Thread: Unions Blast Government Effort to Stop Hiring of IAs

Originally Posted by PhredE

NoBueno - Unsubstantiated claims should not be taken very seriously.

You can believe such thing when it is accompanied by official stats. / sources from the US DHS/ICE. In the meantime, I suggest you fold your arms, and retort 'prove it!'

Plus, one confusing aspect of the debate on 'errors' with the respect to SSN and no-match letters, ('they' - the critics claim an error rate of about 4% DHS claims it to be more like 1%-2% now...) So, the real questions is:

What is an error?

Just because a number doesn't match a name can that be translated automatically to signify an error. In some cases, the name and SSN WON'T match - and that is NOT an error (think contrived name and/or SSN) In some cases, the no-match uncovers the real problem in data handling or integrity.

Or, consider this:

4% 'claimed' error rate in DHS SSN/No-Match db

170 million in US workforce, of that about 7 million or IA workers.
That represents guess what percentage overall? Yep, 4.1%

Of course, many of those IA workers are not going to have SSNs in the DHS database (for a number of reasons) but, some, especially workers that have been here a while and/or are more established stand a better chance at that... so *some* of that 4.1% is going to be at least *part* of the purported errors uncovered in the process. The DHS needs to investigate in detail the nature of these errors/problems and publish results to better document and support their efforts in this regard. The reality is probably that it works much better (accurately) than the critics want to admit.

In addition, the crux of your argument seems to be focused on "error rate" and what constitutes an "error". Once again, there is no system or procedure to my knowledge which will be 100% error free. Does this mean that we should not implement a system that would afford greater protections for America and it's workers? Why would unions have a probelm with this? I thought unions were for the good of American Workers.

In addition, I see that you have chosen to use the error rate of 4% which is the error rate the critics of no-match prefer to use. Critics claim the error rate is 4%, DHS says the error rate is from 1-2%. Therefore the actual number is probably somewhere in between, at about 2.5-3%.

American Citizens are not going to be losing jobs simply because a no-match letter is received. I cannot imagine that such people would not be afforded ample time to investigate the discrepanices which led to the no-match and resolve those issues. Again, why would any union have a problem with this?

Oh and finally, perhaps you could remind everyone who the AFL-CIO joined forces wit in Federal Court seeking an injunction, preventing the no-match letters from going out.

Sorry, I stand by my original claims.

Just follow the money!

NoBueno - I think you may have misinterpreted where I was coming from in my above posts. While I initially posted in response to your post above, I wasn't disagreeing or taking issue with what you said. I was trying to lay out the details for onlookers to see - that what the critics claims as 'errors' are both overestimated and that 'errors' may not in fact be true errors - but may instead be cases where fraudulent data may have entered the system.

It's all good - no worries (eg. I agree with you 100% on this...)

Originally Posted by PhredE

NoBueno - I think you may have misinterpreted where I was coming from in my above posts. While I initially posted in response to your post above, I wasn't disagreeing or taking issue with what you said. I was trying to lay out the details for onlookers to see - that what the critics claims as 'errors' are both overestimated and that 'errors' may not in fact be true errors - but may instead be cases where fraudulent data may have entered the system.

It's all good - no worries (eg. I agree with you 100% on this...)

PhredE. I'm so sorry, it looks as if I did read your comments wrong. Don't I feel stupid I don't know whats wrong with me today.

I'm sorry! I probably should take a break

Don't sweat it.

I've been around here enough to know the different styles of communicating/writing/etc and sometimes, I am not 100% clear in how I am trying to present an argument and such. Really, don't worry about it.

Actually, in retrospect, it's kind of good that our apparent different points of view played itself out in public here. People can see all the flaws with the argument that says 'E-Verify is inaccurate and so flawed' - fact is, it isn't perfect, but overall, it's pretty darn good and getting better all the time.

Our Government needs to tell these people to shut the hell up and just enforce our immigration laws....It is against the law to hire an illegal alien...Period.

If an American gets caught in the middle once in a while so be it, he will be better off to fix his SS # than to ignore it. Americans have a right to know if their identity has been stolen and this is a good solution to that problem besides getting rid of illegals!!

Another "error" can be marriage and the the SS# isn't matching because the new spouse has not changed her name with the SS administration. It's not a big deal.