I-9 Form Penalties: Highest Civil Penalty Assessed Since Enactment of Anti-Discrimination Provisions
Monday, August 22nd, 2011The highest civil penalty paid through settlement since the enactment of the INA anti-discrimination provisions in 1986 was assessed today against Farmland Foods in the amount of $290,400.
This is a very strong reminder that any request for specific documentation is unlawful if it is made for the purpose or with the intent of discriminating against an individual on the basis of national origin or citizenship status. Employers, however, who make such requests to clarify ambiguity or conflicts in the employee’s presented documents should not be held liable for document abuse. The employer’s discrimination must be knowing and intentional.
An employer SHOULD NOT:
1. Set different employment eligibility verification standards, or require that different documents be presented by employees, because of national origin and citizenship status. For example, employers cannot demand that non-U.S. citizens present DHS-issued documents. Each employee must be allowed to choose the documents that s/he presents from the list of acceptable Form I-9 documents. For example, both citizens and work authorized aliens may produce a driver’s license (List B) and an unrestricted Social Security card (List C) to establish identity and employment eligibility.
2. Request to see employment eligibility verification documents before hire and completion of the Form I-9 because the employee looks or sounds “foreign” or because someone states that s/he is not a U.S. citizen.
3. Refuse to accept a document, or refuse to hire an individual, because a document has a future expiration date.
4. Request during reverification that an employee present a new unexpired employment authorization document (EAD) if s/he presented an EAD during initial verification. For re-verification each employee must be free to choose to present any document either from List A or from List C. Refugees and asylees may possess EADs, but they are authorized to work based by virtue of their immigration status and may present other documents that prove work authorization from List A or List C to show on re-verification, such as an unrestricted Social Security card.
5. Limit jobs to U.S. citizens unless U.S. citizenship is required for the specific position by law, regulation, executive order, or federal, state, or local government contract. On an individual basis, an employer may legally prefer a U.S. citizen or national over an equally qualified alien to fill a specific position, but the employer may not adopt a blanket policy of always preferring citizens over non-citizens.
6. Refuse to accept documents during the employment eligibility verification procedure that are acceptable documents under the law, that relate to the individual, and that appear on their face to be genuine (also called “document abuse”). An employer cannot be held liable for document abuse unless the employer’s refusal to honor documents is made for the purpose or with the intent of discriminating against an individual on the basis of national origin or citizenship status. For example, an employer should not be held liable if it refuses to honor documents that conflict with statements made by the employee.
7. Engage in intimidation, threats, coercion, or retaliation, including discharge, against an employee who exercises his/her rights under IRCA’s anti-discrimination provision. This protection extends not only to an employee who is the target of discrimination, but also to an employee who may speak up in support of the targeted employee.
Should you have any questions concerning this “balancing act”, please do not hesitate to contact our office for more information.