refuse to pay me unpaid salary from former employer

[Jojo92122 1,924]

But the tenant is enriched by not having to part with their money for the rent so it is more similar...

I agree that we probably won't agree on which is right and I'm not trying to argue with you.

I am not trying to argue with you either. I feel this is healthy debate.

[Deputy Purple 1,294]

I am not trying to argue with you either. I feel this is healthy debate.

Cool, we agree on something...

[Dan and Judy 614]

Not true. It would be unfair for employers to exploit illegal workers and not be held legally liable to pay them. This amounts to slave labor at the very worst or an incentive to exploit vulnerable people at the very least.

The employer is also part of the "illegal contract." If the employer doesn't have to pay, doesn't he come out ahead on the illegal contract? Should the employer get the benefit of free labor? That's unfair.

Here are cases of illegal workers suing for or winning cases for back pay;

http://www.themonito...kers-alamo.html

http://www.myfoxatla...win-20110511-es

If the OP can prove that he worked those nine days, he could certainly win in court.

One case in these links was "won" because the other side didn't show up. They will drag it out with an appeal

One case they got half of what they were due, outside of court, probably because the contracter didn't want the publicity.

Other case is still pending.

This is not a strong argument for pursuing it in court especially given the downside that you mentioned.

http://www.fairus.org/site/News2?page=NewsArticle&id=16665&security=1601&news_iv_ctrl=1007

The following is an overview of federal law on hiring and harboring illegal aliens. It is not a substitute for professional legal counsel in specific situations.

Summary

A person (including a group of persons, business, organization or local government) commits a federal felony when he:

• assists an alien whom he should reasonably know is illegally in the U.S. or who lacks employment authorization, by transporting, sheltering, or assisting him to obtain employment,
• encourages that alien to remain in the U.S., by referring him to an employer, by acting as employer or agent for an employer in any way, or
• knowingly assists illegal aliens due to personal convictions.

Penalties upon conviction include criminal fines, imprisonment, and forfeiture of vehicles and real property used to commit the crime.

Anyone employing or contracting with an illegal alien without verifying his work authorization status is guilty of a misdemeanor. Aliens and employers violating immigration laws are subject to arrest, detention, and seizure of their vehicles or property. In addition, individuals or entities who engage in racketeering enterprises that commit (or conspire to commit) immigration-related felonies are subject to private civil suits for treble damages and injunctive relief.

I don't think working illegaly is just a civil matter. I am not a fanatic about this stuff but you have to wonder how this stuff can be on the news and both employer and employee are not paying the consequences.

Edited August 11, 2011 by Dan and Judy

[Free_Dom 6]

IMO, the best thing to do is to let it go. The hassle you would be putting yourself into doesn't seem to be worth it for 9 days of work. Especially, when you weren't supposed to be working in the first place. Good luck!

[Harsh_77 718]

There is a vast difference in working illegally and drug dealing. Working illegally is a civil matter. Drug dealing is a criminal matter.

State and federal courts are also courts of equity. In a civil matter like wage dispute, the court will apply the concept of fairness in determining the outcome. While it is illegal for a person without work authorization to work, it is also illegal for an employer not to pay at least the minimum wage. So when two laws on point conflicts, the court can use it's equity powers to order the employer to pay back wages.

The cases you have ref are where eomplyer have exploited worker for longer period of time and hence they are forced to pay.

In this case its not the case - employer is going to say yes employe said he was legal to work in US and they hired him and when he was asked for docs he could not produce and thus company had to let him go etc.

Since the employment duration was 9 days they could very well say they found out he was not authrorized to work or on company records there is nothing to show he ever worked for that company how can court force company to pay him for 9 days.

very different situation.