Illegals from North Mexico (Cali)?

[Spanman]

Contractor from Cali thought it was standard practice I guess....

http://www.ktva.com/topalaskanews/ci_14001235

 

[JOAT]

This is not surprising in the least. This kind of stuff has been going on for years and employers keep turning a blind eye and taking advantage of illegals. It's not fair for anyone involved and yet we can't seem to get anyone to enforce our immigration laws.

 

[Vince]

This is not surprising in the least. This kind of stuff has been going on for years and employers keep turning a blind eye and taking advantage of illegals. It's not fair for anyone involved and yet we can't seem to get anyone to enforce our immigration laws.

why should they enforce it when the GOV is trying to give them drivers license and health care and voting rights.

 

[Tombo]

Welcome to the lower 48, It's all about votes & money. Take a look at the new immigration bill from Gutierrez, a Democrat from Illinois. The working American citizen is being sold down the river by both the Republicans and the Democrats. Say goodbye to America as we know it.

 

[wtrdog1]

Should be no surprise.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20091216/ap_on_go_ot/us_white_minority

 

[Spanman]

Um yeah, it is a problem and prior to this didn't seem to be an Alaska Problem...this was on Elmendorf. Nice Security huh? I can't get on base if I forget my CAC card..these guys worked for months.

 

[atvalaska]

maybe that "BAGGAGE" we got in washington DC can help us out here..yea rite...

 

[mics_54]

It shouldn't be an employers responsibility to verify an employees document authenticity. An employer requires an I9 The law states that an employer CAN NOT choose which document of the three choices an employee must provide, only that he provides one of a group dictated by the feds. An employer has no means to do a background search on an employee. In most cases where employees are to be working on projects at schools, an FBI background check is required before the employee can work on the job. Same goes for most churches for employees that work around children.

Elmendorf dropped this ball not the contractor.

 

[gusdog44]

In response to spanman it has been an Alaska problem for a long time. One of the biggest busts of illegals was in Nikiski at a fish processor in the mid ninetys - there were 21 illegals from El Salvador working there. A friend who worked in the office told me they all had correctly filled out I-9s but the ids turned out to be fake. It puts the employer in a very bad position when there is not any way to verify the ID as valid.

Not sure what a solution would be within the realm of affordable actions but we need to do something to put an end to this. How many of the non-english speaking people clearing streets and pushing carts at Wal-Mart are truly legal residents?

 

[brav01]

ICE

ICE

Put the blame where it belongs squarely on ICE. The government issues a green card, legal aliens can then get a social security card and a state drivers license.These are presented to the employeer for identification for employement. The employeer doesn't have a way to check the persons legal citizenship status.
What is about as common is Jos A gets his SS card and DL. Then gives his brother Jos B the info and he goes down and files for a set of lost documents. NOW 2 people have a legal set of documents and no one is the wiser. Then add a couple of cousins to the list and ther are a lot of people with good documents that aren't legal at all.
ICE doesn't even allow police depts. to check the citizenship status of person arrested and incarcerated unless they commit a felony. So this perpetuates, since ICE is no longer allowing the deportation of illegals that are arrested and committed no crime except haveing forged documents.
That's how these people worked on base, they had papers. They just weren't legal. It's coming to a jobsite near you!

 

[Spanman]

Brav01 - That's how I got my first fake ID

On most job sites (especially Federal) there are checks in place, and it is the Responibility of the Prime Contractor to check authenticity of workers and documents. According to the base, a background check is done to see if there are Felonies or Warrants..we've even had laborers denied based upon DUI's...which apperantly in Construction is a badge of Honor according to some.

 

[brav01]

True

True

Brav01 - That's how I got my first fake ID

On most job sites (especially Federal) there are checks in place, and it is the Responibility of the Prime Contractor to check authenticity of workers and documents. According to the base, a background check is done to see if there are Felonies or Warrants..we've even had laborers denied based upon DUI's...which apperantly in Construction is a badge of Honor according to some.

BUT as long as the original owner of the documents has no Wants or Warrants and hasn't been covicted of anything the check comes back OK.

 

[littleman81]

This is definately an Alaska problem as well. A couple years ago a consultant I know was filling in for another consultant checking on a heated sidwalk project he was doing. He showed up at the jobsite and the concrete guys were getting their forms set up. Not ONE of them could speak English and so he checked the forms over. There was a small radius at one corner and he noticed they were forming the radius with a sign. Get this, the sign was from the U.S. IMMIGRATION OFFICE in downtown Anchorage!!! Apparantly these guys stole it and were using it on the jobsite. My friend took a bunch of photos once he got his bout of laughing under control.

 

[JOAT]

It shouldn't be an employers responsibility to verify an employees document authenticity.

Yes, it should be... and it is. If the employer doesn't verify who they hire, then who is going to do it? ICE even offers free tools to help you spot fake documents.

An employer has no means to do a background search on an employee.

Bull. There are plenty of means to do background checks on potential employees. You can start with a simple Google search (highly recommended prior to ANY hiring) and go all the way to pulling their official credit report. Any employer can also require potential employees to obtain a criminal background check as part of the application process.

 

[mics_54]

You don't know what you are talking about...come back when you are an employer

 

[mics_54]

This is the only responsibility an employer has to verify employment eligibility.
http://www.uscis.gov/files/form/i-9.pdf

A base on the other hand has both the capability and authorization to initialize background checks. They may, I suppose, require construction contractors to do this for them but that seems rather stupid to me.

 

[JOAT]

I know exactly what I'm talking about, so I'll come back right now.

However "stupid" you think it is, the facility doesn't bear the responsibility of verifying employment eligibility of a contractor's employees. In fact, when a facility has "issues" with particular contractor employees, they still have to go through the employer to do anything about it. Sometimes the employer can shrug off the facility and the facility can't do anything about it. The exception being where a law is broken. Sometimes the facility can find policies to prevent clearance of a particular person for a specific reason, but that is rare.

It is 100% on the employer as to who they hire. And it is 100% on the employer when they break the law and hire illegal workers. AND an employer has the right to perform any and all background checks they want prior to hiring anyone, for anything. No one said they have a "requirement" to do a background check. But they have the RIGHT to do so and it is good business practice.

 

[littleman81]

I know exactly what I'm talking about, so I'll come back right now.

However "stupid" you think it is, the facility doesn't bear the responsibility of verifying employment eligibility of a contractor's employees. In fact, when a facility has "issues" with particular contractor employees, they still have to go through the employer to do anything about it. Sometimes the employer can shrug off the facility and the facility can't do anything about it. The exception being where a law is broken. Sometimes the facility can find policies to prevent clearance of a particular person for a specific reason, but that is rare.

It is 100% on the employer as to who they hire. And it is 100% on the employer when they break the law and hire illegal workers. AND an employer has the right to perform any and all background checks they want prior to hiring anyone, for anything. No one said they have a "requirement" to do a background check. But they have the RIGHT to do so and it is good business practice.

JOAT, I think you are correct. I have run into issues (I work for a government owner) on construction jobs where the contractor pulled funny stuff (State prevailing wages, subcontracts, etc.). The STATE went after the contractor because they didn't report correctly as REQUIRED by the contract. I (owner, i.e. facility) get copied on certified payroll but am not liable to the state. General contractor took the hit because they DIDN'T VERIFY and FOLLOW THE STATE LAWS.

My .02

 

[Diesel Nut]

It shouldn't be an employers responsibility to verify an employees document authenticity. An employer requires an I9 The law states that an employer CAN NOT choose which document of the three choices an employee must provide, only that he provides one of a group dictated by the feds. An employer has no means to do a background search on an employee. In most cases where employees are to be working on projects at schools, an FBI background check is required before the employee can work on the job. Same goes for most churches for employees that work around children.

Elmendorf dropped this ball not the contractor.

Wrong. The employer is required by the terms of the contract to submit fingerprint cards and request a criminal history check for all employees not classified as day workers. A day worker is along the lines of a food delivery or taxi driver. The contractor failed to conduct these checks, and then claimed to have met security standards. They will likely be fined, although we'll probably never hear the details.

The base is prohibited by law from fingerprinting and requesting history checks on anybody not employed directly by the Federal government. The only time the base cops can run a criminal history check on a person is during incidental contact (call-out, traffic stop, etc). All other checks have to be purchased through the AST Reports and Records office.

 

[Spanman]

Yup, It is entirely the Prime Contractors responsibility to do Background checks and verify authenticity. They submit certified payroll and all records are subject to investigation by Governing authority. Unfortunatly in this case the ball was dropped on several accounts starting with the Sub-KTR, the Prime-KTR, and possibly the agency enforcing the contract, and Security forces office who approve base passes.