Gaaah! Employers!!
#76
Lost in BE Cyberspace
Joined: Feb 2009
Location: North Charleston,SC. born in Stockport,UK.
Posts: 10,109
Re: Gaaah! Employers!!
Why is it wrong for an employer to ask to see a green card, which is illegal. But it's ok for green card holders not to carry them on their person, which is a legal obligation
I really don't see a problem with it, but maybe I am just naieve
I really don't see a problem with it, but maybe I am just naieve
#77
Joined: Jan 2008
Posts: 7,605
Re: Gaaah! Employers!!
We all know the law about asking for a green card. The point in some of the responses is that it's much ado about nothing. No one was asked to commit an indecent act. No one was asked to bare their breasts for employment. No one was asked overtly personal questions about their sexual relations with animals. They were asked for a Green Card. Rather than getting their tits in a knot, what harm would it have done them to comply? If they failed to carry the card as required by law, that's on them. No employer likes a "sea lawyer" who is quick to shove some ridiculous rule in their face and in doing so make an unfortunate reputation for themselves. Much Ado About Nothing. Live with it. That's the point of many responses in this thread. Are there not more pressing concerns in ones life than something so petty?
#78
Lost in BE Cyberspace
Joined: Feb 2004
Posts: 14,577
Re: Gaaah! Employers!!
All those laws are pointless. But... they are trying to prevent discrimination based on immigration status, which I suppose is as serious as discrimination based on race/religion/ethnicity in the eyes of the law.
#79
Re: Gaaah! Employers!!
It's not really anger. It's frustration. I've never understood the tendency on the part of some to take a minor issue and make a mountain out of it. Clearly there must not be enough other issues in their lives to occupy their complaint department. We all give in to minor things that we really don't have to, by the letter of the law or regulations, but we do so because in most cases it just isn't worth the trouble of stressing over it.
When my OH and the daughters received their green cards, they voluntarily took them to show their employers and the College. There was no awareness that they were not obligated to, only a sense of pride and willingness to do so. I much prefer that attitude.
When my OH and the daughters received their green cards, they voluntarily took them to show their employers and the College. There was no awareness that they were not obligated to, only a sense of pride and willingness to do so. I much prefer that attitude.
#80
Re: Gaaah! Employers!!
But what is interesting is the fact that the I-9 specifically asks if you are a citizen, non citizen national, lawful permanent resident or an alien authorized to work in the U.S. and your alien #. So the information for discrimination is already there if the employer chooses to discriminate. That makes asking for the Green Card a really non discriminatory act. The green card at least tells the employer that your status is more solid which, if the job involves expensive and time consuming training, might be good information to have. I'd like to have it as an employer. I think the law as it stands is stupid in light of the massive concern about undocumented workers.
#81
Lost in BE Cyberspace
Joined: Feb 2009
Location: North Charleston,SC. born in Stockport,UK.
Posts: 10,109
Re: Gaaah! Employers!!
If the law was working to stop discrimination, I would agree that it is needed. I seriously doubt a piece of paper is going to do that, most employers make choices based on the person/appearance/qualifications. Discrimination unfortunately is rampant, everywhere.
#82
Re: Gaaah! Employers!!
It's not really anger. It's frustration. I've never understood the tendency on the part of some to take a minor issue and make a mountain out of it. Clearly there must not be enough other issues in their lives to occupy their complaint department. We all give in to minor things that we really don't have to, by the letter of the law or regulations, but we do so because in most cases it just isn't worth the trouble of stressing over it.
When my OH and the daughters received their green cards, they voluntarily took them to show their employers and the College. There was no awareness that they were not obligated to, only a sense of pride and willingness to do so. I much prefer that attitude.
When my OH and the daughters received their green cards, they voluntarily took them to show their employers and the College. There was no awareness that they were not obligated to, only a sense of pride and willingness to do so. I much prefer that attitude.
This isn't an argument that's going to be "won" by anyone. You keeping saying the same thing over and over again doesn't make it any more valid than the counter-argument.
#83
Lost in BE Cyberspace
Joined: Feb 2004
Posts: 14,577
Re: Gaaah! Employers!!
To solve the eligibility problem they should remove the employer's responsibility to check for work authorization. Just have the employer report to immigration the name, address and SSN of who they are hiring and let that agency deal with it.
#84
Joined: Jan 2008
Posts: 7,605
Re: Gaaah! Employers!!
Sometimes, it's even more complex than that. For example, how do you differentiate between discrimination on national origin and discrimination on the grounds of "you're not from round these parts", which could include born and bred USCs from as little as a few hundred miles away?
#85
Re: Gaaah! Employers!!
You do get that your opinion is no more "right" than the frustration felt by someone who is being asked to go out of their way to provide something that should be totally irrelevant to their new employer, don't you?
This isn't an argument that's going to be "won" by anyone. You keeping saying the same thing over and over again doesn't make it any more valid than the counter-argument.
This isn't an argument that's going to be "won" by anyone. You keeping saying the same thing over and over again doesn't make it any more valid than the counter-argument.
What amazes me is that the choice on the I-9 is to provide the employer ONE item from column A, which includes the Green Card, or TWO others, one from B an one from C. So presenting the Green Card itself is totally permissible, and easier than providing two other forms of proof. And, since required by law to carry it, can only be going out of the way if you are in violation of that law.
Anyway, you are correct in stating that none will change their opinions. Pity. That means there will continue to be people who refuse to obey the law while demanding that others do, as well as people who live to make mountains out of molehills.
Last edited by dakota44; Apr 6th 2010 at 9:59 pm.
#86
Re: Gaaah! Employers!!
Sometimes, it's even more complex than that. For example, how do you differentiate between discrimination on national origin and discrimination on the grounds of "you're not from round these parts", which could include born and bred USCs from as little as a few hundred miles away?
#87
Re: Gaaah! Employers!!
Ummm... Yes it is.
The original frustration vented by the OP was that her husband's employer asked him to produce documentation it had no legal authority to request -- and the fact that, by doing so, he felt it might lose his job if he didn't comply.
For some of you, showing the GC obviously isn't a big deal. But the point is that no one should be put in this position in the first place -- and they wouldn't be, if the employer's behavior is legal. In this case, it wasn't. I don't think it's right to put anyone down just because they don't feel like caving into pressure, particularly when a law exists to protect them from that pressure in the first place.
~ Jenney
The original frustration vented by the OP was that her husband's employer asked him to produce documentation it had no legal authority to request -- and the fact that, by doing so, he felt it might lose his job if he didn't comply.
For some of you, showing the GC obviously isn't a big deal. But the point is that no one should be put in this position in the first place -- and they wouldn't be, if the employer's behavior is legal. In this case, it wasn't. I don't think it's right to put anyone down just because they don't feel like caving into pressure, particularly when a law exists to protect them from that pressure in the first place.
~ Jenney
And yes this WAS exactly my point when I posted.
#88
Re: Gaaah! Employers!!
But what is interesting is the fact that the I-9 specifically asks if you are a citizen, non citizen national, lawful permanent resident or an alien authorized to work in the U.S. and your alien #. So the information for discrimination is already there if the employer chooses to discriminate. That makes asking for the Green Card a really non discriminatory act. The green card at least tells the employer that your status is more solid which, if the job involves expensive and time consuming training, might be good information to have. I'd like to have it as an employer. I think the law as it stands is stupid in light of the massive concern about undocumented workers.
So one could presume that no discrimination has occurred (thus far).
You know, green cards have expiration dates on them. You say you as an employer would like to see a green card before you hired somebody. Fair enough. What are you going to do about that expiration date?
#89
Re: Gaaah! Employers!!
If you say so. I have not argued that it is legal for an employer to ask for the Green Card. I have merely made it clear that I think it is going on about something so minor as to be almost foolish. Especially if it comes from those who believe that they can follow the laws they want to (i.e. I never carry my Green Card) but you must follow the laws they want you to. My argument further states that no potential hires do themselves any good by playing lawyer at an interview. Circular file for that resume.
What amazes me is that the choice on the I-9 is to provide the employer ONE item from column A, which includes the Green Card, or TWO others, one from B an one from C. So presenting the Green Card itself is totally permissible, and easier than providing two other forms of proof. And, since required by law to carry it, can only be going out of the way if you are in violation of that law.
Anyway, you are correct in stating that none will change their opinions. Pity. That means there will continue to be people who refuse to obey the law while demanding that others do, as well as people who live to make mountains out of molehills.
What amazes me is that the choice on the I-9 is to provide the employer ONE item from column A, which includes the Green Card, or TWO others, one from B an one from C. So presenting the Green Card itself is totally permissible, and easier than providing two other forms of proof. And, since required by law to carry it, can only be going out of the way if you are in violation of that law.
Anyway, you are correct in stating that none will change their opinions. Pity. That means there will continue to be people who refuse to obey the law while demanding that others do, as well as people who live to make mountains out of molehills.
#90
Re: Gaaah! Employers!!
Once again, when you are asked to fill out the I9, you have already been hired.
So one could presume that no discrimination has occurred (thus far).
You know, green cards have expiration dates on them. You say you as an employer would like to see a green card before you hired somebody. Fair enough. What are you going to do about that expiration date?
So one could presume that no discrimination has occurred (thus far).
You know, green cards have expiration dates on them. You say you as an employer would like to see a green card before you hired somebody. Fair enough. What are you going to do about that expiration date?