Welcome To The Dark Side Of Illegal Immigration

[rebeccajo 14]

When I filled out my I9 at work I had to show proof of citizenship...birth cert or passport. Course, I also have to be ID'ed and go through a security check anyway, but still.

Nobody should have asked to see your birth certificate or your passport.

An employer cannot specify which documents they will accept. It is against the law.

[scandal 951]

When I filled out my I9 at work I had to show proof of citizenship...birth cert or passport. Course, I also have to be ID'ed and go through a security check anyway, but still.

Nobody should have asked to see your birth certificate or your passport.

An employer cannot specify which documents they will accept. It is against the law.

Agreed

Rules for I-9, including documents acceptable for Lists A,B,C:

http://www.uscis.gov/files/form/i-9.pdf

[rebeccajo 14]

Regarding your 2 bold points - the latter one (verifying existing employees) would not concern me. If someone is legal, why should they have any reason to fear this?

The former one does seem harsh. I would expect a tentative non-confirmation of an existing employee to have a time period (e.g. 30 days) to prove error in the system before termination.

Someone can be legal but not look legal, you know.

What if when you were hired, you gave your employer a copy of your greencard as proof of status (satisfying Column A of the I9)?

What if your employer decided to try out E-Verify on your greencard after it had expired? (They aren't allowed to ask you to show them a new one). That would be illegal of course, but hey what if....

So what if you just happen to be in the process of removing the conditions of residency? Are you sure the Service still lists you as authorized to work?

What if there is a false hit? Do you think the employer who illegally used E-Verify to check you out is going to ask you to rectify the mistake?

Don't be going all snicker-y on me either. I've got a husband who was just discharged from a job - and it is not lost on me that the greencard in his personnel file 'expired' five weeks before he was terminated.

[natty bumppo 297]

When I filled out my I9 at work I had to show proof of citizenship...birth cert or passport. Course, I also have to be ID'ed and go through a security check anyway, but still.

Nobody should have asked to see your birth certificate or your passport.

An employer cannot specify which documents they will accept. It is against the law.

RJ ... The employer has 3 days to ask for proof ... the employeer has to be within the requirements.

After 3 days ... it's lawsuit time.

btw: my employer tired this with me ... they blinked ... threatened ... and lost.

[rebeccajo 14]

When I filled out my I9 at work I had to show proof of citizenship...birth cert or passport. Course, I also have to be ID'ed and go through a security check anyway, but still.

Nobody should have asked to see your birth certificate or your passport.

An employer cannot specify which documents they will accept. It is against the law.

RJ ... The employer has 3 days to ask for proof ... the employeer has to be within the requirements.

After 3 days ... it's lawsuit time.

btw: my employer tired this with me ... they blinked ... threatened ... and lost.

I'm not sure what three days has to do with what happened with jundp.........

[scandal 951]

Regarding your 2 bold points - the latter one (verifying existing employees) would not concern me. If someone is legal, why should they have any reason to fear this?

The former one does seem harsh. I would expect a tentative non-confirmation of an existing employee to have a time period (e.g. 30 days) to prove error in the system before termination.

Someone can be legal but not look legal, you know.

What if when you were hired, you gave your employer a copy of your greencard as proof of status (satisfying Column A of the I9)?

What if your employer decided to try out E-Verify on your greencard after it had expired? (They aren't allowed to ask you to show them a new one). That would be illegal of course, but hey what if....

So what if you just happen to be in the process of removing the conditions of residency? Are you sure the Service still lists you as authorized to work?

What if there is a false hit? Do you think the employer who illegally used E-Verify to check you out is going to ask you to rectify the mistake?

Don't be going all snicker-y on me either. I've got a husband who was just discharged from a job - and it is not lost on me that the greencard in his personnel file 'expired' five weeks before he was terminated.

Let's start at the bottom. I'm certainly not going snicker-y, and surprised you would be saying so!

I rather thought we were having a pleasant and agreeable discussion of the details of eVerify. Considering that this thread was provocatively started by JAS as yet another tiresome "let's bash all the brown people" attempt, I thought we've done a remarkable job turning it into something more useful. I'm sorry to hear about your husband's job, I know you are going through a stressful time and are dealing with the job market and health concerns all at the same time. Sincerely --- my very best wishes to you and your husband and I hope all turns out well for both of you.

Regarding your scenario - look, you're asking a hypothetical. Which means there is no "answer".

Here are some comments however.

First, regarding an expired Green card, either a 2-year or 10-year. I'm guessing here (really, just a guess), that the government database holding these green cards records their expiration dates, and that this is part of the verification process. If the date is within range - check. If the date is out of range, I would hope this goes to an additional layer of scrutiny either automatic or manual. I would be surprised if it leads to an automatic rejection.

Look, most states and most employer/employee contracts in this country are "at will". An employer can terminate someone without cause pretty much at any time. Why would we need to be concerned about using eVerify as an avenue to justify dismissals? Already we know that HR departments use data like Facebook etc. to "snoop' on their employees. If an employee is performing his job responsibilities well, there should be no motive to look for dismissal grounds. And if s/he is not performing well - perhaps s/he should be dismissed (or at least reprimanded). And if the employer is one of those who likes to "snoop", they will snoop. Either put up with it, or find a different job.

RJ ... The employer has 3 days to ask for proof ... the employeer has to be within the requirements.

After 3 days ... it's lawsuit time.

btw: my employer tired this with me ... they blinked ... threatened ... and lost.

I'm not sure what three days has to do with what happened with jundp.........

Yeah me neither. Natty confuzzed me here too

[natty bumppo 297]

When I filled out my I9 at work I had to show proof of citizenship...birth cert or passport. Course, I also have to be ID'ed and go through a security check anyway, but still.

Nobody should have asked to see your birth certificate or your passport.

An employer cannot specify which documents they will accept. It is against the law.

RJ ... The employer has 3 days to ask for proof ... the employeer has to be within the requirements.

After 3 days ... it's lawsuit time.

btw: my employer tired this with me ... they blinked ... threatened ... and lost.

I'm not sure what three days has to do with what happened with jundp.........

Please read Section 2 Employer

I-9

[natty bumppo 297]

Regarding your 2 bold points - the latter one (verifying existing employees) would not concern me. If someone is legal, why should they have any reason to fear this?

The former one does seem harsh. I would expect a tentative non-confirmation of an existing employee to have a time period (e.g. 30 days) to prove error in the system before termination.

Someone can be legal but not look legal, you know.

What if when you were hired, you gave your employer a copy of your greencard as proof of status (satisfying Column A of the I9)?

What if your employer decided to try out E-Verify on your greencard after it had expired? (They aren't allowed to ask you to show them a new one). That would be illegal of course, but hey what if....

So what if you just happen to be in the process of removing the conditions of residency? Are you sure the Service still lists you as authorized to work?

What if there is a false hit? Do you think the employer who illegally used E-Verify to check you out is going to ask you to rectify the mistake?

Don't be going all snicker-y on me either. I've got a husband who was just discharged from a job - and it is not lost on me that the greencard in his personnel file 'expired' five weeks before he was terminated.

Let's start at the bottom. I'm certainly not going snicker-y, and surprised you would be saying so!

I rather thought we were having a pleasant and agreeable discussion of the details of eVerify. Considering that this thread was provocatively started by JAS as yet another tiresome "let's bash all the brown people" attempt, I thought we've done a remarkable job turning it into something more useful. I'm sorry to hear about your husband's job, I know you are going through a stressful time and are dealing with the job market and health concerns all at the same time. Sincerely --- my very best wishes to you and your husband and I hope all turns out well for both of you.

Regarding your scenario - look, you're asking a hypothetical. Which means there is no "answer".

Here are some comments however.

First, regarding an expired Green card, either a 2-year or 10-year. I'm guessing here (really, just a guess), that the government database holding these green cards records their expiration dates, and that this is part of the verification process. If the date is within range - check. If the date is out of range, I would hope this goes to an additional layer of scrutiny either automatic or manual. I would be surprised if it leads to an automatic rejection.

Look, most states and most employer/employee contracts in this country are "at will". An employer can terminate someone without cause pretty much at any time. Why would we need to be concerned about using eVerify as an avenue to justify dismissals? Already we know that HR departments use data like Facebook etc. to "snoop' on their employees. If an employee is performing his job responsibilities well, there should be no motive to look for dismissal grounds. And if s/he is not performing well - perhaps s/he should be dismissed (or at least reprimanded). And if the employer is one of those who likes to "snoop", they will snoop. Either put up with it, or find a different job.

RJ ... The employer has 3 days to ask for proof ... the employeer has to be within the requirements.

After 3 days ... it's lawsuit time.

btw: my employer tired this with me ... they blinked ... threatened ... and lost.

I'm not sure what three days has to do with what happened with jundp.........

Yeah me neither. Natty confuzzed me here too

a year after employment ... they wanted me to resubmit docs. I said BS. Corporate legal got involved ... HR lost big time.

[scandal 951]

Yeah me neither. Natty confuzzed me here too

a year after employment ... they wanted me to resubmit docs. I said BS. Corporate legal got involved ... HR lost big time.

Jundp was stating that proof of citizenship was required for her job (either US Birth certificate or passport).

This is not true. As we all know, you don't need to be a citizen to be legally able to work in the US, so of course this cannot be a documentary requirement for I-9.

I'm sure what you're saying is true Natty, about your own case, but it doesn't address what Jundp was saying. Hence the confusion by RJ and me.

[natty bumppo 297]

Yeah me neither. Natty confuzzed me here too

a year after employment ... they wanted me to resubmit docs. I said BS. Corporate legal got involved ... HR lost big time.

Jundp was stating that proof of citizenship was required for her job (either US Birth certificate or passport).

This is not true. As we all know, you don't need to be a citizen to be legally able to work in the US, so of course this cannot be a documentary requirement for I-9.

I'm sure what you're saying is true Natty, about your own case, but it doesn't address what Jundp was saying. Hence the confusion by RJ and me.

jundp needs to be strong ...

[Pinocchio Liberal 268]

Why you botherin Nat?

[natty bumppo 297]

Why you botherin Nat?

guess I tried to be nice ...

So how you doing? Want company there? Got good seafood and beer?

[scandal 951]

Why you botherin Nat?

guess I tried to be nice ...

So how you doing? Want company there? Got good seafood and beer?

Nice? What is this nice you speak of??

:devil:

[Pinocchio Liberal 268]

Why you botherin Nat?

guess I tried to be nice ...

So how you doing? Want company there? Got good seafood and beer?

Oh yeah! Your welcome anytime bud!

[natty bumppo 297]

Why you botherin Nat?

guess I tried to be nice ...

So how you doing? Want company there? Got good seafood and beer?

Oh yeah! Your welcome anytime bud!

I'm there ...

question ... got enough bandwidth so we can have some fun?