Wall Street Journal (09/12/13) Article Reprinted in Staffing Today

“U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement has notified 1,000 companies across the country that they must submit employment verification documents for audits. This is the largest audit since July 2009. The audits target restaurants, food processors, high-tech manufacturers, the agriculture sector, and other industries that cumulatively employ tens of thousands of workers.

The audits will not lead to deportation of illegal workers, but those workers will lose their jobs, which critics point out can drive immigrants to exploitative, off-the-books work. They can also cause lost productivity and result in large fines and the loss of employees to competitors. ICE typically requests Forms I-9, worker rosters, and payroll stubs, then issues notices of suspect documents to employers, which inform their workers they must either produce legal documentation or quit. More than 10,000 employers have been audited in the past four years. The audits have grown more intense, and ICE now requests not just basic paperwork but weekly work schedules, names of managers, lists of temporary staffing firms used, and the company’s articles of incorporation.”

This is certainly NOT what you want to take place in your company. If you know that you are overdue for an I–9 audit (whether full or partial), or require additional training or should have your policies and procedures examined in light of recommended best practices, being proactive will always be your best defense. So, do not procrastinate. We’d be glad to work with you toward this end.  You contact us at info@immigrationcompliancegroup.com or by calling 562 612.3996.

Reprint here:  http://staffingtoday.net/2013/09/13/

By:  Timothy Sutton, Communications Editor

Shortly after ICE began their Form I-9 audit of the San Antonio based sushi chain, Sushi Zushi, an exodus of employees forced the company into a weeklong-statewide shutdown. After an internal announcement by Sushi Zushi management to employees of the routine audit, a wave of scared employees did not return to their jobs on Friday Morning.  A public statement was issued by Sushi Zushi’s public relations spokesperson; Judy McCarter detailing the company’s decision:

STATEMENT FROM SUSHI ZUSHI, Friday, July 27, 2012

Sushi Zushi has temporarily suspended its operations and closed its restaurants in San Antonio, Austin and the DFW Metroplex. We plan to resume operations as soon as possible.

The decision to close the restaurants was made at Sushi Zushi today by executive management due to an unanticipated internal reaction to news of a routine I-9 audit. Several vital employees have chosen not to report to work. This has affected our ability to provide our expected level of service to guests. CEO Alfonso Tomita is returning from travels outside the country.

Sushi Zushi’s policy is to comply with all federal, state and local laws and regulations. And Sushi Zushi has made its best efforts to comply with I-9 requirements always done appropriate due diligence on all its staff. Sushi Zushi is working with legal counsel to respond to the government’s audit.

We wish to be clear – there was no raid by the government on our operations. Nor has any employee  been detained by the government or terminated by the company. Sushi Zushi is responding to a routine I-9 audit. We apologize in advance for the inconvenience and appreciate the patience of our loyal guests while we work through this issue.

Company management immediately posted want ad’s on Craigslist and Facebook. Their customers posted their concerns across social media, including accusations of mismanagement that surfaced on reddit.com. In the midst of this audit meltdown, an employee announced via facebook that he was promoted from delivery driver to sushi chef. With the company’s reputation spinning out of control, their facebook page had posts of former kitchen employees who remarked, “The food won’t be the same without us,” while other employees joked with friends that they had a week-off work to “fill out their I-9 forms.”

Before ICE issues a dollar of fines or fees, Sushi Zushi will suffer hundreds of thousands in loses and devastating harm to their reputation. Sushi Zushi employees fled because they were not educated on the differences between an I-9 audit and deportation raids. Clearly, today’s ICE audits are shaping up to be equally as effective in deterring unlawful employment as raids of the past. To prevent your company from becoming the next Sushi Zushi, contact our immigration professionals for their expert knowledge on Form I-9 compliance, and sign up to receive our information and visit our Employer Resource Center:  www.I-9Audits.com

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.

By:  Timothy Sutton, Communications Editor

For the Houston based ABC Professional Tree Service, Inc., firing non-compliant workers and implementing E-Verify was too little too late. Even after implementing E-Verify and firing hundreds of workers following an ICE audit in 2008, the Immigration Customs Enforcement agency of the Department of Homeland Security recently announced reaching a $2,000,000 non-prosecution agreement with ABC. Shockingly, the sum was based upon ICE’s estimation of profits ABC earned through illegal labor practices.

After four years of investigation, ICE did not release how the $2,000,000 figure was reached. However, they did release an estimate that up to 30% of the 2,500 ABC employees were illegally employed. In a press release on May 18, 2012, ICE espoused ABC knowingly employed illegal workers after receiving “no-match letters” from the Social Security Administration. Additionally, on March 4, 2010, two years after the initial audit, ICE seized records from the ABC Birmingham office through a federally issued warrant. Undocumented employees in the Alabama office and working in the field were detained.

Typically Form I-9 violations lead to heavy monetary penalties, but in this case ICE chose to cut a non-prosecutorial deal. It is unclear from the information released whether or not the $2,000,000 sum is more or less than ABC would have faced in fines? But more importantly, businesses like ABC who are subject to years of audits and investigations, despite implementing E-Verify and discharging employees, have little bargaining power. Consequently, the best defense against an ICE audit is total compliance. Employers would be wise to hire a professional consultant to train staff, organize existing documentation and manage future non-compliance issues. The Immigration Compliance Group has the experience and resources necessary to protect your business from an ICE audit.  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.

By:  Timothy Sutton, Communications Editor

Like many successful restaurant managers, I worked my way up from the bottom of the employee food chain. That meant with each promotion from bus boy to manager, I was trained by other employees on how to do my job. By the time I became a General Manager, I erroneously believed that being a good manager meant being able to follow established procedures. I soon discovered that this was actually a recipe for disaster.

Auditioning a new waiter is a common practice in the restaurant industry. This entails observing an applicant voluntarily interacting with customers, taking orders, serving food and working with other employees. Typically, the audition ends with a free meal in exchange for the waiter’s time and parking validation if the restaurant is generous. Throughout the industry, restaurateurs believe that this practice limits their liability because the applicant has not yet become an employee in “volunteering,” their time to audition for the job.

However, the M-274 Handbook For Employers instructions on completing form I-9 (Employment Eligibility Form) classifies this practice of meals and parking reimbursement as remuneration: anything of value given in exchange of labor or services, including food or lodging. Because restaurant managers typically train one another on hiring practices, there is a perpetual false belief that auditioning waiters is a healthy hiring practice. According to the M-274, the work done in exchange for the value of a meal exposes restaurants to form I-9 non-compliance fines. Essentially, the audition becomes Day One of employment, which requires I-9 forms to be completed and retained.

If the applicant is not hired, both Section 1 and 2 of the I-9 form must be completed that same-day in order to comply with rules regarding employees retained for three-days or less. Without the proper knowledge and training on these I-9 compliance issues, managers expose their companies to thousands of dollars in fines by auditioning waiters. A successful manager goes beyond following the established procedures by having the foresight to seek professional guidance to ensure that company employment practices are in accordance with the law.

For fresh insight into how your business’s employment practices can become a recipe for success contact our office at info@immigrationcompliancegroup.com or call 562 612.3996.

Please refer to our informative Employer Resource Center for more, and here for a list of our services and solutions.

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.

It has been recently reported that ICE is launching another round of worksite investigations, but this time, returning to employers that have already been through a federal investigative audit in the last three years.  We’ve not seen this before. Approximately 500 employers are being re-visited by ICE Special Agents to confirm that non-compliant activity identified during prior audits has been resolved.

Employers must make sure they are hiring only people who can work legally in the U.S. Businesses that previously have received warning letters or administrative fines may now be the subject of yet more fines if ICE Special Agents determine that  the employer continues to make the same mistakes.

Bear in mind, that several Federal agencies have the authority to review your I-9 forms, these agencies consist of ICE, The Office of Special Counsel for Immigration-Related Unfair Employment Practices (OSC) and the DOL, Wage and Hour Division.  Each of these agencies investigate violations in the I-9 process, and we strongly advise that employers need to be prepared for a visit from any one of them.

ICE has recently announced their enforcement related statistics in the area of I-9 compliance for 2011, as follows:

• 2,496 I-9 audits were conducted
• 3,291 worksite enforcement cases were initiated
• Criminally arrested 221 employers
• Issued 385 Final Orders for $10.4+ million in fines; and
• Debarred 115 individuals and 97 businesses

These enforcement statistics should indeed be troubling to employers, particularly given that  they don’t reflect the number of ICE notices (such as the Notice of Discrepancies or Notice of Suspect Documents) that are sent to employers, who are otherwise compliant, but may have accepted fraudulent documents or whose employees may have purchased the identity of a US citizen for work authorization purposes, despite your best efforts.  As a result of this, employers across the country have had to terminate thousands of employees and incur the expense of hiring and training new employees.

ICE expects to audit some 3,000 employers in 2012.  We recommend that you hire experts in the field to conduct either a partial or full audit, depending upon your circumstances, train personnel who are charged with the processing of your I-9 forms, and develop a written policy statement that reflects your goals for remaining compliant.

This brochure outlines some excellent Do’s and Don’ts pertaining to how to interact with employees during an ICE audit; however, these suggestions additionally apply to all audit situations such as outside 3rd party audits by attorneys or compliance experts, as well as internal self-audits.

It is recommended that you have an established procedure for interacting with employees whose I-9 forms require correcting; i.e, how to inform them that you are seeking information from them, what to communicate to them, and how much time to allow them to respond.

Should you wish to discuss the particulars of your compliance program, please feel to contact our office for more information.

::::::::::::::::::

Leslie Davis is the Managing Director of Immigration Compliance Group and is an expert in employer compliance matters.  The firm also specializes in US and Canadian business immigration.

The Justice Department has reached a settlement agreement with University of California San Diego Medical Center for $115,000 (one of the higher civil penalties we’ve seen) for a complaint filed on Dec. 6, 2011, alleging that the medical center failed to comply with proper I-9 Form employment eligibility verification processes for non-citizens who are authorized to work in the United States.

Specifically, the DOJ’s complaint alleged that UCSD medical center engaged in a pattern of subjecting newly hired non-U.S. citizens to excessive demands for documents issued by the Department of Homeland Security in order to verify their employment eligibility, but did not require the same of US citizens. The Immigration and Nationality Act’s (INA) anti-discrimination provision prohibits employers from placing unfair documentary burdens on work-authorized employees during the hiring and employment eligibility verification process based on their citizenship status or national origin. Clearly put, it is illegal to discriminate against work authorized individuals.  You simply cannot specify which documents are to be presented.  This is considered document abuse.

The medical center has taken appropriate action to ensure compliance with INA’s anti-discrimination provision and has received Department of Homeland Security/U.S. Immigration & Customs Enforcement (ICE) training on the proper use of work authorization documents.  They have also agreed to work with the DOJ to ensure compliance with proper I-9 processes across all University of California campuses, medical centers and facilities.

Under the terms of the settlement agreement, the medical center agrees to implement new employment eligibility verification policies and procedures that treat all employees equally regardless of citizenship status. In addition, the medical center has agreed to pay a civil penalty of $115,000, conduct supplemental training of its human resources personnel on their responsibilities to avoid discrimination in the employment eligibility verification process and work with the department to ensure compliance with proper employment eligibility verification processes across all University of California campuses, medical centers and facilities.

Heightened Enforcement Continues

During the past few years, we have seen unprecedented enforcement and legislative activity relating to Form I-9 and E-Verify worksite compliance.  Since fiscal year 2009, ICE has audited more than 6,000 employers, debarred 441 companies and individuals, and imposed more than $76 million in financial sanctions.  We have also seen an unprecedented increase in the number of enforcement actions brought about by the Department of Justice (DOJ) for discrimination in the I-9 process.  The Office of Special Counsel (OSC) has robustly prosecuted claims of discrimination in the I-9 process resulting in fines and penalties against employers, as well as back pay to injured parties.

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 are not training your employees, then you are turning a blind eye to establishing a compliant workforce, the consequences of which today are severe and expensive – not to mention the bad press that accompanies such an investigation.

Employers cannot request specific documents (such as a green card), reject documents that reasonably appear to be genuine and relate to the employee presenting them, request that employees produce more documents than are required or treat groups of applicants differently when completing the I-9 form. You must examine 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, regardless of whether or not

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

• Use E-Verify,
• Use the Social Security Number Verification Service (SSNVS) for wage reporting purposes
• Establish a written hiring and employment eligibility verification policy.
• Establish an internal compliance and training program related to the hiring and employment verification process
• Require the I-9 process to be conducted only by individuals who have received appropriate training and include a secondary review as part of each employee’s verification to minimize the potential for a single individual to subvert the process.
• Arrange for annual I-9 audits by an external auditing firm or a trained employee not otherwise involved in theI-9 process.
• Establish a protocol for responding to letters or other information received from federal and state government agencies indicating that there is a discrepancy between the agency’s information and the information provided by the employer, such as SSA “No-Match” letters
• Establish and maintain appropriate policies, practices and safeguards to ensure that authorized workers are not treated differently with respect to hiring, firing, or recruitment or referral for a fee or during the Form I-9, E-Verify or SSNVS processes because of citizenship status or national origin.
• Maintain copies of any documents accepted as proof of identity and/or employment authorization for all new hires.

For more, refer to:

1) DOJ Press Release

2) DOJ Press Release on one of the largest settlements against a major healthcare system

3)  Our list of services and solutions

__________________

About Immigration Compliance Group

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.