USCIS announced today it will start accepting H-1B petitions subject to the fiscal year (FY) 2012 cap on April 1, 2011. Cases will be considered accepted on the date USCIS receives a properly filed petition for which the correct fee has been submitted; not the date that the petition is postmarked.

The H-1B program is used to employ foreign workers in specialty occupations that require theoretical or technical expertise. Such workers include scientists, engineers, and computer programmers, among others.

The cap (the numerical limit on H-1B petitions) for FY 2012 is 65,000. The first 20,000 H-1B petitions filed on behalf of individuals with U.S. master’s degrees or higher are exempt.

USCIS will monitor the number of H-1B petitions received and will notify the public of the date when the numerical limit of the H-1B cap has been met. This date is known as the final receipt date. If USCIS receives more petitions than it can accept, it may on the final receipt date randomly select the number of petitions that will be considered for final inclusion within the cap. USCIS will reject petitions that are subject to the cap and are not selected, as well as petitions received after it has the necessary number of petitions needed to meet the cap.

In addition to petitions filed on behalf of people with U.S. master’s degrees or higher, certain other petitions are exempt from the congressionally mandated cap.

Petitions for new H-1B employment are exempt from the annual cap if the beneficiaries will work at:

• Institutions of higher education or related or affiliated nonprofit entities;
• Nonprofit research organizations; or
• Governmental research organizations.

Petitions filed on behalf of beneficiaries who will work only in Guam or the Commonwealth of the Northern Marianas Islands are exempt from the cap until Dec. 31, 2014. Employers may continue to file petitions for these cap-exempt H-1B categories for beneficiaries who will start work during FY 2011 or 2012.

Petitions filed on behalf of current H-1B workers who have been counted previously against the cap do not count towards the H-1B cap. USCIS will continue to process petitions filed to:

• Extend the amount of time a current H-1B worker may remain in the United States;
• Change the terms of employment for current H-1B workers;
• Allow current H-1B workers to change employers; and
• Allow current H-1B workers to work concurrently in a second H-1B position.

H-1B petitioners should follow all statutory and regulatory requirements as they prepare petitions, to avoid delays in processing and possible requests for evidence. USCIS has posted on its website detailed information, including a processing worksheet, to assist in the completion and submission of a FY2012 H-1B petition.

Should you wish to discuss your case or become a client of our firm, please contact us at info@immigrationsolution.net or call 562 612.3996.

The USCIS Verification Division and the Office of Public Engagement invite any interested parties to participate in a webinar either tomorrow or Thursday on E-Verify Self Check. E-Verify Self Check, the first service offered directly to individuals by E-Verify, is a simple online service that allows an individual to check his or her own employment eligibility in the United States.   If you missed our previous article on E-Verify and how it functions, you can access it here.

E-Verify Self Check will initially be available in the following locations as of March 21, 2011: Colorado, Idaho, Mississippi, Arizona, Virginia and the District of Columbia. USCIS will be hosting webinars to provide an overview of E-Verify Self Check on the following dates:

• Wednesday, March 16, 2011 @ 1:00pm (EDT): Click here to Register

• Thursday, March 17, 2011 @ 3:30pm (EDT): Click here to Register

Once your registration has been confirmed, you will receive an email with instructions on how to join the webinar.

On the day of the webinar: Please note that on the day of the webinar, you will need to take the following steps:

1. Login to the webinar using the instructions provided to you in the registration email

2. Call the toll-free number provided to you in the registration email

** Please note that space is limited to accommodate 100 participants per session. **

The owner of a Southern California furniture manufacturing company, Brownwood Furniture located in Rancho Cucamonga, has been sentenced to 10 months in federal prison for knowingly hiring illegal immigrants and six months for continuing to employ illegal aliens.  The sentences will be served concurrently.  In addition to the prison terms, he was ordered to pay a $15,000 fine.

Prosecutors say 57-year-old Brownwood Furniture owner Rick Vartanian was told earlier that 61 of his 73 workers at the facility were illegal immigrants and had submitted invalid documents to obtain their jobs.  In November 2009, Vartanian told U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement agents that the illegal immigrants no longer worked for Brownwood Furniture, but investigators discovered 18 illegal immigrants were still working for him.  Vartanian, who was convicted of obstruction of justice and employing illegal immigrants, was sentenced Monday by a Los Angeles federal judge.

Brownwood Furniture vice president Michael Patrick Eberly pleaded guilty to employing illegal immigrants and he was placed on a years’ probation and fined $10,000.

The charges against the defendants stem from an investigation that began after ICE HSI received an anonymous tip that Brownwood furniture was using unauthorized labor. An audit of the company’s hiring records in July 2009 revealed that 61 of the firm’s 73 employees had submitted invalid documents to obtain their jobs. After ICE HSI notified the company about the discrepancies, the executives told investigators the unauthorized workers had been terminated. However, when ICE HSI agents executed a search warrant at the business in Dec. 2009, they encountered 30 unauthorized workers, 18 of whom had purportedly been terminated following the July audit.

These sentences make very clear that employers who knowingly hire unauthorized workers, face seriously dire consequences.

Should you require the services of an expert team of employer compliance specialists, please contact our office to discuss your situation and visit our I-9 Employer Compliance Resource Center:  www.I-9Audits.com

Our March 2011 news is now available.  You can access our Immigration News here and our I-9 Compliance Newsletter here.  Should you wish to discuss your immigration case with us, we can be contacted at info@immigrationsolution.net or by phone at 562 612.3996.

We have a volume of free information on our websites that includes newsletters, news flashes, podcasts, blog, and articles.  Please feel free to sign up on our website:  www.immigrationsolution.net to receive our information through email or iTUNES.

Bloomberg News on 1/27/2011 released the findings of its report on a proposal to require every U.S. employer to use E-Verify to confirm the legal status of all new hires.  The report  revealed that businesses with less than 500 employees would undoubtedly bear the greatest burden, spending about $2.6 billion a year to use the government’s “free” web-based program, compared with less than $100 million for the 4% that used it in 2010.

A study conducted in December 2010 by Westat that was commissioned by the government as part of a multi-year evaluation of the E-Verify program represents the result of their 2009 findings of a nationwide survey of 511 respondents that encompassed nonusers (companies that have never signed a Memorandum of Understanding) to participate in E-Verify, focus groups of nonusers, surveys of users, and interviews with employees that received TNC’s (Tentative Non-Confirmations).

The primary finding of the survey and the principal barrier to participation in E-Verify appears to be a lack of awareness of the Program. Among the case study participants, 63 percent were not familiar with E-Verify. Case study participants were often positive about the characteristics of E-Verify, and among the 101 who answered a question concerning their future plans, 23 percent definitely planned to participate in E-Verify in the future (while 32 percent would not participate unless mandated to do so).

For those employers who have heard of E-Verify, the information often came from professional associations, media outlets and government materials or publications.

The other primary reasons for not participating were not perceiving a benefit from participating, and thinking it would be too costly or time-consuming to participate.  The perception of burden is based in part on employers’ negative experiences with other government Internet-based programs (such as the Social Security Administration/Business Services Online Website).

Large employers were much more likely to be familiar with E-Verify than small employers. A majority of large employers in the case study (56 percent) were familiar with E-Verify, compared with 29 percent of medium-sized employers and 17 percent of small employers.

The case study participants supported many program changes to E-Verify, with the most popular including the increased use of technology to identify fraudulent documents and to verify identity, allowing a formal appeal by an employer and/or employee of a final case finding, and allowing verification of job applicants before a job decision is made.

Some participants who decided not to use the program did so because they did not perceive any benefit in using it compared to the cost, the manpower, training and the logistics required to use the program.  Others were not using it because they felt that it was a government priority rather than a business priority.  Some felt that it wasn’t their responsibility to control illegal immigration and that it should be the government’s responsibility.

One insightful response came from a business owner who stated, “Hold me, personally, and my company harmless from any loopholes in the system that become exploited by the undocumented population . . . bottom line . . . I don’t want to make the 5 o’clock news by complying with a broken system.”

In summary, E-Verify is not perfect – it doesn’t identify identity theft issues, but it is immigration compliance best practice and should carefully be considered and the pro’s and con’s discussed with an immigration attorney that is informed and specializes in employer compliance issues prior to enrollment.

We link to the Westat Study here.  More on E-Verify Strengths and Weaknesses

We link to our I-9 Employer Compliance Resource Center here.

USCIS announced today that it has published a proposed rule that will save US businesses more than $23 million over the next 10 years by establishing an advance H-1B registration process for U.S. employers seeking to file petitions for foreign workers under the H-1B specialty occupation category.  The proposed electronic system would minimize administrative burdens and expenses related to the H-1B petition process—including reducing the need for employers to submit petitions for which visas would not be available under the visa cap.

USCIS Director Alejandro Mayorkas announced today the opening of a 60-day comment period that will allow businesses and the general public to provide input on the proposed system in order to ensure it best meets the needs of employers that rely on H-1B visas to bring in foreign workers for specialty occupations.  Mayorkas expressed that “Improving the H-1B petition process is part of USCIS’s ongoing efforts to leverage new ideas and innovation to streamline our operations and enhance customer service.”

The employer would go through an online, electronic a process that would take an estimated 30 minutes to complete.  Before the petition filing period begins, USCIS would select the number of registrations predicted to exhaust all available visas. Employers would then file petitions only for the selected registrations. The registration system would save employers the effort and expense of filing H-1B petitions, as well as Labor Condition Applications, for workers who would be unable to obtain visas under the statutory cap.

The proposed rule, which posted to the Federal Register today for public viewing, contains complete details about the registration system and estimated cost savings. USCIS encourages formal comments on the proposed rule.  We link to the following additional information:

Fact Sheet

News Release

ICE and HSI worksite enforcement activities strike again – this time it’s temp agencies!

In an ICE Press Release today, it was announced that during an ICE and HSI investigation, it was found that a 2-location temp agency was knowingly supplying undocumented unskilled and skilled warehouse and janitorial workers to their clients as a part of their labor pool.

Clinton Roy Perkins, the owner of Can Do It Inc. in Bensenville, IL, was sentenced on February 16th to 18 months in prison, to be followed by three years of supervised release, for knowingly hiring illegal aliens at the staffing companies. He pleaded guilty in September 2010. On Feb. 25th, U.S. District Judge Joan B. Gottschall also ordered the forfeiture of $465,178 in proceeds obtained as a result of the criminal activity.

Perkins admitted to knowingly hiring more than 10 illegal aliens from Mexico between October 2006 and October 2007.  Perkins did not require the workers to provide documents establishing their immigration status or lawful right to work in the United States.

Perkins and his son-in-law, Chrispher Reindl, paid the illegal workers’ wages in cash; did not deduct payroll taxes or other withholdings. Perkins and Reindl directed low-level supervisory employees to transport illegal workers back and forth between locations near the aliens’ residences in Chicago and work sites in the suburbs. Both also provided bogus six-digit numbers – purporting to be the last six digits of the aliens’ Social Security numbers – to a company, knowing that their workers were in the country illegally and did not possess valid Social Security numbers.

In a quote from special agent in charge of ICE HSI in Chicago:  “We will hold employers accountable for their actions.  Mr. Perkins knowingly hired an illegal workforce and circumvented our nation’s immigration laws for financial gain. The goal of our enforcement efforts is two-fold – reduce the demand for illegal employment and protect job opportunities for the nation’s lawful workforce.”

ICE was assisted in the investigation by the U.S. Department of Labor’s Office of Inspector General in Chicago. Assistant U.S. Attorneys Christopher R. McFadden and Daniel May, Northern District of Illinois, prosecuted the case.

One of Mississippi’s most successful and largest private employers pled guilty in federal court last week to knowingly violating federal criminal conspiracy laws in its employment of illegal aliens at the company’s electrical transformer plant in Laurel, MS following an investigation by ICE and Homeland Security Investigations (HSI).  The company agreed to pay a $2.5 million fine, which is larger than normal for such a conviction, the U.S. Justice Department said in a news release.

Immigration agents detained more than 600 illegal immigrants at Howard Industries’ electrical transformer plant during a massive raid on Aug. 25, 2008. Those detained in the raid came from countries including Brazil, El Salvador, Germany, Guatemala, Honduras, Mexico, Panama and Peru, and most of them were deported, though a few were convicted on identity theft charges for using fraudulent documents and providing fake papers to other workers.

The company said in a statement that it was pleased to resolve the investigation “based on the actions of its former human resources manager Jose Humberto Gonzalez.”  Gonzalez is the only company executive who has been charged in the case. He pled guilty in December 2009 to conspiracy and admitted that he hired hundreds of people who he knew were in the country illegally.  

The company had repeatedly denied allegations that it had knowingly hired individuals without work authorization, putting all of the blame on its HR manager, Jose Humberto Gonzalez, who was charged in a 25-count indictment with conspiracy and employee verification fraud.   He faces a maximum of 5 years of imprisonment on the conspiracy charge and on each employee verification fraud count. He also faces a minimum of 2 years imprisonment for the aggravated identity theft charge and possible fines up to $250,000.

Howard Industries was charged with knowingly and willfully conspiring to encourage and induce undocumented workers to reside in the US, and knowingly conspiring to conceal, harbor and shield from detection such workers.  As it turned out, Howard Industries waived indictment and agreed to plead guilty to the one-count felony of  conspiracy to commit offense or to defraud the United States which calls for a term of not less than one and not more than 5 years of probation and a fine of up to $500,000. However, this fine was substantially enhanced to $2.5 million due to the nature of the crime (harboring), the number of workers involved (100 or more), and the size of the company.

Apparently Gonzalez would routinely hire unauthorized workers who presented false identity documents, including green-cards and Social Security cards, and then would complete the I-9 with the fake information.  Gonzalez was also accused of submitting SSNs to the Social Security Administration to verify their numbers and then disregarding the results if they came back as invalid.

E-Verify doesn’t protect against identify fraud: Howard Industries was using E-Verify and ran every applicant through the system, but E-Verify doesn’t detect identify fraud and shouldn’t be used as a substitute for I-9 compliance.  The case at hand teaches a lesson about the E-Verify program, in that using E-Verify doesn’t insulate an employer against penalties and doesn’t provide a safe harbor against worksite enforcement.

So what’s an employer to do?

If you are contemplating ‘going electronic’, whether that be an electronic I-9 system or enrolling in the E-Verify program, it is imperative that you find out what condition your I-9’s are in.  This is done by having a qualified immigration attorney that specializes in compliance issues perform either a partial or full audit on your I-9’s so that the reoccurring errors and violations buried in your paperwork can be identified, corrected, and your staff properly trained.  We additionally encourage our clients to work with us in establishing policies and guidelines as to how they want to process and manage the I-9 function at their organization and document this, and make sure that everyone involved with the process is trained and fully understands your internal policies.

We link to the ICE press release

For more information on our employer compliance services and solutions

February 16, 2011, Brett Dreyer, Chief of the Worksite Enforcement, Unit of Homeland Security Investigations, verified on 2/16/2011 that ICE continues to focus its investigations both on businesses that were brought to their attention by tips and leads, and on those that work in areas of national security and critical infrastructure. Mr. Dreyer further confirmed: “The agency continues to be interested in egregious employers as they tend to break other laws in addition to immigration…including paying employees under the table, avoiding taxes and ignoring employee protections. The inspections will touch on employers of all sizes and in every state in the nation — no one industry is being targeted nor is any one industry immune from scrutiny.”

Confirmation has been publicized that NOI’s were indeed served throughout the USA on February 17^th.  The audits are expected to be completed within the next 2-3 months. We link here for more on this story.

This is a good time to review what you should do if you are served with a Notice of Inspection (NOI):

• Immediately contact Immigration Solutions and company management
• Employers are allowed by law 3 days notice to respond by producing the I-9 records of their active as well as terminated employees within a particular period of time

The NOI will be most probably be accompanied by a very invasive Document Subpoena that might ask for all of some of the below items:  

• A copy of your I-9 Policy and Procedures Statement or Manual
• I-9 forms for current employees hired after 11/6/1986
• I-9 forms for terminated employees within the required retention period
• Complete employee lists of current and terminated employees
• Quarterly Wage and hour reports
• Payroll Summaries
• SSA Mismatch correspondence
• E-Verify and/or SSNVS documents
• Business information such as:  Employer ID number, owner’s SSN/address, business license, etc.

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 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 programs.  Visit our I-9 Resource Center here.

Here’s another sad story from the restaurant industry. Snack Attack Deli, d/b/a  a Subway Restaurant franchise in Fayetteville North Carolina, has been neglecting filling out I-9 Employment Eligibility forms for several years to the tune of 108 I-9 violations producing a serious fine of some $111,078, as reported by the Department of Justice, Office of the Chief Administrative Hearing Officer (OCAHO) on February 11, 2011.  The Judge considered the small size of the company, the number of employees and their payroll and reduced the penalty down to $27,000 which was still difficult for the small franchise to handle.

Here’s the back story: Snack Attack produced 11 incomplete I-9 forms for 108 employees, current and mostly past employees, following the receipt of an NOI requesting I-9 forms for current and past employees for years 2006 through 2009 from ICE in early 2009.  The ICE auditor provided the owner with a copy of a sample I-9 form along with a copy of the I-9 Employer Handbook and told one of Snack Attack’s employees that if new forms were prepared, they should not be back dated.  Section 2 of the 11 I-9 forms that were produced were not filled out at all, and 7 of the 11 forms had been back dated  – including one for the restaurant owner.  Amazing- go figure!

ICE then issued a Notice of Intent to Fine in July 2009 stating that Snack Attack committed 108 I-9 violations including improper completion of the 11 forms, failing to complete I-9 forms for 97 employees.  Each violation carried a penalty of $1,028.50 for a total of $111,078.

Snack Attack alleged that the back dating was not their fault because it occurred in section 1 and that the owner had sold the business to another person, although there was no evidence to support his claim and so the judge issued civil penalties in the case.

The Judge wrote that failure to prepare an I-9 form is amongst the most serious of paperwork violations, in addition to not filling out the employer attestation in section 2.

It should be stated that there was no evidence of unauthorized workers and the 97 employees for whom no I-9’s were filled out, remains unresolved.  ICE’s position was that Snack Attack’s practices could very easily lead to the hiring of unauthorized workers.

We cannot stress enough that employers must be proactive and generate an I-9 form for all their employees and should catch these serious violations right now, particularly if you are in an industry such as food service, manufacturing/distribution, the garment industry, construction or the hospitality industry that are making headlines every week and creating media nightmares for employers

We also learn with this ruling that although fines are calculated based on regulatory criteria, there is some hope of relief based on a company’s size and business volume.  The question is, could there have had a much happier ending if Snack Attack would have retained the services of a competent attorney with a specialty in employer compliance issues to represent them during the audit?  We say unequivocally, “yes!”

For more information on employer compliance issues, please visit our I-9 Resource Center.