Today, among other things, I filled out U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services Form I-9, Employment Eligibility Verification.
The form verifies an employee’s identity and proves that they are eligible to work in the United States. The requirement to prove eligibility was established in 1986. This is at least the sixth time I’ve completed Form I-9.
These forms, as I understand it, are not submitted to the government, but, rather, are retained by the employer for all current employees and for a defined period of time after the employment ends.
There are a lot of illegal immigrants in the United States and most wouldn’t be able to stay without employment income. None would have legitimate documents required to prove eligibility for employment.
Employers can be fined by Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) for the following immigration law violations: 1
- Employing workers who are not authorized to work in the USA.
- Not having I-9 Employment Verification Forms done for each employee.
- Having improperly filled out I-9 forms.
- Not verifying employment authorization within the time limits of the law.
- Ignoring Social Security Mismatch letters.
- Discriminating against employment authorized foreigners.
- Requiring specific documents for verification purposes.
- Not accepting documents presented by employees listed on the I-9 form.
- Hiring independent contractors to circumvent Immigration Law.
- Not cooperating with US government officials during an audit and/or a raid.
1 Top 10 Reasons Why Employers Are Fined For Immigration Law Violations
Comments on this entry are closed.
I hadn’t realized you would have to fill out a form like that. Interesting!
Cheerful Monk recently posted…Habemus ….
All new-hires have had to fill one out since 1986. At some point after the attacks on September 11, 2001, all existing employees who didn’t have one on file, had to fill one out, I believe. The only ones that don’t have to have one are volunteer workers and contractors. I think that refers to independent contractors, which I am not. I am an employee of a contract services company who is providing my services to the facility through a purchase order via a third company.
Mike recently posted…Commonplace Swirls
Interesting and scary. Especially the criminal implications.
Cheerful Monk recently posted…Habemus ….
Most employers won’t risk it, I think. In one other article, I read about some employers who were charged under the federal Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act, commonly referred to as the RICO Act or simply RICO.
Mike recently posted…Commonplace Swirls
From what I’ve read RICO is an invitation for abuse, and a lot of innocent people have suffered from it.
Cheerful Monk recently posted…A Great, Non-Sunny Day
I haven’t read much about it one way or another, but I have heard of some abuse of the system via RICO.
Mike recently posted…Commonplace Swirls
I think I was thinking of Equitable Sharing, where local and state police could grab people’s property and the owner’s had to sue to get it back. The Feds are finally putting a stop to it: http://www.washingtonpost.com/investigations/holder-ends-seized-asset-sharing-process-that-split-billions-with-local-state-police/2015/01/16/0e7ca058-99d4-11e4-bcfb-059ec7a93ddc_story.html?wpisrc=nl_evening&wpmm=1
Cheerful Monk recently posted…Vegemite
That certainly can be an abuse of power and misuse of the system.
Mike recently posted…Tired.