The government last week re-released its ruling that forces businesses to fire workers whose names don’t match their Social Security numbers as a means to crack down on the hiring of illegal immigrants. The Department of Homeland Security (DHS) released the rule on its Web site on Friday, and will accept public comment for 30 days.
Critics including trade groups and civil rights activists that opposed the ruling when DHS introduced it last year say few provisions have changed from the original. Such groups, including the AFL-CIO and trade groups (including organizations to which American Nursery & Landscape Association and the Professional Landcare Network belong) filed a lawsuit to stop the “no-match” rule last fall, and a federal judge granted an injunction. The grounds for blocking the rule included it would likely create hardships for businesses and their workers, cause employers to incur compliance costs and that legal workers may lose their jobs due to errors in the Social Security database.
In releasing the new rule, DHS says it will ask U.S. District Judge Charles Breyer to lift his injunction; in addition, DHS has filed an appeal asking a court to overturn Judge Breyer’s injunction.
The Department of Homeland Security says the rule does not create new legal obligations for businesses, according to a statement on its Web site. “It simply outlines clear steps an employer may take in response to receiving a letter from the Social Security Administration indicating that an employee’s name does not match the social security number on file. If the business follows the guidance in the No-Match Rule, comprising various actions to rectify the no-match within 90 days of receiving the letter, they will have a safe harbor from the no-match letter being used against them in an enforcement action.”
Tom Delaney, PLANET's director of goverment affairs, disputes DHS's assertion that the new rule doesn't create new legal obligations. The fact that employers have to change their termination procedures when receiving "no-match" letters is a new legal obligation in itself, Delaney says. The 90-day period in which to correct discrepencies is a legal concern, too, he says.
In response to charges that the initial ruling did not consider the regulation’s impact on small business as required by law, DHS says in the new proposal that compliance will cost companies with fewer than 100 workers $3,000 to $7,500 overall, while it will cost larger companies $13,000 to $34,000, the Washington Post reports. These estimates do not include the cost of firing and replacing workers who lack legal documentation.
“We are serious about immigration enforcement,” Homeland Security Secretary Michael Chertoff says in the Web site statement. “The No-Match Rule is an important tool for cracking down on illegal hiring practices while providing honest employers with the guidance they need.”
Access the entire 44-page report here:
http://www.dhs.gov/xlibrary/assets/press_nomatch-snprm.pdf