The Department of Justice (“DOJ”) reported that it had reached a settlement with Brand Energy and Infrastructure Services and its subsidiary, Industrial Services LLC (ISI) on July 21, 2011. The DOJ reports that Industrial Services engaged in a pattern and practice of discrimination while completing Form I-9 on its non-citizen workers requiring specific employment documentation beyond what was required by law.

The investigation was prompted after a work-authorized immigrant lost his job when he could not comply with ISI’s request to provide specific employment documentation beyond what was required by law.   Further investigation revealed that ISI’s Prairieville, LA office required all newly hired non-U.S. citizens to present documents issued by the Department of Homeland Security upon hire.  The company did not require U.S. citizens to present any particular documents.

ISI has agreed to pay $43,560 in civil penalties and $7,200 in back pay, plus interest, to the injured party.   Brand and ISI have also agreed to monitoring provisions, as well as training for their human resources personnel.

What employers need to know: You just cannot presume that the employees charged with  managing your I-9 program are compliant with the law and adhering to anti-discrimination rules and regulations if you’re turning a blind eye to your compliance issues, the consequences of which today  are severe and expensive – not to mention the bad press that accompanies such an investigation. Employers must accept ANY acceptable document from List A that appears to be genuine and that relates to the worker, or a combination List B plus a List C document.  Additionally, employers are not to require more documentation than what is itemized on the List of Documents for Form I-9.

Let’s re-visit ICE’s list of best practices that include the following as a reminder to employers:

• Internal compliance & training program

• Polices/procedures safeguard against discrimination incl. training

• Require I-9 process only by those trained

• Secondary review for each I-9

• Annual I-9 audits by external auditing firm or trained person not involved in I-9 process

• Written I-9 policy

• Protocol to respond to tips/information/constructive knowledge

• Maintain copies of documents

• Participation in E-Verify/SSNVS

We are available  to assist you with your compliance  needs.  Please visit our Employer Resource Center and contact us should you wish to discuss our services and solutions.

USCIS rolled out the 1st of many new regulations for comment toward transitioning from a paper submission process to an electronic one.   The new reg goes into effect 11/28/2011.

The new regulation revises more than 50 parts of DHS regulations contained in Title 8 of the Code of Federal Regulations. The regulation eliminates references to outdated USCIS benefit request forms and descriptions of paper-based procedures. In addition, the regulation removes numerous obsolete provisions of the regulations.

The public is invited to comment on this regulation and offer suggestions on further improvements. Comments must be received by Oct. 28, 2011. The new regulation will become effective on Nov. 28, 2011.

For more on the transformation process.

A story hit the news last week concerning a dispute between two electronic I-9 software providers where outsourcing I-9 software to a third party vendor was involved.  One of the parties wished to cancel its reseller agreement requesting that all I-9 data be returned to its customers.  In so doing, it was revealed that they would have to pay a rather high fee to obtain their customer’s I-9 data in a usable format.  Additionally, it was revealed that the 3^rd party provider had already been directly soliciting the other vendor’s clients to enter into a new I-9 and E-Verify service agreement.  Unable to resolve their differences, a lawsuit was filed on June 27, 2011, seeking an injunction to require the 3^rd party vendor, USVerify, to return its clients’ I-9 data in a reasonably usable and accessible format and to cease and desist from using or disclosing any confidential client information.

In light of the unraveling of this story, it brings clearly to the forefront the importance of being able to access your I-9 and E-Verify data because the employers who are customers of the vendor who is cancelling the reseller agreement, are unable to access their I-9 data at the present time. So, unless they have saved the data in another format or system, it can be assumed that if they were served with an ICE Notice of Inspection (NOI), they would not be able to comply with the NOI’s strict deadlines.

There are several I-9 software vendors in the marketplace, some good, some not.  This includes stand-alone providers that focus solely on I-9/E-Verify, in addition to “all-in-one” providers that offer electronic I-9 software that integrates with the employer’s personnel management software and employment screening/background check applications.

Apparently many all-in-one systems “outsource” the I-9 and E-Verify service to a third party vendor under a “reseller agreement.”  The reseller agreement governs the terms of use and other vital details regarding accessibility of the employer’s I-9 records. Given the rash of recent I-9 audits throughout the country, it is more important than ever for employers to very closely examine these arrangements to ensure that your best interests are protected.

It is not advisable for an employer to rely strictly on a vendor’s representations concerning their products and system compliance as these representations will not protect or insulate you from liability. Employers must undertake independent due diligence to ensure the system they choose complies with the applicable regulations.

If you are using a background screening provider, applicant tracking system, or all-in-one solution, it is imperative that you perform due diligence to ensure they you will have unrestricted access to your I-9 and E-Verify data, especially in the event the reseller agreement is terminated or if the you wish to terminate the agreement with your vendor.

We would recommend asking the following questions:

• Who owns the I-9 E-Verify data under the terms of the agreement?
• Can the employer request a backup of the electronic I-9 and E-Verify data at no or little cost?
• How often can the employer request such a backup and in what format will it be delivered?
• What happens if the vendor closes shop or decides to assign the data to another provider?

Lastly, we remind you that there are specific regulatory electronic I-9 requirements that affect almost every aspect of a vendor’s system and relationship.  These requirements are often confusing and unclear, and you should be encouraged to discuss these issues with experienced immigration counsel to ensure that your I-9 electronic system is compliant with enforcing agencies in all respects.

The American Immigration Attorneys Association (AILA) published an excellent article on the Minimum Requirements for Electronic Verification.  View article

Contact our office should you have any concerns that you’d like to discuss concerning this issue.

With a 2nd wave this year of Notices of Inspection (NOI’s) sent to employers across the country, and I-9 administrative audits being ICE’s driving force in determining whether an employer is adhering to employment laws –  it is a costly mistake for employers to presume that they can fly under ICE’s radar.  An ICE investigation can be triggered at any time by SSA No-Match letters, a tip from a disgruntled employee, a terminated employee, a customer, a competitor, or other “concerned citizens.”

With the above being said, we thought this would be a good time to review exactly what takes place when an employer is served with an NOI – starting with immediately contacting an attorney that specializes in employer compliance matters. Not all immigration or corporate attorneys do…so do your homework, or just call us.

Employers are allowed by law 3 days notice to respond by producing the I-9 records and other requested information.

The administrative inspection process is initiated by the service of a Notice of Inspection (NOI) upon an employer compelling the production of Forms I-9. Often, ICE will request the employer provide supporting documentation (an invasive Document Subpoena), which may include requests for a copy of your I-9 Compliance Policy, Employee Roster, copies of Payroll Summaries, I-9 forms for current and terminated employees, Quarterly Wage and Hour Reports, SSA Mismatch correspondence,   E-Verify and/or SSNVS documents, Articles of Incorporation, and business licenses.

ICE agents or auditors then conduct an inspection of the Forms I-9 for compliance. When technical or procedural violations are found, pursuant to regulations at INA §274A(b)(6)(B) (8 U.S.C. § 1324a(b)(6)(B)), an employer is given ten (10) business days to make corrections. An employer may receive a monetary fine for all substantive and uncorrected technical violations. Employers determined to have knowingly hired or continued to employ unauthorized workers will be required to cease the unlawful activity, may be fined, and in certain situations may be prosecuted criminally. Additionally, an employer found to have knowingly hired or continued to employ unauthorized workers may be subject to debarment by ICE, meaning that the employer will be prevented from participating in future federal contracts and from receiving other government benefits.

Monetary penalties for knowingly hiring and continuing to employ violations range from $375 to $16,000 per violation, with repeat offenders receiving penalties at the higher end. Penalties for substantive violations, which includes failing to produce a Form I-9, range from $110 to $1,100 per violation. In determining penalty amounts, ICE considers the size of the business, good faith effort to comply, seriousness of violations, whether the violation involved unauthorized workers, and history of previous violations, amongst other factors.

ICE will notify the audited party, in writing, of the results of the inspection once completed. The following are the most common notices:

Notice of Inspection Results – also known as a “compliance letters,” used to notify a business that they were found to be in compliance.

Notice of Suspect Documents – advises the employer that based on a review of the Forms I-9 and documentation submitted by the employee, ICE has determined that the employee is unauthorized to work and advises the employer of the possible criminal and civil penalties for continuing to employ this individual. ICE provides the employer and employee an opportunity to present additional documentation to demonstrate work authorization if they believe the finding is in error.

Notice of Discrepancies – advises the employer that based on a review of the Forms I-9 and documentation submitted by the employee, ICE has been unable to determine their work eligibility. The employer should provide the employee with a copy of the notice, and give the employee an opportunity to present ICE with additional documentation to establish their employment eligibility.

Notice of Technical or Procedural Failures – identifies technical violations identified during the audit and gives the employer 10 business days to correct the forms. After 10 business days, uncorrected technical and procedural failures will become substantive violations.

Warning Notice – issued in circumstances where substantive verification violations were identified but circumstances do not warrant a monetary penalty and there is the expectation of future compliance by the employer.

Notice of Intent to Fine (NIF) – may be issued for substantive, uncorrected technical, knowingly hire and continuing to employ violations.

We’d like to close with emphasizing the importance of creating an I-9 compliance policy that is integrated with your overall personnel policy.  A comprehensive written policy will help establish guidelines for all employees to follow, will establish good-faith efforts towards compliance, and potentially could mitigate penalties.  A company should also designate an overall I-9 compliance administrator. To ensure consistency, designate one person who is charged with centralized oversight, management, and training of the company’s compliance program.  To provide guidance to hiring managers about I-9 procedures, managers should know who must complete Form I-9; when and how to conduct verification; what permissibly may be asked prior to the actual hiring; what limits may be placed on hiring of certain individuals; what, how, and for how long I-9 records should be maintained.

.. We link to an inspection process chart that is a good illustration of the various steps in the NOI process

.. We also link to a copy of an ICE NOI and a Document Subpoena

.. For a list of I-9 Technical and Substantive Violations

We work with our clients to create compliant workforces, and now is the time to be proactive if you absolutely know that you have problems with your I-9 forms; and, by the way, most employers do.  We encourage you to be proactive and take action now before you pay the high price of being put in a position where your options have considerably diminished.

We are happy to hear from you and are very flexible with our package of compliance services and solutions.  Our talented team is read to assist you with whatever you’d like to accomplish with your compliance program.  Visit our I-9 Resource Center here

It has been reported that this latest wave of I-9 inspection notices to employers brings the total number of ICE I-9 audits to 2,338 for this year.  This exceeds their record-breaking audit total from 2010 of 2,196.  Average audit fines appear to be exceeding $110,000.

I-9 audits today are the key driving force of the Agency’s efforts in determining whether businesses are violating U.S. employment laws by hiring unauthorized workers.

“The inspections will touch on employers of all sizes and in every state in the nation, with an emphasis on businesses related to critical infrastructure and key resources,” ICE spokeswoman Gillian Christensen said in a statement.   Although ICE has not disclosed the names of the companies being targeted, they do include both large and small businesses in some 17 business sectors, including garment, construction, agriculture, food production, fast food chains, hospitality and financial services industries, as well as IT, healthcare, transportation, postal and shipping, commercial nuclear reactors and drinking water and water treatment.

For employers, the audits can lead to both civil and criminal penalties. The possibilities range from fines and being barred from competing for government contracts to criminal charges of knowingly employing illegal workers, evading taxes and engaging in identity theft.

In the past, ICE agents have initiated audits in one region, and companies in the same business were unlikely to face inspection elsewhere. But “businesses can no longer assume an audit is isolated in one location. It’s spreading nationwide,” said Julie Myers, ICE chief during the Bush administration.  Larger employers have been increasingly targeted since the establishment earlier this year of an ICE audit office outside Washington.  It has been reported that several utilities and food production companies in Montgomery, AL have received notices of inspection from ICE, and were surprised because they have been participating in E-Verify.  Participating in E-Verify doesn’t mean you won’t be audited.

The penalties for ignoring the legal requirements of the I-9 process can be quite severe, even in cases of unintentional omissions and uncorrected I-9 mistakes. Civil penalties for such errors may range from $110 to $1,100 for each affected employee. A business with thousands of employees and multiple worksites may face a significant financial burden in noncompliance penalties. The fines may be further increased if the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) determines that an employer knowingly hired unauthorized foreign nationals, and can range from $375 to $16,000 per violation with repeat offenders on the high end.

What’s the solution? One of the most cost-effective and convenient ways to take action is to conduct a preemptive partial (10-20% of your workforce) or full audit to see what’s buried in your I-9 paperwork. Analyze the results and initiate targeted training and institute a standardized policies and process for handling and managing your I-9 function.  This can easily be accomplished both onsite and offsite.  These steps are especially critical for companies that have a large number of employees, multiple locations, several people involved with the I-9 process and a high turnover rate.

Here is a list of our services and solutions and here is our I-9 Employer Resource Center

__________________

About Immigration Solutions

For those of you who may be first time readers, Immigration solutions provides US and Canadian business immigration services to employers and individuals and additionally provides a full range of I-9 employment eligibility compliance services for employers that require I-9 audits, training, and compliance policy development.

It is not a surprise to see where the priorities are in the spending bill making its way through the House of Representatives.  The House Appropriations Committee passed a Bill this week that will go to the floor of the House possibly next week.  We highlight the money trail here:

USCIS:  Approximately 1/3 of the requested funding was approved

1. Fee Reform: The Administration’s fee reform effort would receive no funding.  The Administration requested $207 million for the processing of refugee and asylum applications, for which there is no charge.
2. Immigrant Integration: The Administration requested $19.75 million for immigrant integration programs and for the operations of the Office of Citizenship.  The Committee rejected the request.  In its report on the bill, the Committee noted that it “supports the efforts of the Office of Citizenship to promote civic education through the naturalization process.”  Not, apparently, enough to provide funding for this purpose.

Enforcement

While the Committee couldn’t find any money for immigrant integration, costs concerns were not a factor in enforcement budgets.  Customs and Border Protection got $8.77 billion—$44 million more than the President asked for in his budget, and more than half a billion dollars more than allocated in FY 2011.  Within that amount, border security between ports of entry gets $3.62 billion, $191 million more than last year—enough to bring the Border Patrol up to 21,370 agents.

ICE was allocated $5.5 billion, $25.6 million more than the President requested and $84.8 million more than in 2011.  Secure Communities got $194 million, $10 million more than the President requested.  ICE Detention and Removal operations were awarded $2.75 billion, $26.7 million more than the President asked for, to raise the minimum number of detention bed spaces that ICE must maintain on a daily basis from 33,400 bed spaces to 34,000—and the Committee directs ICE “to intensify its enforcement efforts and fully utilize these resources.”

As part of his enforcement-only agenda, Representative Lamar Smith (R-TX) is expected to introduce a bill that would make the use of the E-Verify electronic work authorization verification system mandatory for all businesses in the U.S.

There is still no sign that Republicans who now control the Judiciary Committee (having jurisdiction over immigration) will attempt to seriously address any legal or illegal immigration reform to fix the broken system.  Despite billions of dollars being spent on immigration enforcement, and enforcement “benchmarks” set in the last round of immigration reform, legislative efforts having been largely met and the  Republicans continue to call for yet more enforcement.  They continue to move the goalpost.

For more information on this subject, we link to, “E-Verify Without Reform Cannot Succeed,” and listen to a recording of a National Immigration Forum briefing for reporters on the E-Verify program.

For more on this as well as the mandatory E-Verify Bill expected in June, we link to the National Immigration Forum’s Policy Update

Foreign students studying at U.S. universities have traditionally had a year after graduation in which to find a job, allowing them to live and work in the United States. Three years ago, the U.S. Department of Homeland Security (DHS) changed immigration rules to stretch this window of time from 12 to 29 months for students graduating in certain areas of science, technology, engineering, and mathematics.

On May 12, 2011, DHS announced that it was expanding the list of disciplines eligible for the extension. The revised list adds fields such as neuroscience, marine science, environmental science, pharmaceutics and drug design, and education research. It also greatly expands its listings within the agricultural sciences and psychology. The decision follows a yearlong review of requests from businesses and academia to add new fields, says Gillian Christensen, a spokesperson for DHS’s Immigration and Customs Enforcement.

The announcement follows President Obama’s recent remarks in El Paso, Texas, where he reiterated his strong support for new policies that embrace talented students from other countries, who enrich the nation by working in science and technology jobs and fueling innovation in their chosen fields here in the United States, as a part of comprehensive reform.

By expanding the list of STEM degrees to include such fields as Neuroscience, Medical Informatics, Pharmaceutics and Drug Design, Mathematics and Computer Science, the Obama administration is helping to address shortages in certain high tech sectors of talented scientists and technology experts-permitting highly skilled foreign graduates who wish to work in their field of study upon graduation and remain in the USA, to extend their post-graduate work authorization.

Under the OPT program, foreign students who graduate from U.S. colleges and universities are able to remain in the U.S. and receive training through work experience for up to 12 months. Students who graduate with one of the newly-expanded STEM degrees can remain for an additional 17 months on an OPT STEM extension.

Yesterday, USCIS made the announcement that  a final rule was released that reflects changes made to the I-9 Form process over 2 years ago by DHS.  The changes were rolled out in April 2009 which included, amongst other changes, no longer accepting expired documents for identity and employment authorization.

Two years out from this ruling, there is still much confusion concerning the world’s most complicated 1-page form!  We hope that when USCIS does finally release the new website “I-9 Central,” that is will truly do what they are claiming it will – and that it to provide employers with additional clear & concise guidance and tools to become I-9 compliant.  In the meantime, we link to the FAQs regarding the final rule here, and link to additional I-9 employer resources here.

The employer will receive a SSA TNC when the:

1. Name, SS# or date of birth is incorrect in SSA records
2. Name change was not reported to SSA
3. Citizenship or immigration status was not updated with SSA
4. SS record contains another type of error

The employer will receive a DHS TNC when the:

1. Name, A# and/or I-94 number are incorrect in DHS records
2. Information was not updated in the employee’s DHS records
3. Citizenship or immigration status changed
4. Record contains another type of error
5. ID photograph differs from the photograph in DHS records

• The employer informs the employee and prints and reviews the TNC
• The employee chooses to “contest” or “not contest” the TNC
• Refer the employee to the appropriate agency if the TNC is contested
• The employee has 8 Federal Government workdays from the date of referral to visit or call the appropriate agency to resolve the discrepancy.
• Employee continues to work while the case is being resolved
• Once resolved, they should inform the employer
• With both a SSA TNC and a DHS TNC, a response is electronically sent to the employer through the system.  The employer should check E-Verify periodically for the response

TNC Case Resolution

• The employer will receive one of three results:

Employment Authorized |  Final Non-confirmation  |  Review/Update Employee Data then Resubmit

USCIS launched the new website today –  here it is.

E-Verify Self Check is the first online E-Verify program offered directly to the U.S. workforce. E-Verify Self Check, a fast, simple, secure and free service, enables individuals to voluntarily check their own employment eligibility status. USCIS is releasing E-Verify Self Check in phases, with the first phase only accessible to users who maintain an address and are physically located in Arizona, Idaho, Colorado, Mississippi, Virginia, or the District of Columbia. Click here to visit the E-Verify Self Check website and check your own employment eligibility status.

Here is a Fact Sheet for more information.  Let us know what you think.