Company Warned Against Firing Illegal Immigrants

imported_dna

Golden Member
Aug 14, 2006
1,755
0
0
A Mississippi Democrat in line to become chairman of the House Homeland Security Committee has warned the nation's largest uniform supplier it faces criminal charges if it follows a White House proposal to recheck workers with mismatched Social Security numbers and fire those who cannot resolve the discrepancy in 60 days.

Rep. Bennie Thompson said in a letter to Cintas Corp. it could be charged with "illegal activities in violation of state and federal law" if any of its 32,000 employees are terminated because they gave incorrect Social Security numbers to be hired.

"I am deeply troubled by Cintas' recent policy change regarding the Social Security Administration's 'no match' letters," Mr. Thompson said in the Nov. 2 letter. "It is my understanding that hundreds of Cintas' immigrant workers have received these letters. I am extremely concerned about any potentially discriminatory actions targeting this community."

...

Article

Can you believe this guy? Invoking the specter of discrimination as an argument for not respecting the law.

Legal immigrants have nothing to worry about, while 60 days should be enough to resolve any inconsistencies -- assuming the person in question is indeed authorized to work.
 

Rainsford

Lifer
Apr 25, 2001
17,515
0
0
Pretty stupid if it's true.

On the other hand, there is no news source for this other than the Washington Times, which is about as right-wing biased as you can get. And they include VERY little of the letter's contents, most of the story is paraphrasing, which may or may not be what is said. Given that Rep. Thompson is worried about "discriminatory" actions, I'd be curious to know just what he considers discrimination, but in his own words, not those of some hack right-wing "journalist".
 

Jaskalas

Lifer
Jun 23, 2004
33,425
7,485
136
Just read the CNN transcript.

So he wants them to stop enforcing a law that government itself refuses to enforce. It?s a pathetic move to ensure our soon to be legal citizens aren?t hassled as they wait for amnesty and voting rights.
 

imported_dna

Golden Member
Aug 14, 2006
1,755
0
0
In the CNN transcript we have:
THOMPSON: There's no question about it. The problem we've found is that we don't have a specific rule. The mismatch rule does not give a time limit in terms of when an employer has to get this information back.

While a little bit of searching yielded this document at the Federal Register.

A reasonable employer would check its records promptly after
receiving a no-match letter, to determine whether the discrepancy
results from a typographical, transcribing, or similar clerical error
in the employer's records or in its communication to the SSA or DHS. If
there is such an error, the employer would correct its records, inform
the relevant agencies (in accordance with the letter's instructions, if
any; otherwise in any reasonable way), and verify that the name and
number, as corrected, match agency records--in other words, verify with
the relevant agency that the discrepancy has been resolved--and make a
record of the manner, date, and time of the verification. ICE would
consider a reasonable employer to have acted promptly if the employer
took such steps within 14 days of receipt of the no-match letter
.

If the records are correct according to the employee, the
reasonable employer would ask the employee to pursue the matter
personally with the relevant agency, such as by visiting a local SSA
office, bringing original documents or certified copies required by
SSA, which might include documents that prove age, identity,
citizenship or alien status, and other relevant documents, such as
proof of a name change, or by mailing these documents or certified
copies to the SSA office, if permitted by SSA. ICE would consider a
reasonable employer to have acted promptly if the employer took such
steps within 14 days of receipt of the no-match letter.

The proposed regulation also describes a verification
procedure that the employer may follow if the discrepancy is not
resolved within 60 days of receipt of the no-match letter. This
procedure would verify (or fail to verify) the employee's identity and
work authorization. If the described procedure is completed, and the
employee is verified, then even if the employee is in fact an
unauthorized alien, the employer will not be considered to have
constructive knowledge of that fact.

So what is he blabbing about?
 

dmcowen674

No Lifer
Oct 13, 1999
54,894
47
91
www.alienbabeltech.com
Originally posted by: dna
A Mississippi Democrat in line to become chairman of the House Homeland Security Committee has warned the nation's largest uniform supplier it faces criminal charges if it follows a White House proposal to recheck workers with mismatched Social Security numbers and fire those who cannot resolve the discrepancy in 60 days.

Article

Can you believe this guy? Invoking the specter of discrimination as an argument for not respecting the law.

Legal immigrants have nothing to worry about, while 60 days should be enough to resolve any inconsistencies -- assuming the person in question is indeed authorized to work.

Sorry, you can't pin this on the Democrats no matter how hard you try.

The current policy (of basically no policy) was put in place by your Republican heroes.

Nice try, play again.
 

BoomerD

No Lifer
Feb 26, 2006
62,843
11,254
136
Sue them if they fire them, fine the crap out of them if they don't...Gotta love our system.
 

jrenz

Banned
Jan 11, 2006
1,788
0
0
Originally posted by: dmcowen674
Originally posted by: dna
A Mississippi Democrat in line to become chairman of the House Homeland Security Committee has warned the nation's largest uniform supplier it faces criminal charges if it follows a White House proposal to recheck workers with mismatched Social Security numbers and fire those who cannot resolve the discrepancy in 60 days.

Article

Can you believe this guy? Invoking the specter of discrimination as an argument for not respecting the law.

Legal immigrants have nothing to worry about, while 60 days should be enough to resolve any inconsistencies -- assuming the person in question is indeed authorized to work.

Sorry, you can't pin this on the Democrats no matter how hard you try.

The current policy (of basically no policy) was put in place by your Republican heroes.

Nice try, play again.

And it looks like the Democrats have no intention of changing things :laugh:
 

judasmachine

Diamond Member
Sep 15, 2002
8,515
3
81
On most applications it specifically asks if you are legal to work in the US. Also, I believe that lying on an application is grounds for dismissal.
 

imported_dna

Golden Member
Aug 14, 2006
1,755
0
0
Sorry, you can't pin this on the Democrats no matter how hard you try.

The current policy (of basically no policy) was put in place by your Republican heroes.

Nice try, play again.[/quote]

The Republicans are my heroes? I didn't know that.

I wasn't trying to pin it on the democrats, only pointing out how retarded the representative from Mississippi is.
 

smack Down

Diamond Member
Sep 10, 2005
4,507
0
0
Originally posted by: judasmachine
On most applications it specifically asks if you are legal to work in the US. Also, I believe that lying on an application is grounds for dismissal.

That is all fine and good but employeers don't want to fire illegals.