Tuesday, August 25, 2009
FORMER ICE CHIEF CRITICIZES DROPPING THE NO MATCH RULE
Julie Myers, ICE chief in the Bush Administration, criticizes in Forbes the Obama Administration's decision to kill the Social Security no match rule. According to Myers:
DHS' decision to disregard no-match letters and focus on E-Verify alone to drive compliance is nonsensical. Employers who are on E-Verify and participating in IMAGE generally do not receive no-match letters. With E-Verify participation, employers resolve most no-matches when a new employee starts working. Instead, employers who are not on E-Verify receive the majority of the no-match letters. And, E-Verify and IMAGE are generally voluntary programs (except for federal contractors and those mandated by state laws). DHS is essentially conceding that they are going to focus on the employers that need the least scrutiny, and ignore useful information that will help DHS target the next IFCO.
Where does this leave well-intentioned employers? Without guidance on no-match letters, and without assurance that voluntary participation in government programs such as E-Verify will give them any protection. To the contrary, DHS is increasing audits of E-Verify employers, and targeting those employers for potential enforcement action. And perhaps worst of all, well-intentioned employers heard loud and clear from the administration, "never mind what the egregious employers are up to, it's you who should be concerned." Where's the justice, or logic for that matter, in that?
# posted by Greg Siskind @ 4:12 PM
XML newsfeed
archives
April 2007
November 2007
December 2007
January 2008
February 2008
March 2008
April 2008
May 2008
June 2008
July 2008
August 2008
September 2008
October 2008
November 2008
December 2008
January 2009
February 2009
March 2009
April 2009
May 2009
June 2009
July 2009
August 2009
September 2009
October 2009
November 2009
December 2009
January 2010
February 2010
March 2010
April 2010
May 2010
June 2010
July 2010
August 2010
September 2010
October 2010
November 2010
December 2010
January 2011
February 2011
March 2011
April 2011
May 2011
June 2011
July 2011
August 2011
September 2011
November 2011
December 2011
January 2012
February 2012
March 2012
April 2012
May 2012
September 2012
December 2012
April 2014
DHS' decision to disregard no-match letters and focus on E-Verify alone to drive compliance is nonsensical. Employers who are on E-Verify and participating in IMAGE generally do not receive no-match letters. With E-Verify participation, employers resolve most no-matches when a new employee starts working. Instead, employers who are not on E-Verify receive the majority of the no-match letters. And, E-Verify and IMAGE are generally voluntary programs (except for federal contractors and those mandated by state laws). DHS is essentially conceding that they are going to focus on the employers that need the least scrutiny, and ignore useful information that will help DHS target the next IFCO.
Where does this leave well-intentioned employers? Without guidance on no-match letters, and without assurance that voluntary participation in government programs such as E-Verify will give them any protection. To the contrary, DHS is increasing audits of E-Verify employers, and targeting those employers for potential enforcement action. And perhaps worst of all, well-intentioned employers heard loud and clear from the administration, "never mind what the egregious employers are up to, it's you who should be concerned." Where's the justice, or logic for that matter, in that?
# posted by Greg Siskind @ 4:12 PM
November 2007
December 2007
January 2008
February 2008
March 2008
April 2008
May 2008
June 2008
July 2008
August 2008
September 2008
October 2008
November 2008
December 2008
January 2009
February 2009
March 2009
April 2009
May 2009
June 2009
July 2009
August 2009
September 2009
October 2009
November 2009
December 2009
January 2010
February 2010
March 2010
April 2010
May 2010
June 2010
July 2010
August 2010
September 2010
October 2010
November 2010
December 2010
January 2011
February 2011
March 2011
April 2011
May 2011
June 2011
July 2011
August 2011
September 2011
November 2011
December 2011
January 2012
February 2012
March 2012
April 2012
May 2012
September 2012
December 2012
April 2014