Nobody's Happy With the Immigration Reform Bill

By Jeralyn, Section Legislation
Posted on Mon May 21, 2007 at 01:09:54 AM EST
Tags: immigrants, immigration reform (all tags)

Share This:

We've been hearing for days that Republicans and the immigrant community are not happy with the compromise immigration reform bill that the Senate will begin debating today.

Add another group to the mix: Employers aren't happy either.

A bad bill is worse than no bill at all. The Senate has a long way to go to make this bill palatable. Can they do it?

Here are the employers' objections:

“Under the current system,” Mr. Hoffman said, “you need an employer to sponsor you for a green card. Under the point system, you would not need an employer as a sponsor. An individual would get points for special skills, but those skills may not match the demand. You can’t hire a chemical engineer to do the work of a software engineer.”

David Isaacs, director of federal affairs at the Hewlett-Packard Company, said in a letter to the Senate that “a ‘merit-based system’ would take the hiring decision out of our hands and place it squarely in the hands of the federal government.”

Employers of lower-skilled workers voiced another concern. “The point system would be skewed in favor of more highly skilled and educated workers,” said Laura Foote Reiff, co-chairwoman of the Essential Worker Immigration Coalition, whose members employ millions of workers in hotels, restaurants, nursing homes, hospitals and the construction industry.

It's said that in a divorce, if both sides are unhappy with the settlement, it's probably fair. This isn't a divorce. This bill needs to be fair to the undocumented and fair to the workers. I think there's too much emphasis on enforcement and not enough on protecting workers and their families.

Update: Truth Laid Bear has put up an html version of the bill where you can comment on specific provisions.

< Life After Gangs? Unions Embrace Former Members | Specter Predicts Alberto Gonzales Will Quit >

Legal

Nothing on this site should be construed as legal advice. TalkLeft does not give legal advice.

TalkLeft is not responsible for and often disagrees with material posted in the comments section. Read at your own risk.

Nobody's Happy With the Immigration Reform Bill | 5 comments (5 topical)

Readers Must Login or Create an Account to Comment

Industry is upset about wages and nothing more.... (none / 0) (#1)
by jerry on Mon May 21, 2007 at 01:48:50 AM EST

"Under the current system," Mr. Hoffman said, "you need an employer to sponsor you for a green card. Under the point system, you would not need an employer as a sponsor. An individual would get points for special skills, but those skills may not match the demand. You can't hire a chemical engineer to do the work of a software engineer."

David Isaacs, director of federal affairs at the Hewlett-Packard Company, said in a letter to the Senate that "a `merit-based system' would take the hiring decision out of our hands and place it squarely in the hands of the federal government."

These are statements that they fear the wages will go up. What could happen if employees didn't have sponsors? They could leave for another company much more easily is what. And they could leave for small companies that today cannot afford the know how to sponsor an employee.

The truth is that Industry would like ALL employees, citizens or foreign workers to require sponsors.

If Industry really was looking for labor and not just cheap labor, then industry would make sure that each and every facility had someone representing HR and hiring managers that could meet applicants that walk in the door.

When I graduated college in the 80s, it was common practice to visit a city and visit all of the interesting employers in that city, seeing who was hiring, and meeting with managers that very day.

Now you cannot do that. There are no HR managers on site. All applications go to some central location for resume scanning and selection.

And the companies then complain they can't find qualified people that want to work for them.

Really? (none / 0) (#2)
by Gabriel Malor on Mon May 21, 2007 at 02:10:16 AM EST

jerry, I'm not sure what Mr. Hoffman is talking about. Under the current system, for an alien to qualify for legal permanent resident status, the employer must jump through a number of hoops, including showing that no current U.S. citizen will fill the job vacancy and that the intended immigrant will provide the necessary skills.

In other words, the employer matches a job to a specific alien and then petitions the Department of Labor for certification and then petitions the Department of Homeland Security for admission and entry.

Under the proposed system all that is done away with. Instead, there is no "petitioning" at all. The immigrant simply declares their capabilities and, if they meet the requirements, quotas, and admissibility requirements, gains entry. Then they've entered the pool of available labor in the U.S.

In other words, U.S. employers will benefit from greater pool of skilled persons than they do at present. That's the point of the point system.

[BTW, I'm a little freaked out that I'm the only person I've found anywhere that isn't 100% opposed to this bill. To be sure, I have my problems with it (as I commented on in an earlier TalkLeft post on the subject), but by-and-large I don't see what everyone's problem is (well, except for far-right conservatives, who I understand are a little afraid of brown people stealing their jobs and their wimins). As far as everyone else is concerned, the bill's got amnesty for current illegals, provisions for a guest worker program, harsh criminal sanctions for criminals who prey on illegals, and increased border security. So, as Cartman would say, "What's the big F'ing deal, b*tch?"]

[ Parent ]

GM (none / 0) (#4)
by sarcastic unnamed one on Mon May 21, 2007 at 12:11:10 PM EST

and increased border security.

It increases border security about as much as my personal commute this AM increased global warming.

OK, maybe a little exaggeration, but still...

[ Parent ]

: SUO (none / 0) (#5)
by jimakaPPJ on Tue May 22, 2007 at 08:14:32 AM EST

Nope under statement on both points.

[ Parent ]

Oh, and while I'm thinking about it... (none / 0) (#3)
by Gabriel Malor on Mon May 21, 2007 at 02:18:07 AM EST

This reporter obviously has no clue about current employment requirements in the U.S. He writes:

But Susan R. Meisinger, president of the Society for Human Resource Management, which represents 215,000 executives, said: "The Senate proposal would require employers to reverify the identity and employment eligibility of 145 million Americans who are currently employed. That's unworkable. The burden on government and the private sector could cause the system to crash."

In fact, all employers are currently required to acquire and check I-9 Employment Verification forms. Expecting employers to send those forms on to the federal government will not in any way cause the "system to crash." That's pathetic scaremongering.