|
NEW YORK TIMES
Employers Fight Tough Measures on Immigration
By JULIA PRESTON
Under pressure from the toughest crackdown on illegal immigration in two
decades, employers across the country are fighting back in state
legislatures, the federal courts and city halls.
Business groups have resisted measures that would revoke the licenses of
employers of illegal immigrants. They are proposing alternatives that
would revise federal rules for verifying the identity documents of new
hires and would expand programs to bring legal immigrant laborers.
Though the pushback is coming from both Democrats and Republicans, in
many places it is reopening the rift over immigration that troubled the
Republican Party last year. Businesses, generally Republican stalwarts,
are standing up to others within the party who accuse them of
undercutting border enforcement and jeopardizing American jobs by hiring
illegal immigrants as cheap labor.
Employers in Arizona were stung by a law passed last year by the
Republican-controlled Legislature that revokes the licenses of
businesses caught twice with illegal immigrants. They won approval in
this year’s session of a narrowing of that law making clear that it did
not apply to workers hired before this year.
Last week, an Arizona employers’ group submitted more than 284,000
signatures — far more than needed — for a November ballot initiative
that would make the 2007 law even friendlier to employers.
Also in recent months, immigration bills were defeated in Indiana and
Kentucky — states where control of the legislatures is split between
Democrats and Republicans — due in part to warnings from business groups
that the measures could hurt the economy.
In Oklahoma, chambers of commerce went to federal court and last month
won an order suspending sections of a 2007 state law that would require
employers to use a federal database to check the immigration status of
new hires. In California, businesses have turned to elected officials,
including the Democratic mayor of Los Angeles, to lobby federal
immigration authorities against raiding long-established companies.
While much of the employer activity has been at the grass-roots level, a
national federation has been created to bring together the local and
state business groups that have sprung up over the last year.
“These employers are now starting to realize that nobody is in a better
position than they are to make the case that they do need the workers
and they do want to be on the right side of the law,” said Tamar Jacoby,
president of the new federation, ImmigrationWorks USA.
After years of laissez-faire enforcement, federal immigration agents
have been conducting raids at a brisk pace, with 4,940 arrests in
workplaces last year. Although immigration has long been a federal
issue, more than 175 bills were introduced in states this year
concerning the employment of immigrants, according to the National
Conference of State Legislatures.
State lawmakers said they had acted against businesses, often in
response to fervent demands from voters, to curb job incentives that
were attracting shadow populations of illegal immigrants.
“Illegal immigration is a threat to the safety of Missouri families and
the security of their jobs,” Gov. Matt Blunt, a Republican, said after
the Missouri Legislature passed a crackdown law in May. “I am pleased
that lawmakers heeded my call to continue the fight where Washington has
failed to act.”
But because of the mobilization of businesses, the state proposals this
year have increasingly reflected their concerns. State lawmakers “are
starting to be more responsive to the employer community because of its
engagement in the issue,” said Ann Morse, who monitors immigration for
the national legislature conference.
The offensive by businesses has been spurred by the federal enforcement
crackdown, by inaction in Congress on immigration legislation and by a
rush of punitive state measures last year that created a checkerboard of
conflicting requirements. Many employers found themselves on the
political defensive as they grappled, even in an economic downturn, with
shortages of low-wage labor.
Mike Gilsdorf, the owner of a 37-year-old landscaping nursery in
Littleton, Colo., saw the need for action by businesses last winter when
he advertised with the Labor Department, as he does every year, for 40
seasonal workers at market-rate wages to plant, prune and carry his
shrubs in the summer heat. Only one local worker responded to the
notice, he said, and then did not show up for the job.
Mr. Gilsdorf was able to fill his labor force with legal immigrants from
Mexico through a federal guest worker program. But that program has a
tight annual cap, and Mr. Gilsdorf realized that he might not be so
lucky next year. His business could fail, he said, and then even his
American workers would lose their jobs.
“We’re not hiring illegals, we’re not paying under the table,” Mr.
Gilsdorf said. “But if we don’t get in under the cap and nobody is
answering our ads, we don’t have employees.” His group, Colorado
Employers for Immigration Reform, is pressing Congress for a much larger
and more flexible guest worker program.
Unhappy California businesses won the support of Mayor Antonio R.
Villaraigosa of Los Angeles, who wrote a letter in March to Homeland
Security Secretary Michael Chertoff criticizing immigration agents for
aiming raids at “established, responsible employers” in the city and
urging him to focus on those with a record of labor violations.
In Virginia, an employers’ coalition headed off bills that would have
closed businesses that hire illegal immigrants and would have required
all employers to participate in the federal system to check the working
papers of new hires, which is known as E-Verify. Business groups
nationwide oppose mandatory use of the system, which is now voluntary,
because they say the Social Security Administration database it draws
upon is full of errors that could lead to job denials for American
citizens and legal immigrants and bureaucratic overload for the agency.
Virginia employers said they learned a lesson last year after the broad
immigration bill they supported failed in Congress.
“The silent masses of businesses out there should have been on the phone
with their Congressional representatives calling for rational reform,”
said Hobey Bauhan, president of the Virginia Poultry Federation, whose
members include some of the biggest low-wage employers in the state.
Virginia lawmakers ultimately adopted verification rules aimed at
employers who systematically hire illegal immigrants.
In this legislative session, Arizona businesses rallied behind a bill to
create what would have been the first state guest worker program in the
country. Their advertising campaign used the slogan “What part of legal
don’t you understand?” — a tweak of the battle cry of their opponents,
who use the same phrase with the word “illegal.”
Arizona employers said they knew that passage would be difficult for the
bill, because only the federal government can issue visas to immigrant
workers.
Although the bill never came to a vote, employers said the debate helped
make their views known in Washington.
“It’s a message to the federal government,” said Joe Sigg, director of
government relations for the Arizona Farm Bureau, “that we need a legal
and reliable means to recruit workers.”
Employers’ groups have not succeeded everywhere. Under a bill passed
this year, Mississippi is the first state to make it a felony for an
illegal immigrant to work. The measure also allows terminated employees
to sue their employer if they were replaced by an illegal immigrant.
President Bush on June 9 ordered all federal contractors to check new
workers with E-Verify. The administration is pressing forward with a
rule that would pressure employers to fire within 90 days any worker
whose identity information does not match the records of the Social
Security Administration, as frequently happens with illegal immigrants.
The first version of the rule was held up last year by a federal court
injunction.
While many businesses have come forward, they say they speak for many
others with immigrant workers that are lying low after finding that the
crackdown has left them in a perilous legal bind. While raids and
sanctions are increasing, employers with low-wage immigrant workers are
barred by antidiscrimination rules from examining identity documents of
new hires too closely or checking the immigration status of employees
after they have been hired.
“The problem for business is that despite their complete compliance with
the law, it is inevitable for employers with large numbers of immigrant
workers that a certain percentage will be unauthorized workers using
false documents,” said Peter Schey, a lawyer who represents two
California companies facing scrutiny by federal immigration agents. “The
system is just as broken for employers as it is for immigrants.”
One employer facing this problem is the chief executive of a $20 million
company on the outskirts of Los Angeles that assembles electronic parts.
She said she had come to fear that her company — including its legal
workers — is at risk of being crippled by an immigration raid.
The executive spoke on the condition that neither she nor her company be
identified by name, for fear of attracting immigration authorities.
A human resources manager who worked for the company a decade ago hired
a number of workers without conducting an extra check of their documents
with the Social Security Administration, the executive said. Now she has
received notices from the agency of mismatches in the identity documents
of 20 workers who were hired 10 years ago, out of 90 workers on the
assembly floor today.
Because of the antidiscrimination rules, the executive cannot check to
be certain that the 20 workers, mainly Hispanic women, are illegal.
Moreover, they have advanced through training, she said, and excel at
their jobs, which require the repetitive assembly of tiny parts by hand,
often under microscopes.
“I can’t replace those people,” the executive said. She said that
despite offering competitive wages from $9 to $17 an hour, the company
had failed over the years in repeated efforts to attract nonimmigrant
workers because of the state’s tight technology labor market and because
of the nature of the work, exacting and tedious. If the workers were
fired or arrested, she said, she could fail to meet her contracts.
“If we have to terminate 20 people, that’s going to jeopardize 100 other
jobs of people who are legal, Americans, people who are making a good
living,” she said.
Angelo Paparelli, an immigration lawyer who represents the company,
said: “This is not an employer who wants to turn a blind eye to
lawbreaking. She is facing a tightening of the enforcement vise that
does not take into account Congress’s failure to create a workable
system.”
California employers were shocked by the raid earlier this year at Micro
Solutions Enterprises, an established manufacturer of printer cartridges
that is based in Los Angeles and has more than 800 workers. Officials
said 138 workers were arrested. In a message to his customers, Avi
Wazana, the Micro Solutions owner, said the company had been verifying
the legal status of all new hires through federal programs for nearly a
year.
Bush administration officials said the crackdown was the price employers
must pay to persuade voters to agree to open the gates to immigrant
workers. In an interview, Mr. Chertoff, the homeland security secretary,
said, “We are not going to be able to satisfy the American people on a
legal temporary worker program until they are convinced that we will
have a stick as well as a carrot.”
|