The OSC announced today that they had reached an agreement with a janitorial and facilities management company in Florida that was fined for mishandling the TNC process with the employee.  The employer was fined $8800 (back pay and civil penalties) and had to agree to training by the Justice Department on the anti-discrimination provision and training by the Department of Homeland Security on proper E-Verify procedures.

It is imperative that you follow appropriate TNC procedures and supply your employees with the required documentation so that they can resolve TNC issues.  Sit down with them, show them the information that you input into E-Verify and make sure that it’s accurate.  Provide them with the appropriate  TNC notice and  SSA or DHS referral letter.  Here is an excellent training video that we recommend you use as a tool in your organization.

Check out our employer resource center here:  www.I-9Audits.com and our services and solutions here:  www-employer-compliance.com.   Stay informed and sign up to receive our information.

By:  Timothy Sutton, Communications Editor

Today, recruiters, human resource managers, and small business owners utilize the Internet to recruit new employees. Online recruiting is cheap, efficient, and reaches a much broader audience than traditional forms of media. While there are numerous advantages to employing a professional staffing agency to locate prospective employees through the Internet, many employers choose to self-publish want ads through popular websites like monster.com or craiglist.org. Self-publishing online job posting gives the employer complete control over when, where, and how long a post will be visible to the public. Ultimately, do-it-yourself recruiting can be personally tailored to suit a particular employer’s needs.

But recruiters beware. The Internet is much more sophisticated than a virtual corkboard. Keywords and phrases in your job listings can be tracked and monitored by government software, then stored in databases. Recently, the Civil Rights Division of the Office of Special Counsel (OSC) released a Best Practices notice for online job posting. Whether this notice foreshadows future litigation over civil rights violations in hiring practices is yet to be determined; regardless, the message is clear, employers need to exercise caution when recruiting online because the OSC is monitoring online want ads.

Immigration laws prohibit the use of discriminatory language regarding U.S. Citizenship, lawful permanent residence, citizenship status, or national origin unless required by law, regulation or executive order. Curiously, the OSC notice was released shortly after a handful of states attempted to curtail the rights of Deferred Action Childhood Arrival qualifiers to obtain state identification (see our previous post here). There is no data revealing any increase in discriminatory language found in online job postings, but a simple keyword search on either monster.com or craigslist.org reveals numerous non-compliant ads. For instance, if the word “citizen” is entered into Craigslist, ads for dishwashers, personal assistants, security guards, and caregivers pop up. Each ad contains some version of the following discriminatory language that the OSC notice clearly forbids pursuant to the Immigration and Nationality Act at § 1324b that prohibits discrimination based on the citizenship status or national origin in the hiring, firing unfair document practices (“document abuse”) during employment eligibility verification process, and retaliation:

•  “Only U.S. Citizens”
• “Citizenship requirement”*
• “Only U.S. Citizens or Green Card Holders”
• “H-1Bs Only”
• “Must have a U.S. Passport”
• “Must have a green card”

One explanation presented by the OSC for the common use of such language is the misinterpretation of federal employment laws. Employers are not limited to the recruitment of U.S. citizens. In fact, we recently published an article on the proper method of verifying the legal employment status of refugee/asylees. Due to the complexity of adhering to the legal requirements of recruiting, hiring, and employing individuals in today’s diverse workplace, employers should seek the professional guidance of an attorney. The cost savings and convenience of self-publishing job postings are heavily outweighed by the potential financial penalties and negative publicity of losing an anti-discrimination lawsuit.

Our office has the experience and successful track record necessary to protect the interests of your enterprise.  For more information, contact one of our immigration professionals at info@immigrationcompliancegroup.com or call 562 612.3996.

By:  Timothy Sutton, Communications Editor

“Homeland Security Investigations is committed to holding businesses and their managers accountable when they knowingly hire an illegal workforce,” –John Kelleghan, Special Agent in charge of HSI Philadelphia.

Homeland Security, the FBI, and ICE did much more than hold GPX/GPX, USA, a seismic surveying company and their field supervisor, Donald Wiggill, “accountable,” by charging the company with a total maximum fine of $10 million, a probation term of five years on each count, and a special assessment totaling $8,000; Wiggill faces an unconscionable indictment of 100 years in prison on all 20 counts, a fine of $5 million, a supervised release term of 60 years, and a special assessment of $2,000. The Texas based company failed to verify the immigration status of nineteen employees and did not prepare the required Form I-9 and supporting documentation concerning the immigrants’ authorization to work in the United States.

John Kelleghan of Homeland Security further justified the Philadelphia HSI decision to levy such harsh punishment for I-9 non-compliance saying, “HSI and our law enforcement partners will continue to ensure that employers follow our nation’s hiring laws, which ultimately protect job opportunities for the nation’s legal workers, and levels the playing field for those businesses that play by the rules.”

The proportionality of the punishment sought for the crime is extremely shocking. Our blog has recently covered the penalties imposed upon, HerbCo, Chipotle, and most recently ABC Tree Professionals, which pale in comparison to the punishment GPX is now facing.

GPX is being treated like a national security threat for mishandling nineteen employees Form I-9s. The difference between thousands of dollars versus millions of dollars in fines, in addition to 100 years of jail time, is the involvement of the FBI and the Homeland Security. GPX is charged with harboring and transporting illegal aliens and conspiracy to commit those offenses as outlined in an indictment by the U.S. Attorney for the Middle District of Pennsylvania, Peter J. Smith. Whether GPX was honestly aware of their employees’ immigration status is still unknown, however proper planning and implementation of I-9 compliance would have saved the company millions in civil penalties and avoided a hundred years of jail time. With the stakes elevated so tremendously high by this multi-departmental crackdown on workforce compliance –  who can afford not to get their legal documents in order?

To protect your business and your employees please contact one of our immigration professionals at info@immigrationcompliancegroup.com or call 562 612.3996.

We had the ICE IMAGE Training and Forum in Los Angeles last week on May 3rd where they explained the benefits of the IMAGE Program and followed up with releasing all the Powerpoint Presentations through email after the event.  They have made some excellent information available to the public on their website; namely:

1. An HSI I-9 Presentation
2. An IMAGE HSI Presentation
3. OSC IMAGE Event Presentation
4. Self Check User Presentation
5. E-Verify Presentation

We felt that their perspective on the above topics was critical information to  be shared and analyzed alongside your other resources.  They can be accessed here.

Please know that we are available to assist you with your compliance program and offer practical and sustainable services and solutions to assist you in establishing a compliant workforce.

The OSC has provided a valuable resource in sharing their letter responses to various employment eligibility verification compliance inquiries from stakeholders. The topics include: Non-Discrimination Practices, Pre-Employment Inquiries, Form I-9  Document Abuse, SS No-Match Letters, Dishonesty/Falsification Issues, using acceptable language for job postings, and much more.

Here are a few citations:

Re:  Question Concerning Re-Verifying Work Authorization when Discrepancies with SS are Discovered: “An employer is only under a duty to investigate further if it knows or has knowledge that would lead a reasonable person to believe that an individual is not authorized to work in the United States.  There are many possible reasons for why an employee’s name and Social Security number may not match.  Therefore, employers should not draw conclusions about an employee’s work authorization status based solely on information indicating that the employee’s name and Social Security number cannot be found in a system of records-whether the records are directly managed by the Social Security Administration or any other private or public entity. Furthermore, the mere receipt of a no-match letter or other no-match notice does not, standing alone, constitute ‘constructive knowledge’ on the part of an employer that the referenced employee is not work authorized. Only the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) is legally authorized to conclusively determine an individual’s authorization to work.  OSC also cautions employers against providing an unreasonably short period of time to clear up a Social Security no-match…” It it strongly recommended that you consult with a qualified attorney in employment-related immigration law before jumping to any conclusions that might possibly escalate into a very unpleasant scenario for all parties concerned.

Question re Modifying the List of I-9 Acceptable Documents:  “Document abuse occurs when an employer either demands that a worker produce more or different documents than those identified in the Form 1-9 process, or refuses to honor documents tendered that on their face reasonably appear to be genuine, based on national origin or citizenship status.  To the extent that an employee either inadvertently or mistakenly indicates an incorrect immigration status in Section 1 of the Form 1-9, the limitation of documents in Section 2 may prevent that employee from presenting valid documents) acceptable for 1-9 purposes. Similarly, if the list excludes one or more documents that an employee of a particular status may possess, the limitation of documents may also prevent that employee from presenting his or her valid documents) acceptable for 1-9 purposes.”  We caution you to discuss issues such as this with experienced counsel in employment-related immigration matters before action is taken.

We trust that you will find this information useful as it relates to the enforcement of the anti-discrimination provision of the INA. Please check out a list of our compliance  services and solutions. Please be reminded that we invite you to contact our office with your employment-related immigration matters (I-9 audits, training, policy development and more).

About the OSC:  The Office of Special Counsel for Immigration-Related Unfair Employment Practices (OSC) enforces the anti-discrimination provision (§ 274B) of the Immigration and Nationality Act (INA), 8 U.S.C. § 1324b.  his federal law prohibits: 1) citizenship status discrimination in hiring, firing, or recruitment or referral for a fee, 2) national origin discrimination in hiring, firing, or recruitment or referral for a fee, 3) document abuse (unfair documentary practices during the employment eligibility verification, Form I-9, process, and 4) retaliation or intimidation.