The Problem with Illegal Immigration raids.

[Rex Kickass]

http://apnews.myway.com/article/20061213/D8LVTD7O0.html

 

GREELEY, Colo. (AP) - Outside a meatpacking plant fence here, a frustrated Tony Garcia watched as Immigration and Customs Enforcement agents swarmed inside.

 

"We need help," he yelled to them. "We need answers."

 

There were few of those Tuesday as agents began their initial sweep through Swift & Co. plants in six states, arresting illegal immigrants who had bought or stolen other people's identities to help them get Swift jobs.

 

Garcia, who said he has friends who work at the Greeley plant, was worried about the fate of schoolchildren whose parents were arrested. "Who is going to pick them up?" he asked.

 

The raids capped a 10-month investigation into an identity-theft scheme that may have hundreds of victims, both U.S. citizens and legal residents, officials said.

 

Authorities did not say how mnay people were arrested at the plants in Greeley; Grand Island, Neb.; Cactus, Texas; Hyrum, Utah; Marshalltown, Iowa; and Worthington, Minn.

 

The United Food and Commercial International Workers union said it would ask federal judges in all six states to halt the raids. Union spokeswoman Jill Cashen said attorneys were gathering details before filing the requests.

 

No charges had been filed against Swift. In a written statement, President and CEO Sam Rovit said the company has never knowingly hired illegal workers and does not condone the practice.

 

Immigration officials last month informed Swift that it would remove unauthorized workers on Dec. 4, but Swift asked a federal judge to prevent agents from conducting the raid, arguing it would cause "substantial and irreparable injury" to its business.

 

Swift estimated that a raid would remove up to 40 percent of its 13,000 workers. After a closed hearing, a judge on Thursday rejected Swift's request, clearing the way for the raids.

 

The six Swift plants targeted Tuesday represents all of the company's domestic beef processing capacity and 77 percent of its pork processing capacity. Greeley-based Swift describes itself as the world's second-largest meat processor with sales of about $9 billion.

 

Swift uses a government pilot program to confirm whether Social Security numbers are valid. Company officials have raised questions about the program's ability to detect when two people are using the same number.

 

Does it bother anyone that this company estimates that 40% of its working population is illegal and says that it "doesn't condone the practice?"

[southsider2k5]

What was the term I heard the other day... "willful ignorance"?

 

The interesting part is that the government has tried to focus on the ID theft part of this, which I believe is a really understated symptom of how many illegals are still able to get jobs. I have no idea how big this practice is exactly, because it seems to only get mentioned in passing in assorted articles, but it obviously exsists to some degree if they were able to use it as a primary reason to raid this company. I would be willing to be there is more of this going on, and less cash under the table type stuff than we are led to believe.

[Rex Kickass]

But if the company is able to estimate that 40% of the workers are illegal under oath in court... they aren't willfully ignorant. They're knowingly hiring people who are illegals.

[southsider2k5]

But if the company is able to estimate that 40% of the workers are illegal under oath in court... they aren't willfully ignorant. They're knowingly hiring people who are illegals.

 

Yeah. I gotta say you are probably right on that account.

[sox4lifeinPA]

Two questions are raised one in the article and one by rex:

 

what happens to the children?

 

what happens to a company that "doesn't condone" a practice that has a 40% saturation rate in it's work force.

 

no, silly, the kids can't work in their parents place...

 

fine the company whatever it takes to ensure the children either are shipped home to the native countries or if the children can provide documentation that they're citizens, then they can stay and parents can apply for temporary work permits after they have background checks.

[Rex Kickass]

I think, if we are serious about illegal immigration - these companies need to be fined hardcore.

[ptatc]

How does a company with just 13,000 employees have a 9 billion dollar business? What a profit.

[southsider2k5]

I think, if we are serious about illegal immigration - these companies need to be fined hardcore.

 

I agree with you 100% there. I mentioned a sizable fine such as $50,000 earlier, which times the estimated 1300 workers, would come out to $65,000,000. Do you think that would give you a little more incentive to be careful in your hiring practices?

 

Here is an interesting article about one of the ID theft victims with some interesting stats to go with it.

 

http://redtape.msnbc.com/2006/12/meatpacking_rai.html#posts

 

Theresa Sanchez was expecting a $5,400 tax refund when she opened a letter from the IRS in January 2003. Instead, she got a bill demanding payment of taxes on $120,000 in undeclared wages. Someone using her name and Social Security number had earned the money through a series of jobs dating back to 1996 and had not paid any taxes on the income, the letter said.

 

Sanchez complained to the agency and to the Federal Trade Commission that her identity had been stolen, and was being used by someone to gain employment. Nonetheless, more than two years later, in April 2005, a woman walked into the Swift & Co. meatpacking plant in Greeley, Colo., and used Theresa Sanchez's name and Social Security number to get a job.

 

The woman’s employment ruse became public knowledge Tuesday when authorities raided Swift & Co. plants in six states and arrested approximately 1,300 illegal immigrants suspected of buying or stealing other people’s identities to secure U.S. jobs.

 

The suspect accused of illegally using Sanchez’s identity is identified only as Jane Doe in an affidavit filed by authorities Tuesday in Weld County, Colo., district court.

 

Attempts to find the real Sanchez, who lives in Texas, were unsuccessful. Neither Immigrations and Customs Enforcement officials nor the Federal Trade Commission would provide additional details about her or her case.

 

But MSNBC.com was able to piece together part of her decade-long identity theft ordeal from details provided in the affidavit.

 

Sanchez told investigators that she suspects her ex-husband gave the information to an imposter about 10 years ago.

 

It's not clear why that person – and apparently many others – was able to use Sanchez's personal information to obtain employment – and, in some cases, pay taxes -- even after she alerted federal agencies nearly four years ago that the data was being used for employment fraud.

 

Government doesn't warn consumers

 

And over the entire 10-year span, federal agencies like the IRS and the Social Security Administration could have detected suspicious use of her Social Security number, since they were collecting taxes from multiple jobs at multiple locations. But it is not the policy of either agency to warn consumers that their number might have been been stolen.

 

It happens often. Each year, 8 million to 9 million people pay taxes using the wrong number – some are mere clerical errors, but many are undocumented workers skirting the system by supplying a fake number and another name. In the Swift case, the imposter took on Sanchez’s identity, using her real name and Social Security number in a ruse designed to trick even the newest employment verification system, called Basic Pilot.

 

“The government has known since at least August 2005 that the current Basic Pilot program cannot successfully detect identity theft and would likely permit an unauthorized worker to be improperly verified,” U.S. District Judge Mary Lou Robinson wrote in her order denying an injunction filed by Swift to stop the raids.

 

“Some Social Security numbers are widely used at multiple locations, over 200 workplaces for some numbers,” she wrote.

 

The size of the problem is obviously massive. ICE officials said about 30 percent of Swift’s workforce had filed I-9 employment forms with questionable information. There’s no reason to suspect the Swift is unique in its industry.

 

Total number of victims unclear

 

And Sanchez apparently was just one of hundreds of victims in the Swift case. It is not clear how many IDs were used to obtain employment at the plants, but a fascinating compilation of Colorado-based cases on the Greeley Tribune's Web site gives some indication of the scope.

 

It's not clear what prompted ICE officials to put a sudden end to their ordeal with the largest work-site enforcement action ever taken.

 

But there were some hints at Wednesday's press conference. Homeland Security Director Michael Chertoff complained that his agency is legally barred from communication with the Social Security Administration about Social Security numbers that are used twice.

 

“The law does not allow Social Security to refer cases to us when the Social Security number is used at multiple locations,” he said. “A better solution requires congressional Action. …We urge Congress to act.”

 

If it does, it won’t be soon enough for Sanchez, who has no way of knowing whether her data was sold or shared with any other undocumented workers.

 

Federal Trade Commission chairman Deborah Platt Majoras said Wednesday that her agency is reaching out to Swift-related imposter victims, but there is still no way for Sanchez and the other victims to know if anyone else is using their personal information.

 

Chertoff said one Swift-related ID theft victims had been arrested in Texas because his imposter had committed crimes. Other had multiple loans and credit cards taken out in their names, and had their credit ruined.

 

“There is a persistent hardship which follows this crime,” he said.

 

Very persistent, as Sanchez’s decade-long ordeal demonstrates.

[Texsox]

Swift uses a government pilot program to confirm whether Social Security numbers are valid. Company officials have raised questions about the program's ability to detect when two people are using the same number.

 

Somehow Swift is in a pilot program, seemingly working with the government, and then find out 40% may be illegals? That dosn't make sense to me. And SS, as I have said before, most illegals have social security numbers and other false documents. I assume then that Swift was withholding and paying federal income taxes.

 

In the employees to revenue don't forget the cost of materials. Some industries have high material costs and low labor costs (think diamonds) and others have high labor costs and low materials (landscaping)

[Texsox]

The government will not warn businesses or consumers when the same social is being used multiple times, and we are going to fine Swift $65,000,000? How does that make sense? If a bank loaned the criminal money, should the bank be fines also? I'm for fining the company if they helped the people with this identity theft, but if they gathered the necessary documents, and those documents are proved to be stolen, I can't see how the company shouldbe punished. We're holding them to a higher standard than the IRS, Social Security, etc.

 

In the Swift case, the imposter took on Sanchez’s identity, using her real name and Social Security number in a ruse designed to trick even the newest employment verification system, called Basic Pilot.

 

“The government has known since at least August 2005 that the current Basic Pilot program cannot successfully detect identity theft and would likely permit an unauthorized worker to be improperly verified,” U.S. District Judge Mary Lou Robinson wrote in her order denying an injunction filed by Swift to stop the raids.

[NUKE_CLEVELAND]

I think, if we are serious about illegal immigration - these companies need to be fined hardcore.

 

 

I think you're absolutely right. Deport the illegal workers back where they came from and fine the living daylights out of whoever hired them.

 

 

If we're going to dry up the jobs that these people are getting we have to fix it so that the cost in fines makes it unprofitable for them to go after cheap illegal labor. As it stands now that is not the case.

[Texsox]

I think you're absolutely right. Deport the illegal workers back where they came from and fine the living daylights out of whoever hired them.

 

 

If we're going to dry up the jobs that these people are getting we have to fix it so that the cost in fines makes it unprofitable for them to go after cheap illegal labor. As it stands now that is not the case.

 

Swift was in a pilot government program to prevent this. People stole identities and produced social security numbers. What else should Swift have done?

[sox4lifeinPA]

If a bank loaned the criminal money, should the bank be fines also?

 

it depends on the situation, they can be. Sorry to burst your arguement.

[Balta1701]

So, a couple other interesting notes on these raids...first, the United Food and Commercial Workers union (UCFW) seems pretty unhappy about them, because the raids may have also scooped up some actually legal workers who were members of that union.

 

The Salt Lake Tribune also has an interesting story on a couple of the families involved in the raid, with the interesting allegation that the DHS basically organized the raid and which people it targeted based on the appearance of the people...if you had a lighter skin tone, you went back to work.

[sox4lifeinPA]

So, a couple other interesting notes on these raids...first, the United Food and Commercial Workers union (UCFW) seems pretty unhappy about them, because the raids may have also scooped up some actually legal workers who were members of that union.

 

The Salt Lake Tribune also has an interesting story on a couple of the families involved in the raid, with the interesting allegation that the DHS basically organized the raid and which people it targeted based on the appearance of the people...if you had a lighter skin tone, you went back to work.

 

 

I had a great point to make.... and was all set to use google images... I dare anyone to type "white guy" into google images....

 

let me know how that goes for you

[Texsox]

it depends on the situation, they can be. Sorry to burst your arguement.

 

Again, what should Swift have done to avoid this? What is your company doing to make certain they don't fall victim? We ask for social security cards and driver's license or passport. If someone is proven to be using forged documents, should the employer be fined?

[sox4lifeinPA]

Again, what should Swift have done to avoid this? What is your company doing to make certain they don't fall victim? We ask for social security cards and driver's license or passport. If someone is proven to be using forged documents, should the employer be fined?

 

This point can be asked about resumes in general. How do potential employers verify information on prospective employees?

 

There are various programs that potential employers could use, one like "Lexis-Nexus" gives a score based on the information in national databases matched with information provided, i.e. ss#, address, license, and name. This could be costly to small businesses (although outsourcing at low prices I'm sure would be viable and the fewer employees the fewer queries needed) but larger 9 billion dollar companies should have to implement such things. It is unforgivable the level of violation Swift had reached with 40% illegals.

 

Ironically, THIS is how the government knows where to show up when you're car is damaged in a police chase (see other thread)

[NUKE_CLEVELAND]

Swift was in a pilot government program to prevent this. People stole identities and produced social security numbers. What else should Swift have done?

 

 

Come on Tex. 40% of the workforce?! I could see if it was a few people but something really stinks about that place and it aint the carcasses laying around outside the freezer.

[sox4lifeinPA]

Come on Tex. 40% of the workforce?! I could see if it was a few people but something really stinks about that place and it aint the carcasses laying around outside the freezer.

 

 

that's racist, nuke

[NorthSideSox72]

Ironically, THIS is how the government knows where to show up when you're car is damaged in a police chase (see other thread)

Some departments may do that, but in my experience, they usually use cheaper but more labor intensive methods. Various combinations of phone calls, visits, asking around, location of accident, etc.

[Texsox]

Come on Tex. 40% of the workforce?! I could see if it was a few people but something really stinks about that place and it aint the carcasses laying around outside the freezer.

 

And if it is proven they knowningly hired people with false papers I can see the fine. But if they were in a pilot program from the government and the government won't even tell them if the social security number is being used at another employer, how can the *same government* then fine them? Come on let's change the laws and help businesses. The IRS and Social Security knew that these numbers were being used multiple times but doesn't notify the employers, now you want the government to fine them millions of dollars??

[NUKE_CLEVELAND]

And if it is proven they knowningly hired people with false papers I can see the fine. But if they were in a pilot program from the government and the government won't even tell them if the social security number is being used at another employer, how can the *same government* then fine them? Come on let's change the laws and help businesses. The IRS and Social Security knew that these numbers were being used multiple times but doesn't notify the employers, now you want the government to fine them millions of dollars??

 

 

Well if that is in fact true then I see your point. Guess we'll leave it up to the investigators to find out exactly what happened there.

[Jenksismyhero]

Maybe I read the article wrong, but I think people are assuming too much. It just says that Swift estimated 40% of their workforce would be affected AFTER being told of the possible raids. Who's to say that the government didn't tell Swift how many people they were expecting to pick up, or at least a decent estimate?

 

And as far as incredibly heavy fines go, that's fine and dandy with corporations like tobacco where the companies can offset those 'small' damage rewards within the cost of their already unpopular product. But we're talking about food here. That's a different ball game. The 65 million is going to come from somewhere and it sure isn't going to come from the companies savings account.

Edited December 13, 2006 by Jenksismybitch

[Soxy]

Maybe I read the article wrong, but I think people are assuming too much. It just says that Swift estimated 40% of their workforce would be affected AFTER being told of the possible raids. Who's to say that the government didn't tell Swift how many people they were expecting to pick up, or at least a decent estimate?

 

And as far as incredibly heavy fines go, that's fine and dandy with corporations like tobacco where the companies can offset those 'small' damage rewards within the cost of their already unpopular product. But we're talking about food here. That's a different ball game. The 65 million is going to come from somewhere and it sure isn't going to come from the companies savings account.

And if meat prices go up we'd all have to eat soy! And then we would all turn gay!

[Texsox]

Well if that is in fact true then I see your point. Guess we'll leave it up to the investigators to find out exactly what happened there.

 

The law prevents employers (and consumers) from being notified if the social is being used in multiple places. I am trying to figure out who this benefits besides the identity thief. If the employee provided the legally required documents, and they weren't cut out of a cracker jack box, I have a hard time accessing a $65,000,000 fine. Or $65,000 for that matter.

 

There are a lot of issues here and no easy solutions, but one step is the IRS and Social Security to start monitoring these things and catching them before ten years has gone by. (article 2)

 

 

And then we would all turn gay!

When Johnny comes marching home!