U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies > Illegal Immigration
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 06-04-2010, 03:23 PM
 
Location: Phoenix
5,361 posts, read 7,059,903 times
Reputation: 3974

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by AZDesertBrat View Post
Because I think employers are pretty confident that they won't have anyone coming around checking on them. You live in AZ, how many busts have you heard of in the past couple of years since the employer sanction law went into affect? There are way too many businesses and not enough bodies to stay on top of it, for one thing. Just think of how many jobs could be created if they really wanted to do a crackdown. I'd be first in line to apply!
I've heard of some recently in the news. There was just one yesterday (although MCSO was informed of this identity theft ring in January) - MCSO investigates illegal workers, identity theft at Tempe retailer

I guess I'm back to my original thought...

With the risk being out there that ANY company can hire ANYONE who can pull a gun on ANYONE at work, harass ANYONE, threaten ANYONE, etc, why wouldn't each and every company do their due diligence on background checks for EVERYONE to ensure that they are not hiring ANYONE who can cause undue harm to ANY of their employees, which in effect can cost the company millions of dollars or cause it to close, which in effect can lay off other workers?

While it is true that we can't predict the future habits of employees with clean backgrounds, we can get a record of what their behavior habits have been in the past which can be a predictor for the future (just like credit checks do).
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 06-04-2010, 03:25 PM
 
Location: Verde Valley AZ
8,282 posts, read 9,117,639 times
Reputation: 10439
Quote:
Originally Posted by Benicar View Post
It is over 95% accurate, and discrepancies can be easily resolved. Legal workers will have irrefutable evidence of their eligibility to work in this country. Conversely, an illegal won’t. If not for its accuracy, pro-illegals wouldn’t be such staunch opponents.
Just this morning I went through two interviews and signed a stack of papers giving authority to do a background...E-verify...check on me. This company does it on EVERYBODY who applies there and it doesn't matter who your are, what color you are or what you look like. If I pass the background check I'll get another interview and, hopefully, be hired. Doesn't bother me in the least that I'm being checked out and tells me that, at least, this employer is doing what they are supposed to do.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-04-2010, 03:31 PM
 
Location: Verde Valley AZ
8,282 posts, read 9,117,639 times
Reputation: 10439
Quote:
Originally Posted by AZLiam View Post
I've heard of some recently in the news. There was just one yesterday (although MCSO was informed of this identity theft ring in January) - MCSO investigates illegal workers, identity theft at Tempe retailer

I guess I'm back to my original thought...

With the risk being out there that ANY company can hire ANYONE who can pull a gun on ANYONE at work, harass ANYONE, threaten ANYONE, etc, why wouldn't each and every company do their due diligence on background checks for EVERYONE to ensure that they are not hiring ANYONE who can cause undue harm to ANY of their employees, which in effect can cost the company millions of dollars or cause it to close, which in effect can lay off other workers?

While it is true that we can't predict the future habits of employees with clean backgrounds, we can get a record of what their behavior habits have been in the past which can be a predictor for the future (just like credit checks do).
I guess you'd have to ask the employers why they take the chance. I sure can't tell you because I wonder the same thing you do. I'm glad to see that they are on the job anyway but looks like it's not ICE but the sheriff's department. ICE lets them do the 'dirty work' looks like.

Credit checks don't necessarily mean someone's a 'bad guy' or is going to get into credit trouble. Maybe something bad happened and they had one bad time in their life but otherwise are good upstanding citizens who won't make the same mistake twice. The past isn't always the best predictor of the future. And I know because it happened to me.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-04-2010, 03:34 PM
 
Location: San Francisco, CA
12,854 posts, read 10,214,379 times
Reputation: 11491
Quote:
Originally Posted by AZLiam View Post
First of all, I wouldn't trust any employee who lied to get into this country illegally. What makes an employer believe an illegal wouldn't lie to them?

In addition, why would an employer put themselves at risk for potential lawsuits by not doing their due diligence in checking out the backgrounds for all employees? Companies have been sued and gone under for hiring people who have stalked, killed, or sexually harassed other employees all because they didn't do the proper background checks in the first place.
What "business suicide"? Up until now, everyone has looked the other way while businesses hire illegals. They get cheap labor that works in **** conditions and keeps their mouths shut out of fear. That means bigger margins for the fat cats that run the businesses. What's not to love??

Any serious immigration reform would set a new tone by nailing some corporate asses to the wall for hiring illegals. They're nothing racial about ensuring that every employee you hire has real US-provided credentials supporting their legal status.

When illegals can't find jobs, most of them will stop coming here. Simple as that.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-04-2010, 03:55 PM
 
358 posts, read 332,910 times
Reputation: 107
Quote:
Originally Posted by AZLiam View Post
I just do not understand. If these employers are not doing their due diligence in verifying this information on EVERY potential employee, then they are knowingly ignoring the fact that there is a percentage that may potentially be illegal. How is this discriminatory if they do verify for every employee?
If an employer uses ADP or another service to do a background check on an employee.. how cost effective is that? even if they do, you run into the issue of the information coming back as matching. I have a story to share. I hired an employee named "Geronimo Flores". All the documents were legitimate and fine, no problem. Couple years later a new hire recognized him and called him Ralph Flores. Well.. come to find out he was illegally here and using his brothers info. with a great bootleg license. If I ran Geronimo's info through a screening service it would come back as legitimate and matching. They can buy fake documents where the name and numbers match. My sister has a friend working under a stolen ID right now, and I know her employer does background checks. My whole point is this: employers are not immigration officials and are limited as to what they can do without being "racist" or "profiling" opening the business to lawsuits. I understand there are employers that intentionally hire illegal immigrants, that point is understood. There is just more to it... bottom line is that the Fed's need to uphold the law and cut off the supply. We have visa's to allow for shortages... illegal immigrants just choose not to wait in line.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-04-2010, 04:00 PM
 
358 posts, read 332,910 times
Reputation: 107
Quote:
Originally Posted by 1AngryTaxPayer View Post
If I was a legit business I would be using E-verify
The Name, SSN, DL would come back matching. are you going to fingerprint prospective employees as well? pay for it to be checked out and matched against databases? talk about business becoming immigration officials. Imagine the outcry if employers were mandated by law to fingerprint employees.... lol there would be riots. Besides that we both know it will never happen. Lol.. people would really be screaming "Nazi Germany!!" (not that I would mind fingerprinting)
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-04-2010, 04:09 PM
 
14,307 posts, read 11,156,932 times
Reputation: 2130
Quote:
Originally Posted by Iceman82 View Post
The Name, SSN, DL would come back matching. are you going to fingerprint prospective employees as well? pay for it to be checked out and matched against databases? talk about business becoming immigration officials. Imagine the outcry if employers were mandated by law to fingerprint employees.... lol there would be riots. Besides that we both know it will never happen. Lol.. people would really be screaming "Nazi Germany!!" (not that I would mind fingerprinting)
I have been fingerprinted on two jobs that I had in the past. It was no big deal to me.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-04-2010, 04:12 PM
 
358 posts, read 332,910 times
Reputation: 107
Quote:
Originally Posted by chicagonut View Post
I have been fingerprinted on two jobs that I had in the past. It was no big deal to me.
Depending on the field and security concerns I'm sure. Does E-Verify use employer provided fingerprints? (serious question) but could you imagine your local McDonald's fingerprinting all employees? it would be cost prohibitive (or it would be passed on to the consumer). Regardless I think the Fed's and Mexico are to blame, thats where the finger needs to be pointed.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-04-2010, 04:27 PM
 
Location: Phoenix
5,361 posts, read 7,059,903 times
Reputation: 3974
Quote:
Originally Posted by Iceman82 View Post
If an employer uses ADP or another service to do a background check on an employee.. how cost effective is that? even if they do, you run into the issue of the information coming back as matching. I have a story to share. I hired an employee named "Geronimo Flores". All the documents were legitimate and fine, no problem. Couple years later a new hire recognized him and called him Ralph Flores. Well.. come to find out he was illegally here and using his brothers info. with a great bootleg license. If I ran Geronimo's info through a screening service it would come back as legitimate and matching. They can buy fake documents where the name and numbers match. My sister has a friend working under a stolen ID right now, and I know her employer does background checks. My whole point is this: employers are not immigration officials and are limited as to what they can do without being "racist" or "profiling" opening the business to lawsuits. I understand there are employers that intentionally hire illegal immigrants, that point is understood. There is just more to it... bottom line is that the Fed's need to uphold the law and cut off the supply. We have visa's to allow for shortages... illegal immigrants just choose not to wait in line.
How did you verify the documents when you didn't run them through a screening service? How exactly is an employer "limited" as to what they can do when verifying documents?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-04-2010, 04:33 PM
 
4,919 posts, read 19,145,702 times
Reputation: 6171
What Iceman is saying and everyone else is refusing to understand is that E-verify checks the information you provide with a database that says the person is or isn't legally allowed to work. It does not say that the person standing n front of you is the person who information you entered in the database.

I know everyone doe not have a proiblem with their identity being checked but wait until for no fault of your own, one day someone uses your identity and end up on that list. You go for a job and they dont hire you. They have to tell you and give you a chance to correct it, but most employers just move on to the next person because telling you your on E-Verify's hit list requires a lot of paperwork and stuff. Just pass you by. Even if they do tell you, employers are not required to accept anything you say as proof. You show your DL, SS card, passport and they can just tell you sorry, until your off the list, no can work here. How do they know the documents you show them are real or forged.

The reason so few employers are even held to blame is they use E-Verify and it said the person is alright to work and that ends the employers role unless someone can prove they knew the person was not supposed to be working. It is not illegal to employ an illegal, it's only illegal to employ one if you know or should have known they were illegal. Once E-Verify said they are O.K., the employer is off the hook.

FYI, E-verify is not 95% accurate, it's only about 50% accurate. The 95% some quote means only 5% of the time when a identification was entered did it give a false result that was not suported by the database. But it does not mean that 95% of the time the information in the database was accurate. If you are legal to work but the database said your illegal, it is not an inaccurate result to say your illegal because that's whats in the system It's only inaccurate if the database said your legal to work but tells the employer your not allowed to work.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:

Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies > Illegal Immigration
Similar Threads
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6.

© 2005-2018, Advameg, Inc.

City-Data.com - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35 - Top