# 1,200+ illegals arrested. Company employing them gets off. Huh? **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [December 13, 2006, 11:43pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/1-200-illegals-arrested-company-employing-them-gets-off-huh/384039 "2006-12-13T23:43:32Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 2
**Author:** ![Unregistered\_Bull](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/u/3da27b/32.png) [@Unregistered\_Bull](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Unregistered_Bull)\ **Post date:** [December 14, 2006, 7:06pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/1-200-illegals-arrested-company-employing-them-gets-off-huh/384039/21 "2006-12-14T19:06:03Z")
[QUOTE=Eva Luna] There is currently no legal requirement for employers to verify the authenticity of documents presented for I-9 purposes, as long as they reasonably appear to be geniune. Besides, there are several thousand different formats for something as basic as a U.S. birth certificate; exactly how would employers deal with that under the current system? [/QUOTE] If the documents reasonably appear to be genuine, can an employer delay employment of an individual just to make sure that documents are in fact genuine anyway? Can they only do this for workers of only certain ethnicities / national origins? ---
**Author:** ![Fear\_Itself](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/fear_itself/32/19637_2.png) [@Fear\_Itself](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Fear_Itself)\ **Post date:** [December 14, 2006, 7:20pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/1-200-illegals-arrested-company-employing-them-gets-off-huh/384039/22 "2006-12-14T19:20:21Z")
[QUOTE=mlees] I am curious, too. From what little I have heard about it (I have done no research myself), it could be as little as Swift making an official data request like this: \*SSN of applicant: 123-45-6789 Name of applicant: Mlees Felony convictions: None Please verify SSN 123-45-6789 as current, valid, and assigned to Mlees. Please verify Mlees’ conviction record.\* [/QUOTE] I don’t think the SS administration is legally allowed, much less able, to respond to such a request. ---
**Author:** ![Voyager](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/voyager/32/133_2.png) [@Voyager](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Voyager)\ **Post date:** [December 14, 2006, 7:32pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/1-200-illegals-arrested-company-employing-them-gets-off-huh/384039/23 "2006-12-14T19:32:33Z")
[QUOTE=Fear Itself] I don’t think the SS administration is legally allowed, much less able, to respond to such a request. [/QUOTE] No, but there is a program, which Swift was a part of, which confirmed the validity of an SSN] submitted. However, based on the article on this in the Times yesterday, SSA cannot tell the company that the number is now being used for another job (or another five jobs) half a continent away, and there appears to be correlation to age and sex. I can see the justification for the other job prohibition - a company could use this to see if an employee were moonlighting, and it is unlikely that SSNs of people leaving would be sent, so the data would be inaccurate. However, I can’t imagine any problems confirming a name. BTW, the take on this in the Times is that INS is cracking down to prove to Republicans that they are serious, so that there is a better chance of Bush’s guest worker program passing. ---
**Author:** ![rjung](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/45deac/32.png) [@rjung](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/rjung)\ **Post date:** [December 14, 2006, 10:31pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/1-200-illegals-arrested-company-employing-them-gets-off-huh/384039/24 "2006-12-14T22:31:16Z")
[QUOTE=magellan01] Questions: How can the government turn a blind eye to Swift’s actions? [/quote] Because for all the posturing and pontificating the government does about the bane of illegal immigration, their constituents – that is to say, large corporations like Swift, Wal-Mart, and Tyson Foods – _like_ dirt-cheap illegal labor, and pay good chunks of cash to keep it this way. And all that talk about border fences and tougher laws merely makes it easier to keep the illegals in line. ---
**Author:** ![RTFirefly](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/c77e96/32.png) [@RTFirefly](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/RTFirefly)\ **Post date:** [December 14, 2006, 10:41pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/1-200-illegals-arrested-company-employing-them-gets-off-huh/384039/25 "2006-12-14T22:41:40Z")
[Here’s ICE’s press release](http://www.ice.gov/pi/news/newsreleases/articles/061213dc.htm). What’s wrong with this picture? > [@](#): > > December 13, 2006 > **U.S. Uncovers Large-Scale Identity Theft Scheme Used By Illegal Aliens to Gain Employment at Nationwide Meat Processor > Worksite enforcement investigation reveals that hundreds of U.S. citizens and lawful residents may have been victimized** > > WASHINGTON, D.C. – Homeland Security Secretary Michael Chertoff, Assistant Secretary for Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) Julie L. Myers, Federal Trade Commission (FTC) Chairman Deborah Platt Majoras and Cache County (UT) Attorney N. George Daines today announced that approximately 1,282 persons have been arrested as part of an ongoing worksite enforcement investigation into immigration violations and a massive identity theft scheme that has victimized large numbers of U.S. citizens and lawful U.S. residents. > > Yesterday, ICE agents executed civil search warrants at six facilities owned by Swift & Company (Swift), one of the nation’s largest processors of fresh pork and beef. Agents executed warrants at Swift facilities in Greeley, Colorado; Grand Island, Nebraska; Cactus, Texas; Hyrum, Utah; Marshalltown, Iowa; and Worthington, Minnesota. > > In total, agents apprehended 1,282 illegal alien workers on administrative immigration violations at Swift facilities. Of these, 65 have also been charged with criminal violations related to identity theft or other violations, such as re-entry after deportation. Countries of origin of those arrested were: Mexico, Guatemala, Honduras, El Salvador, Peru, Laos, Sudan and Ethiopia; others have yet to be identified. The investigation is ongoing. > > “Violations of our immigration laws and privacy rights often go hand in hand,” said Homeland Security Secretary Michael Chertoff. “Enforcement actions like this one protect the privacy rights of innocent Americans while striking a blow against illegal immigration.” > > “This investigation has uncovered a disturbing front in the war against illegal immigration. We believe that the genuine identities of possibly hundreds of U.S. citizens are being stolen or hijacked by criminal organizations and sold to illegal aliens in order to gain unlawful employment in this country. Combating this burgeoning problem is one of ICE’s highest priorities,” said Assistant Secretary Myers. > > Evidence uncovered during the investigation, which began in February 2006, indicates that hundreds of these illegal aliens may have illegally assumed the identities of U.S. citizens and improperly used their Social Security numbers and other identity documents in order to gain employment at Swift facilities. ICE and the FTC have identified hundreds of U.S. citizens whose stolen identities have been used by these aliens and have reported being victimized by this identity theft scheme. ICE and the FTC are working to identify other victims who may be unaware that their identities have been stolen. > > The investigation has uncovered criminal organizations around the country that traffic in genuine birth certificates and Social Security cards belonging to U.S. citizens. In recent months, ICE agents have arrested several members of these organizations in Minnesota, Texas, Utah and Puerto Rico. In some cases, these organizations have stolen legitimate identity documents and Social Security cards from unwitting U.S. citizens. In other cases, they have purchased these documents from U.S. citizens willing to sell their identities for money, including homeless people and individuals in jail. > > ICE agents learned that many of these genuine identity documents were trafficked to locations around the country and sold to illegal aliens who used them to gain employment at Swift. By using valid Social Security numbers and birth certificates of U.S. citizens, these illegal aliens were able to thwart the Basic Pilot Employment Eligibility Verification system (Basic Pilot), a federal program designed to help employers detect unauthorized workers. Swift has used the Basic Pilot program since 1997. > > The FTC has received hundreds of complaints from U.S. citizens across the country who allege that they became aware that their identities were being used illegally. Among the victim complaints were: > > ``` > A victim in Texas stated their personal information was used for employment. Victim also reported he was pulled over and arrested once since the suspect used his information for illegal activity. Victim believes the suspect got his information because he lost his wallet. FTC information indicates suspect was working at Swift. > > Victim in Texas reports that suspect obtained utility accounts and a Sprint wireless account using their information. The victim believes theft may be result of purse theft in 2001. FTC information indicates that suspect was working at Swift. > > ``` > > The FTC and ICE will notify any individuals who are identified as victims of this scheme. In the meantime, any U.S. citizens who suspect their identities were stolen in this scheme should report it via the FTC website at [Identity Theft | Consumer Advice](http://www.ftc.gov/idtheft) or by calling the FTC’s hotline at 1-877-ID-THEFT (1-877-438-4338), or by writing to the Identity Theft Clearinghouse, Federal Trade Commission, 600 Pennsylvania Ave. NW, Washington, DC 20580. > > Those illegal aliens arrested yesterday on administrative immigration violations are being detained and processed at locations around the country for removal proceedings or immediate return to Mexico. In certain cases where humanitarian or medical concerns were identified, ICE agents used their discretion and provided the alien with a notice to appear in court at a later date. All will be afforded due process under the law and an opportunity to appear before an Immigration Judge. Relatives or other concerned parties seeking information on the location or status of an illegal alien who may have been arrested at Swift facilities yesterday may call 866-341-3858. > > Those illegal aliens who were charged with federal criminal violations will be remanded to the custody of the U.S. Marshal Service pending their criminal court proceedings before a federal judge. Those illegal aliens charged in state criminal violations will be remanded to the custody of state authorities pending their criminal court proceedings. ICE will seek to remove these individuals from the United States upon the resolution of their criminal charges and affiliated sentences. > > This ongoing investigation is a collaborative effort between ICE, the FTC, the Social Security Administration’s Office of Inspector General, the Weld County (CO) District Attorney, the Cache County (UT) Attorney, the United States Attorney’s offices for the Southern District of Iowa, the District of Colorado, the District of Nebraska, the Northern District of Texas and District of Utah, and the District of Minnesota. The Department of Agriculture Office of Inspector General and U.S. Customs and Border Protection provided critical assistance during the execution of warrants and processing of aliens. > > – ICE – > > U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) was established in March 2003 as the largest investigative arm of the Department of Homeland Security. ICE is comprised of four integrated divisions that form a 21st century law enforcement agency with broad responsibilities for a number of key homeland security priorities. They alleged a “massive identity theft scheme” and **arrested 1,282 persons** - and came up with **65** identity theft violations. Looks like the operation was basically a fishing expedition for immigration violators. [The American Prospect](http://www.prospect.org/web/page.ww?section=root&name=ViewWeb&articleId=12297) thinks it’s also about union-busting and driving a wedge between the Democratic Party and both unions and Latinos. Their case is circumstantial, but at this late point it wouldn’t shock me in the least to find that the Bush Administration was using a government agency for nakedly political ends. ---
**Author:** ![Voyager](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/voyager/32/133_2.png) [@Voyager](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Voyager)\ **Post date:** [December 14, 2006, 11:17pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/1-200-illegals-arrested-company-employing-them-gets-off-huh/384039/26 "2006-12-14T23:17:21Z")
[QUOTE=RTFirefly] [Here’s ICE’s press release](http://www.ice.gov/pi/news/newsreleases/articles/061213dc.htm). What’s wrong with this picture? They alleged a “massive identity theft scheme” and **arrested 1,282 persons** - and came up with **65** identity theft violations. [/QUOTE] Even if it was a fishing expedition, I’d think that getting evidence for identity theft is a lot harder than for being in the country illegally. I wouldn’t bet the problem is limited to 65. But this brings up another question. What’s on the W2? If the given SSN is, the wages for these people should show up for the person whose number it is, and the IRS would quickly start asking questions. Given that a name and employer is on a W2, it would be simple enough to track the thief. If the wages are not reported to the same SSN given to prove that the person is legal, then there is a good case that the company knew or should know that the employees was undocumented. Thus Swift is guilty. ---
**Author:** ![Fear\_Itself](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/fear_itself/32/19637_2.png) [@Fear\_Itself](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Fear_Itself)\ **Post date:** [December 15, 2006, 12:21am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/1-200-illegals-arrested-company-employing-them-gets-off-huh/384039/27 "2006-12-15T00:21:24Z")
[QUOTE=RTFirefly] [The American Prospect](http://www.prospect.org/web/page.ww?section=root&name=ViewWeb&articleId=12297) thinks it’s also about union-busting and driving a wedge between the Democratic Party and both unions and Latinos. Their case is circumstantial, but at this late point it wouldn’t shock me in the least to find that the Bush Administration was using a government agency for nakedly political ends. [/QUOTE] If you are referring to this part: > [@](#): > > After six years in office, ICE’s choice of this moment to begin their campaign is more than suspect. It is designed to force the new Democratic congressional majority to make a choice. The administration is confident that Democrats will endorse workplace raids in order to appear “tough on illegal immigration” in preparation for the 2008 presidential elections. In doing so, they will have to attack two of the major groups who produced the votes that changed Congress in November – labor and Latinos. I think that is a major miscalculation on the part of the White House. Democrats were the only ones supporting the President’s comprehensive immigration bill, including the guest worker program. Why would the same Democrats suddenly care about looking tough on immigration in 2008, when they didn’t seem to care before the 2006 mid-term elections? If this makes anybody look tough on Latinos and unions, I’d say it would be the Republicans, who want to build fences, deport 12 million illegals and oppose “amnesty” at any cost. ---
**Author:** ![RTFirefly](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/c77e96/32.png) [@RTFirefly](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/RTFirefly)\ **Post date:** [December 15, 2006, 3:03am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/1-200-illegals-arrested-company-employing-them-gets-off-huh/384039/28 "2006-12-15T03:03:12Z")
[Family Values](http://www.ksl.com/?nid=148&sid=725009): > [@](#): > > Yesterday, secretaries and teachers all over the Cache and Logan City School Districts found themselves calling students’ family members or relatives to pick them up from school. Some kids only have one parent to go home to and others have none, they’re with relatives. > > It’s possible those kids may not come back to school for a while. In fact, some may never return. And to think, they were there just yesterday. > > There are 450 students at Canyon Elementary,100 of them at least were impacted by what happened yesterday, that’s about a fourth of the school. [More family values](http://www.desmoinesregister.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20061213/NEWS/61213038/1001&lead=1): > [@](#): > > Marshalltown, Ia. — A priest’s and nun’s mission to find the mother of a nursing baby was thwarted today after they said officials from Camp Dodge would not let them inside to tell their story. > > Sister Christine Feagan, from the St. Mary’s Hispanic Ministry, and The Rev. Jim Miller, who is a priest from the St. Mary’s Parish, both said they drove to Camp Dodge this afternoon to find out the status of a nursing mother who was deported and nursing a baby. They were also seeking a father with an ashmatic child. > > They didn’t come with papers showing legal status. Instead, they wanted “to show them the need to be free,” said Miller. > > Miller said he knows detainees were located there, because they were permitted a phone call from Camp Dodge and some had called the church seeking help. > > He said an ICE officer at the facility “wouldn’t tell us anything about anybody.” > > The duo returned to Marshalltown this afternoon to deal with the scores of families trying arrange care for children whose parents have been detained. > > At the church’s Hispanic ministry, the baby whose mother was arrested was passed among staff and a community activist who had agreed to help care for her. > > They said they don’t know when the girl, whose father is absent, will be reunited with her mother. > > The child, whose name was not provided by ministry staff, cried little, and stared at the different faces visiting the ministry. Women speaking a mixture of Spanish and English coordinated plans with how they would take care of children left behind. > > Carmen Montealegre is one of the women who is taking care of two of her friends’ children with family displaced by the arrests. One of the children, a seven-year-old, asks frequently why her mother was detained, she said. > > “She asked me three times, ‘Did she kill someone?’ I said, ‘She was working under another name.’” > > The baby left behind has her own problems. > > She has been difficult to feed since her mother was arrested, Feagan said. > > “The mother was breastfeeding the baby,” Feagan said. “The baby doesn’t want to eat. Another tried to breastfeed, but she knew it wasn’t her.” > > Feagan said she and advocates for local Hispanic families have tried to pinpoint exactly how many children are in family-limbo to try to organize help. > > A total of 408 students were absent in the Marshalltown community school district as of Wednesday morning, district officials reported. ---
**Author:** ![magellan01](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/45deac/32.png) [@magellan01](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/magellan01)\ **Post date:** [December 15, 2006, 3:26am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/1-200-illegals-arrested-company-employing-them-gets-off-huh/384039/29 "2006-12-15T03:26:05Z")
[QUOTE=rjung] Because for all the posturing and pontificating the government does about the bane of illegal immigration, their constituents – that is to say, large corporations like Swift, Wal-Mart, and Tyson Foods – _like_ dirt-cheap illegal labor, and pay good chunks of cash to keep it this way. And all that talk about border fences and tougher laws merely makes it easier to keep the illegals in line. [/QUOTE] Sir, I fear you are absolutely 100% correct. Usually we can pretty much be assured that things won’t get too messed up. If one party really wants to do something the other party will stop or slow them down. The result is that things get screwed up 10% or 25% instead of 100%. In this immigration issue we have an unholiy alliance. The dems see votes, and the reps see cash and the possibility of losing fewer votes. I find this disgusting and would be thrilled if some people, starting with Bush, would get impeached over this. Not that there is any chance of that even being discussed. ---
**Author:** ![Eva\_Luna](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/e495f1/32.png) [@Eva\_Luna](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Eva_Luna)\ **Post date:** [December 15, 2006, 5:09am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/1-200-illegals-arrested-company-employing-them-gets-off-huh/384039/30 "2006-12-15T05:09:02Z")
[QUOTE=Unregistered Bull] If the documents reasonably appear to be genuine, can an employer delay employment of an individual just to make sure that documents are in fact genuine anyway? Can they only do this for workers of only certain ethnicities / national origins? [/QUOTE] I talked to my boss about this; he’s been practicing immigration law approximately as long as I’ve been alive. He agrees with me - employers are between a rock and a hard place on I-9 issues, even if they are trying to comply 100% (and admittedly, many employers don’t bother). If they have reason to suspect that documents submitted for I-9 purposes are forged or don’t relate to the person presenting them, their choices aren’t very palatable; they can let it slide, or they can risk having propective employees file discrimination complaints against them. He said he would advise an employer in a situation like that to carefully explain to the employee the specific factual basis for being suspicious of a particular document, ask for an explanation, and if a reasonable explanation is forthcoming, give the employee a couple of days to provide additional documentation, on pain of termination. But if an employer is going to, for example, verify Social Security numbers, they’d better do it for ALL employees, not just brown ones or ones with accents or ones who appear to be foreign. Differential screening is asking for a lawsuit. And [employers aren’t expected to be forensic document experts](http://www.uscis.gov/portal/site/uscis/menuitem.5af9bb95919f35e66f614176543f6d1a/?vgnextoid=0572194d3e88d010VgnVCM10000048f3d6a1RCRD&vgnextchannel=91919c7755cb9010VgnVCM10000045f3d6a1RCRD), nor should they be: "QUESTIONS ABOUT GENUINENESS OF DOCUMENTS Employers are not required to be document experts. In reviewing the genuineness of the documents presented by employees, employers are held to a reasonableness standard. Since no employer which is not participating in one of the employment verification pilots has access to receive confirmation of information contained in a document presented by an employee to demonstrate employment eligibility, it may happen that an employer will accept a document that is not in fact genuine – or is genuine but does not belong to the person who presented it. Such an employer will not be held responsible if the document reasonably appeared to be genuine or to relate to the person presenting it. An employer who receives a document that appears not to be genuine may request assistance from the nearest Immigration field office or contact the Office of Business Liaison. DISCOVERING UNAUTHORIZED EMPLOYEES It occasionally happens that an employer learns that an employee whose documentation appeared to be in order for Form I-9 purposes is not actually authorized to work. In such case, the employer should question the employee and provide another opportunity for review of proper Form I-9 documentation. If the employee is unable under such circumstances to provide satisfactory documentation, employment should be discontinued (alien employees who question the employer’s determination may be referred to an Immigration field office for assistance)." There are literally scores of combinations of documents that meet the I-9 requirements, and I doubt there is a single person in the U.S. who has seen every possible format they can come in (how many of you have ever seen a Native American tribal document?). And for that matter, several types of documents which by definition can only be held by people who are U.S. citizens or permanent residents are [not acceptable documentation of work authorization for I-9 purposes](http://www.uscis.gov/portal/site/uscis/menuitem.5af9bb95919f35e66f614176543f6d1a/?vgnextoid=31b3ab0a43b5d010VgnVCM10000048f3d6a1RCRD&vgnextchannel=db029c7755cb9010VgnVCM10000045f3d6a1RCRD), which makes no damn sense. So yes, it’s a one-page form, but that doesn’t mean it’s simple by any means. ---
**Author:** ![magellan01](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/45deac/32.png) [@magellan01](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/magellan01)\ **Post date:** [December 15, 2006, 7:46am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/1-200-illegals-arrested-company-employing-them-gets-off-huh/384039/31 "2006-12-15T07:46:03Z")
[QUOTE=Eva Luna] I talked to my boss about this; he’s been practicing immigration law approximately as long as I’ve been alive. He agrees with me - employers are between a rock and a hard place on I-9 issues, even if they are trying to comply 100% (and admittedly, many employers don’t bother). If they have reason to suspect that documents submitted for I-9 purposes are forged or don’t relate to the person presenting them, their choices aren’t very palatable; they can let it slide, or they can risk having propective employees file discrimination complaints against them. [/QUOTE] Is it, or would it be, possible to outsource the entire process. In other words, every employee would automatically go through a screening process done by another company. This would add expense. But a company that feels it has a very low risk of employing an illegal alien could choose to do it in-house, but a company like Swift might choose to do it. I would thiink this is already being done. Is it? ---
**Author:** ![Unregistered\_Bull](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/u/3da27b/32.png) [@Unregistered\_Bull](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Unregistered_Bull)\ **Post date:** [December 15, 2006, 7:59am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/1-200-illegals-arrested-company-employing-them-gets-off-huh/384039/32 "2006-12-15T07:59:53Z")
[QUOTE=magellan01] Is it, or would it be, possible to outsource the entire process. In other words, every employee would automatically go through a screening process done by another company. This would add expense. But a company that feels it has a very low risk of employing an illegal alien could choose to do it in-house, but a company like Swift might choose to do it. I would thiink this is already being done. Is it? [/QUOTE] To where? India? 😛 I really don’t how that is going to fix a problem. We haven’t even established that Swift didn’t do anything wrong. And if they were working for Swift, getting them workers, then they would be facing the same challenges and pressures that they would be. And they couldn’t discriminate based on ethnicity or national origin either. You could go through a more thorough background check one like I did with the Feds. Fingerprints, 10 year history, references, etc. But why go to the expense (money and time) anyway for such a thorough, expensive background check for meat packing jobs? It doesn’t make any economic sense. ---
**Author:** ![Unregistered\_Bull](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/u/3da27b/32.png) [@Unregistered\_Bull](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Unregistered_Bull)\ **Post date:** [December 15, 2006, 8:01am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/1-200-illegals-arrested-company-employing-them-gets-off-huh/384039/33 "2006-12-15T08:01:03Z")
We haven’t even established that Swift did do anything wrong. ---
**Author:** ![magellan01](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/45deac/32.png) [@magellan01](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/magellan01)\ **Post date:** [December 15, 2006, 8:10am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/1-200-illegals-arrested-company-employing-them-gets-off-huh/384039/34 "2006-12-15T08:10:26Z")
[QUOTE=Unregistered Bull] You could go through a more thorough background check one like I did with the Feds. Fingerprints, 10 year history, references, etc. But why go to the expense (money and time) anyway for such a thorough, expensive background check for meat packing jobs? It doesn’t make any economic sense. [/QUOTE] It’s all risk-reward. If a company like Swift realizes that they may (ahem) inadvertently be employing illegals in great numbers, and the penalties are severe, it just might make economic sense. It’ll come as no surprise to you that if I were in charge and they were guilty of wrongdoing, the cost of having those workers checked out as thoroughly as you were would be cheap in comparison. ---
**Author:** ![Voyager](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/voyager/32/133_2.png) [@Voyager](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Voyager)\ **Post date:** [December 15, 2006, 8:13am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/1-200-illegals-arrested-company-employing-them-gets-off-huh/384039/35 "2006-12-15T08:13:21Z")
[QUOTE=magellan01] Is it, or would it be, possible to outsource the entire process. In other words, every employee would automatically go through a screening process done by another company. This would add expense. But a company that feels it has a very low risk of employing an illegal alien could choose to do it in-house, but a company like Swift might choose to do it. I would thiink this is already being done. Is it? [/QUOTE] My company screens everyone before the offer we make is official (it is indeed outsourced) - but we’re not hiring mostly minimum wage laborers. I have no idea what is screened for, but I doubt immigration status is high on the list. ---
**Author:** ![magellan01](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/45deac/32.png) [@magellan01](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/magellan01)\ **Post date:** [December 15, 2006, 8:28am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/1-200-illegals-arrested-company-employing-them-gets-off-huh/384039/36 "2006-12-15T08:28:50Z")
[QUOTE=Voyager] My company screens everyone before the offer we make is official (it is indeed outsourced) - but we’re not hiring mostly minimum wage laborers. I have no idea what is screened for, but I doubt immigration status is high on the list. [/QUOTE] That makes sense. Screen everyone, then make an offer, or not. I see that workers in a meat-packiing plant pose different problems, but it seems like the market is ripe for a company to sprout up and offer a better way of handling it. Maybe you can pay them toabsorb the financial risk if illegals ever get through. Of course, then they would be under huge pressure to get it right, because the risk to them would be huge. i don’t know. just an idea. It’s getting late. ---
**Author:** ![Unregistered\_Bull](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/u/3da27b/32.png) [@Unregistered\_Bull](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Unregistered_Bull)\ **Post date:** [December 15, 2006, 8:33am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/1-200-illegals-arrested-company-employing-them-gets-off-huh/384039/37 "2006-12-15T08:33:53Z")
[QUOTE=magellan01] It’s all risk-reward. If a company like Swift realizes that they may (ahem) inadvertently be employing illegals in great numbers, and the penalties are severe, it just might make economic sense. It’ll come as no surprise to you that if I were in charge and they were guilty of wrongdoing, the cost of having those workers checked out as thoroughly as you were would be cheap in comparison. [/QUOTE] If they are doing it inadvertently, then what penalty are they facing? And the number wasn’t that big either. ---
**Author:** ![magellan01](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/45deac/32.png) [@magellan01](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/magellan01)\ **Post date:** [December 15, 2006, 8:53am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/1-200-illegals-arrested-company-employing-them-gets-off-huh/384039/38 "2006-12-15T08:53:29Z")
[QUOTE=Unregistered Bull] If they are doing it inadvertently, then what penalty are they facing? And the number wasn’t that big either. [/QUOTE] You missed the “ahem”. Naturally an investigation would have to result in outright wrongdoing or negligence. 1,200 hundred people seems small only compared to the number of illegals we know are here. It is an astounding number. There shouldn’t be 1,200 illegals here in total, never mind working for one company. A bit hyperbolic, yes. But you get the point. ---
**Author:** ![Unregistered\_Bull](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/u/3da27b/32.png) [@Unregistered\_Bull](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Unregistered_Bull)\ **Post date:** [December 15, 2006, 9:48am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/1-200-illegals-arrested-company-employing-them-gets-off-huh/384039/39 "2006-12-15T09:48:42Z")
[QUOTE=magellan01] You missed the “ahem”. Naturally an investigation would have to result in outright wrongdoing or negligence. 1,200 hundred people seems small only compared to the number of illegals we know are here. It is an astounding number. There shouldn’t be 1,200 illegals here in total, never mind working for one company. A bit hyperbolic, yes. But you get the point. [/QUOTE] Economic disaster would likely ensue without these people here. You lose 12,000,000 consumers and the economy will go to pot. The 1,200 amount is realtively small even for Swift’s total employee count. I don’t find either number particularly astounding. ---
**Author:** ![magellan01](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/45deac/32.png) [@magellan01](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/magellan01)\ **Post date:** [December 17, 2006, 4:01pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/1-200-illegals-arrested-company-employing-them-gets-off-huh/384039/40 "2006-12-17T16:01:47Z")
[QUOTE=Unregistered Bull] Economic disaster would likely ensue without these people here. You lose 12,000,000 consumers and the economy will go to pot. The 1,200 amount is realtively small even for Swift’s total employee count. I don’t find either number particularly astounding. [/QUOTE] Economic disaster? I don’t think so. These illegals represent about 3% of the population. So if they contributed to the economy (dollars spent) at the same rate as the other 97%, we’d lose that 3%. A hit, yes; disaster, no. But the effect would be less than that because much of the money they earn is not spent here, it is sent back to the home country. So given the fact that they are at the lower end of the earnings scale and that they send many of their dollars out of the economy, the number will be much lower than the 3%. Then we have the degree to which wages for legals at the lower end of the wage scale would rise. The supply of people available and williing to do those jobs will shrink, increasiing demand, and then wages. (As well as the attractiveness of those jobs.) Also, we have to take into account the amount that will not have to be laid out by the government in the areas of health and education and law enforcement, as illegals have a higher rate for incarceration than the general population. Finally, the reality is that there is no way to just snap your fingers and have the 12,000,000 disappear. Even with a serious effort it will take years. And as they leave, if we see (likely) that we cannot meet the demand internally, we can open the doors with a legal guest-worker program, mush like Canada has. I didn’t provide a lot of the actual numbers because I don’t feel like going through all that again. I know we’ve both been in more than one thread where those numbers have been provided, and for the purposes of this particular discussion I think that the broad strokes suffice. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/1-200-illegals-arrested-company-employing-them-gets-off-huh/384039.md?page=1) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/1-200-illegals-arrested-company-employing-them-gets-off-huh/384039.md?page=3)