Author Topic: WTG Congress (Read 1280 times)

Ripsnort · « **Reply #15 on:** December 04, 2006, 01:12:41 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by Charon
I wonder about that. I haven't really seen any numbers either way, but an awful lot of service industry operations -- hotel chains, resturant chains, etc. -- seem to have plenty of illegal labor. Apparently that is the case as well with manufacturing in some industries -- poultry production for example.

Charon

The legal ramifications if caught would seem to offset the risk that a big business or hotel chain is willing take, and a hotel managers job would be on the line (those guys that DO the hiring)...I'm willing to bet you're sterotyping without seeing whether or not they have a green card.

VOR · « **Reply #16 on:** December 04, 2006, 01:20:13 PM »

What ARE the penalties to a business if caught? I'm assuming in addition to the Federal case the state may go after the business as well considering it's a tax issue.

Anyone have the info or a link handy?

CavemanJ · « **Reply #17 on:** December 04, 2006, 01:23:54 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by Ripsnort
The legal ramifications if caught would seem to offset the risk that a big business or hotel chain is willing take, and a hotel managers job would be on the line (those guys that DO the hiring)...I'm willing to bet you're sterotyping without seeing whether or not they have a green card.

I know the chicken planets around Gainesville, GA are using illegals. My sis-in-law works for one, and she's told us about times immigration would raid the place on payday, loading up illegals to deport, and she'd ask them what to do with thier checks, and most tell her to hold them, they'll be back by Monday or Tuesday. And they show back up to get them, and usually go right back to work according to her.

lazs2 · « **Reply #18 on:** December 04, 2006, 02:28:47 PM »

nelson... mav explained it to you, it is not big business that wants or uses illegals but small business.

Does anyone need any more proof of why you should never ever vote for a democrat?

lazs

sluggish · « **Reply #19 on:** December 04, 2006, 06:20:35 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by VOR
What ARE the penalties to a business if caught? I'm assuming in addition to the Federal case the state may go after the business as well considering it's a tax issue.

Anyone have the info or a link handy?

It seems to me that Wal~Mart has been busted for this about five times in the last two years. Wal~Mart, like the federal gubment, is big enough that when you get a thousand fingers pointing in a thousand directions there can never be any semblance of accountability. I could be wrong but I think the extent of wally-worlds punishment has been for a patsy store manager's head to roll and a public promise to not allow it to happen again.

http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2003/11/04/national/main581731.shtml
http://www.csmonitor.com/2003/1027/p08s03-comv.html
http://www.ice.gov/pi/news/insideice/articles/insideice_120505_Web6.htm
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,102928,00.html

dmf · « **Reply #20 on:** December 04, 2006, 07:36:18 PM »

No comment, on the grounds that skuzzy would have a field day editing my post.

Maverick · « **Reply #21 on:** December 04, 2006, 07:44:59 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by sluggish
It seems to me that Wal~Mart has been busted for this about five times in the last two years. Wal~Mart, like the federal gubment, is big enough that when you get a thousand fingers pointing in a thousand directions there can never be any semblance of accountability. I could be wrong but I think the extent of wally-worlds punishment has been for a patsy store manager's head to roll and a public promise to not allow it to happen again.

http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2003/11/04/national/main581731.shtml
http://www.csmonitor.com/2003/1027/p08s03-comv.html
http://www.ice.gov/pi/news/insideice/articles/insideice_120505_Web6.htm
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,102928,00.html

Not to be picky here but each one of those stories are about subcontractors hired by wally world. They are not directly employed by wallyworld and wally world is not in the position to screen another companies employees prior to hiring.

The suit listed in the last story is rather bogus. Why should an illegal sue a company that hired the company they worked for? Didn't they themselves know they were illegal when the started to work as cleaners.

FBBone · « **Reply #22 on:** December 04, 2006, 07:49:58 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by VOR
What ARE the penalties to a business if caught? I'm assuming in addition to the Federal case the state may go after the business as well considering it's a tax issue.

Anyone have the info or a link handy?

In case you really wanted to know, Denver Mayor Hickenlooper owns a restaurant that employed illegal Raul Garcia-Gomez, who ambushed two Denver cops killing one. Oddly enough, the restaurant is still open for business and Hickenlooper still reigns over Denver. Justice?

The Story

VOR · « **Reply #23 on:** December 04, 2006, 07:57:12 PM »

These are all very interesting stories, but I wanted to find out what's actually on the Fed books as min/max punitive actions against an employer. Google gives me a bunch of headlines and editorials.

sluggish · « **Reply #24 on:** December 04, 2006, 07:59:43 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by Maverick
Not to be picky here but each one of those stories are about subcontractors hired by wally world. They are not directly employed by wallyworld and wally world is not in the position to screen another companies employees prior to hiring.

The suit listed in the last story is rather bogus. Why should an illegal sue a company that hired the company they worked for? Didn't they themselves know they were illegal when the started to work as cleaners.

I don't think you're being picky, you're just saying that you agree with the fact that large corporations are untouchable because they subcontract. The original "sub-debate" was whether large corps engage in the use of illegal labor and whether consequences were great enough to prevent them from doing so.

That last link is kind of funny. Welcome to the brave new world...

sluggish · « **Reply #25 on:** December 04, 2006, 08:01:55 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by VOR
These are all very interesting stories, but I wanted to find out what's actually on the Fed books as min/max punitive actions against an employer. Google gives me a bunch of headlines and editorials.

The point is that it doesn't matter what laws are on the books because they aren't being enforced anyway.

VOR · « **Reply #26 on:** December 04, 2006, 08:21:28 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by sluggish
The point is that it doesn't matter what laws are on the books because they aren't being enforced anyway.

I get it, but I'm not looking for points or opinions. I'm looking for some CFR that I can't seem to find.

Maverick · « **Reply #27 on:** December 04, 2006, 08:24:44 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by sluggish
I don't think you're being picky, you're just saying that you agree with the fact that large corporations are untouchable because they subcontract. The original "sub-debate" was whether large corps engage in the use of illegal labor and whether consequences were great enough to prevent them from doing so.

That last link is kind of funny. Welcome to the brave new world...

No what I am saying is that wally world is not responsible to screen the employees of the companies they hire. You may want to assess some moral stigma to them, I'm looking at the situation from the part of both companies. The one at fault is the company that hired the illegals, not the one who hired the company. You seem to expect the person / company contracting with a seperate company to screen the employees of the second company. It's not going to happen.

sluggish · « **Reply #28 on:** December 04, 2006, 08:30:43 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by Maverick
No what I am saying is that wally world is not responsible to screen the employees of the companies they hire. You may want to assess some moral stigma to them, I'm looking at the situation from the part of both companies. The one at fault is the company that hired the illegals, not the one who hired the company. You seem to expect the person / company contracting with a seperate company to screen the employees of the second company. It's not going to happen.

You're right it's not going to happen. If companies were held responsible for the people who WORKED WITHIN THEIR DOORS they couldn't get away with this. Basically what you're saying is that as long as a company doesn't hire the people that work for them, they aren't responsible for checking if they are legal or not. This is brilliant. A loophole for zero accountability. The government couldn't have done better.

VOR · « **Reply #29 on:** December 04, 2006, 08:38:58 PM »

Sluggish, based on what you're saying if I hire Bob's Lanscaping service to mow my lawn, I'm personally responsible for checking the immigration status of every dude that shows up with a leaf blower because I employed the company to do a job.