Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 11

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

  1. #1
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Posts
    2,853

    NY: Ex-manager guilty in illegal worker case

    Ex-manager guilty in illegal worker case

    By JORDAN CARLEO-EVANGLIST, Staff writer
    Last updated: 4:48 p.m., Monday, July 16, 2007

    ALBANY -- The seventh mid-level manager for a Houston-based pallet-making company that authorities say systematically hired thousands of illegal immigrant workers admitted to helping transport and harbor them this afternoon.
    Abelino ``Lino'' Chicas, 41, pleaded guilty to aiding and abetting the transportation and harboring of illegal aliens the latest development in the national immigration case unfolding in federal court in Albany because of ties to IFCO Systems North America's Guilderland Center plant.

    Chicas, who worked as a systems manager at the company's Houston West plant, is the third to admit to a felony, leaving William Hoskins, a general manager at the Cincinnati plant, as the only man so far arrested whose case is still pending.

    Chicas faces up to five years in federal prison, but is more likely to receive 18 to 24 months behind bars.

    Hoskins is also the only one of the nine defendants who has been indicted. He is charged with illegally hiring and harboring illegal immigrants a felony.

    The case went public in April 2006 when federal immigration authorities raided numerous IFCO plants around the country, rounding up more tha 1,100 illegal workers and initially charging eight mid-level managers with recruiting, hiring and harboring illegal workers.

    At the time, the raids were the largest of their kind.

    Another manager was charged later and eventually pleaded guilty, bringing the total number arrested to eight. Misael Romero, an illegal immigrant from Honduras and a foreman at the Guilderland plant, is the only defendant not yet arrested.

    Six of the defendants who have pleaded guilty were due to have been sentenced in June, but a federal judge postponed the proceedings. The reasons for the postponement were sealed, but the delay could mean prosecutors are banking on their help to prosecute Hoskins and other IFCO managers.

    Federal prosecutors vowed to try to target higher-level IFCO officials who may also have been involved in hiring illegal workers.

    IFCO has denied intentionally pursuing illegal labor describing those arrested as ``lower-level IFCO employees'' who ``were not part of any companywide plan, scheme or practice to violate the United States immigration laws.''

    All Times Union materials copyright 1996-2007, Capital Newspapers Division of The Hearst Corporation, Albany, N.Y.

    http://timesunion.com/AspStories/story. ... =7/16/2007

  2. #2
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    Oregon (pronounced "ore-ee-gun")
    Posts
    8,464
    Chicas faces up to five years in federal prison, but is more likely to receive 18 to 24 months behind bars.
    Ha ha. An employer (manager) likely going to do hard time in Federal prison.
    Ha ha. See that illegal employers?
    Join our efforts to Secure America's Borders and End Illegal Immigration by Joining ALIPAC's E-Mail Alerts network (CLICK HERE)

  3. #3
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Posts
    7,377
    That's a start - let's see if the owners do any time.

    I think maybe they didn't flop out the checkbook when the politicians came calling for contributions. If they had, they would be safe like many other big corporations that are employing many, many workers.
    Join our efforts to Secure America's Borders and End Illegal Immigration by Joining ALIPAC's E-Mail Alerts network (CLICK HERE)

  4. #4
    Senior Member Captainron's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Posts
    8,279
    I am not overjoyed or gloating about the prison sentence of these men. It would be better to fine them--and hopefully the money could be used somewhere to solve our immigration problems. I would use the fines to fund agricultural programs that use less labor, thus reducing the need for illegal immigrants.

    Nowadays prison costs are very expensive and unless the prison has a successful work program it adds to the taxpayers' burden. Many of these business execs and managers probably have built a comfortable life, so the fines could be pretty hefty, as much as the law allows.
    "Men of low degree are vanity, Men of high degree are a lie. " David
    Join our efforts to Secure America's Borders and End Illegal Immigration by Joining ALIPAC's E-Mail Alerts network (CLICK HERE)

  5. #5
    Senior Member magyart's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Location
    Columbus, OH
    Posts
    1,722
    Quote Originally Posted by Captainron
    I am not overjoyed or gloating about the prison sentence of these men. It would be better to fine them--and hopefully the money could be used somewhere to solve our immigration problems. I would use the fines to fund agricultural programs that use less labor, thus reducing the need for illegal immigrants.

    Nowadays prison costs are very expensive and unless the prison has a successful work program it adds to the taxpayers' burden. Many of these business execs and managers probably have built a comfortable life, so the fines could be pretty hefty, as much as the law allows.

    IMO, heavy fines have failed to impress busiess owners / mgrs. They rarely receive any jail time. I highly recommend serious jail time. Make an example of the "bad apples" and perhaps a few others will see the light.

  6. #6
    Senior Member gofer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    Tennessee
    Posts
    3,728
    The fines can be passed on as costs....jail time cannot!! There are fines included if I'm not mistaken along with jail time!

  7. #7
    MW
    MW is offline
    Senior Member MW's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    North Carolina
    Posts
    25,717
    Captainron wrote:

    I am not overjoyed or gloating about the prison sentence of these men. It would be better to fine them--and hopefully the money could be used somewhere to solve our immigration problems.
    IMHO, you're dead wrong on this. Many businesses just consider a fine as the cost of doing business. These folks are not afraid of a fine, but they are very afraid of going to prison. Furthermore, we need to set some examples, and quick! Our illegal immigration problem has been out of control for some time now and fines have proven virtually useless in teaching these folks the error of their ways.

    "The only thing necessary for the triumph of evil is for good men to do nothing" ** Edmund Burke**

    Support our FIGHT AGAINST illegal immigration & Amnesty by joining our E-mail Alerts athttps://eepurl.com/cktGTn

  8. #8
    Senior Member Captainron's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Posts
    8,279
    With all due respect:
    1. The person in question here was a mid level manager, not an owner.
    2. A conviction is a conviction--the sentence does not change that fact. I don't know about these types of crooks--but most people who have been in prison for any serious crime are finished in normal society. That's why we have career criminals---it's the only thing they can do.
    3. True, many people are not afraid of small fines. Look at how many repeat DUI's we have. A $500,000 fine would be different, and the company shareholders could possible be jointly and severally liable pushing the total up even futher.
    4. This manager was working at a pallet company. This is a low paying industry, but one that is absolutely essential to US industry. Other types of procurement of illegal labor could be judged much differently.
    5. I wouldn't disagree that prison time would be another deterrent. But just how many more prisoners are we going to stuff into our jailhouses? Where possible, and where the individual is not potentially violent or a repeat offender, I think other deterrents like fines should be considered.
    6. A fund, derived from hefty fines, could find other means to substitute for illegal labor. I have mentioned agriculture elsewhere. Perhaps pallet manufacture can be further automated (I do know a little about that industry, as do most production workers)
    7. My expereince with people who flaunt the law (in construction there are a LOT of them) is that what condones them is not the absence of severe punishment, it's the absence of getting caught at all. Everyone knows that the police and other law enforcers are overtaxed and potentially corrupt anyway so most people calculate this into their deviant strategy. I can not imagine that the small fry contractors I see who hire illegal aliens, for example, would not be sufficiently chastened by a $100,000 fine----if they really think they are going to get caught. This amount could rise for companies hiring more workers.
    "Men of low degree are vanity, Men of high degree are a lie. " David
    Join our efforts to Secure America's Borders and End Illegal Immigration by Joining ALIPAC's E-Mail Alerts network (CLICK HERE)

  9. #9
    Senior Member magyart's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Location
    Columbus, OH
    Posts
    1,722
    Quote Originally Posted by Captainron
    With all due respect:
    1. The person in question here was a mid level manager, not an owner.
    2. A conviction is a conviction--the sentence does not change that fact. I don't know about these types of crooks--but most people who have been in prison for any serious crime are finished in normal society. That's why we have career criminals---it's the only thing they can do.
    3. True, many people are not afraid of small fines. Look at how many repeat DUI's we have. A $500,000 fine would be different, and the company shareholders could possible be jointly and severally liable pushing the total up even futher.
    4. This manager was working at a pallet company. This is a low paying industry, but one that is absolutely essential to US industry. Other types of procurement of illegal labor could be judged much differently.
    5. I wouldn't disagree that prison time would be another deterrent. But just how many more prisoners are we going to stuff into our jailhouses? Where possible, and where the individual is not potentially violent or a repeat offender, I think other deterrents like fines should be considered.
    6. A fund, derived from hefty fines, could find other means to substitute for illegal labor. I have mentioned agriculture elsewhere. Perhaps pallet manufacture can be further automated (I do know a little about that industry, as do most production workers)
    7. My expereince with people who flaunt the law (in construction there are a LOT of them) is that what condones them is not the absence of severe punishment, it's the absence of getting caught at all. Everyone knows that the police and other law enforcers are overtaxed and potentially corrupt anyway so most people calculate this into their deviant strategy. I can not imagine that the small fry contractors I see who hire illegal aliens, for example, would not be sufficiently chastened by a $100,000 fine----if they really think they are going to get caught. This amount could rise for companies hiring more workers.
    These mid-level managers co-ordinated the hiring of illegal aliens throughh out the countyry. Upper management is locayed in Germany.
    Fine'em and put them in prison. Fines alone, arent enough.

  10. #10
    Administrator Jean's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    California
    Posts
    65,443
    Illegal workers recruited, feds say
    Four executives from Texas firm tied to Guilderland are indicted

    By LEIGH HORNBECK, Staff writer

    First published: Friday, February 29, 2008

    ALBANY -- A vice president and three managers of a Texas pallet company with a factory in Guilderland were charged Thursday with bringing illegal immigrants into the U.S. to work, including here.
    The indictment is the latest development in the federal government's case against IFCO Systems North America. Prosecutors have argued since April 2006, when federal immigration authorities raided 45 plants around the country, that IFCO managers systematically recruited illegal workers.

    During the April 2006 raid, Immigration and Customs Enforcement officers detained more than 1,180 illegal workers. Among those, 24 of 26 pallet workers here were illegal; 18 of 19 in Rittman; 20 of 21 in Boston; and all 27 in St. Louis.

    Last year, seven IFCO managers pleaded guilty to felony and misdemeanor charges related to the unlawful employment of illegal immigrants and could face up to 10 years in prison.

    E. Stewart Jones, the attorney for William Hoskins, who was indicted in April and named again Thursday in connection to new charges, said Hoskins had no part in hiring illegal workers.

    Jones said he had not yet seen the latest indictment, but said Hoskins was not responsible and unaware of any practice that may have existed to bring in illegals. Hoskins, 30, of Cincinnati, is free on a personal recognizance bond, Jones said.

    Thursday's indictment named Charles Davidson, 45, of San Antonio, Texas, the vice president of New Market Development, which is the operation IFCO used to establish new pallet plants, according to court papers.

    Also indicted were: Bryan Bailey, 28, of Nashville, Tenn., New Market Development manager; Thomas Soto Castillo, 44, of Cincinnati, the foreman of the plant in Cincinnati and a manager in New Market Development; and Wendy Mudra, 33, of Tampa, Fla., a human resources manager. They have not yet been arraigned, Assistant U.S. Attorney Tina Sciocchetti said Thursday.

    Each defendant was charged with felonies having to do with harboring, transporting, encouraging and inducing illegal immigrants. All the charges carry between five and 10 years in prison.


    www.timesunion.com
    Support our FIGHT AGAINST illegal immigration & Amnesty by joining our E-mail Alerts at https://eepurl.com/cktGTn

Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •