Open Enrollment | Subscribe to Printing Impressions HERE
Connect
Follow us on
Advertisement
 

Immigration Compliance —Fiorenza

November 2007

If the employer receives the letter from DHS, described above, the employer must contact the local DHS office (in accordance with the written notice’s instructions, if any) and attempt to resolve the question raised by DHS about the immigration status document or employment authorization document. The employer must complete this step within 30 days of receiving the written notice.

If the employer is unable to verify with DHS within 90 days of receiving the written notice that the immigration status document or employment authorization document is assigned to the employee, the employer must again verify the employee’s employment authorization and identity. In other words, the employer must complete a new Form I-9 for the employee, using the same procedures as if the employee were newly hired, except that the employer must not accept any document referenced in any written notice.

Ultimately, if the discrepancy referred to in the no-match or DHS letters is not resolved, the employer must either terminate the employee or risk the DHS citing the employer for “constructive knowledge” that the employee was not authorized to work in the United States.

“Constructive Knowledge” of Unauthorized Worker

There are severe civil and criminal penalties for employers under such circumstances. Civilly, it could be fined up to $2,200 for the first offense, from $2,200 to $5,500 for the second offense, and from $3,300 to $11,000 for all subsequent offenses. In addition, employers who “knowingly” hire or continue to employ unauthorized workers are barred from entering into federal contracts for one year.

On the criminal side, employers that engage in a “pattern or practice” of knowingly hiring or continuing to employ unauthorized workers may be prosecuted in criminal proceedings. In such cases, they can be fined not more than $3,000 for each unauthorized worker, imprisoned for more than six months, or both.

Legal Battle Over Enforcing the New Regulation

As you might expect, this new regulation has already led to significant controversy. Recently, the AFL-CIO and ACLU filed suit challenging the rule. These groups allege that because the final rule imposes liability on employers who fail to respond to a SSA or DHS letter, errors attributable to the government could threaten the jobs of U.S. citizens and other authorized workers.

As of this writing, a federal judge has issued a temporary restraining order preventing DHS or SSA from enforcing the rule, and employers are urged to monitor their affirmative obligations in this regard.PI

—Nicholas J. Fiorenza

About the Author
Nicholas J. Fiorenza is managing partner of the employment law firm of Ferrara, Fiorenza, Larrison, Barrett & Reitz, P.C., and long-time association counsel to the Printing Industries Alliance and its members. He is also president of Delacroix Consulting Group, the human resources consulting component of the law firm. For more information, visit www.ferrarafirm.com.
 

COMMENTS

Click here to leave a comment...
Comment *
Most Recent Comments: