Garage door industry magazine for garage door dealers, garage door manufacturers, garage door distributors, garage door installers, loading docks, garage door operators and openers, gates, and tools for the door industry.
Issue link: https://idoi.epubxp.com/i/134362
LEgAL&LegisLation; (continued from page 10) November 6, 1986, who are actually working on federal contracts. Since E-Verify was implemented, it has also provided a valuable tool to employers who are not required to use the service, in that it provides notice of questionable eligibility to work where the presented records may not match the government's databases. The Senate's immigration bill calls for an enhanced E-Verify system that would be phased in over a fve-year period. Employers with more than 5,000 employees would have to begin utilizing the system within two years. Those with more than 500 employees would be phased in within three years. All other employers would be phased in during the next 12 to 24 months. A second part of the system would involve photo matching through a "biometric" system. Every non-citizen would be required to show a "biometric work authorization card," which would have a photograph to be stored in the E-Verify system. In order to be cleared for employment, the picture on the card presented by the employee to an employer would have to exactly match the picture in the E-Verify system. U.S. citizens would also have their photos entered into the E-Verify database, either from their U.S. passport or from the applicable state DMV. The E-Verify system will continue to provide employers with an instant verifcation of whether or not the individual is authorized to work in the U.S. If the information provided for the I-9 form matches the information in E-Verify, then that individual is deemed eligible to work. If there is a "no-match" determination – whether from the Social Security number, or in the future from the biometric and/or photographic information – then the employee has to follow the appropriate processes to verify that the no-match was in error, and that he or she is in fact eligible to work. Employers who do not receive such verifcation would then be required to terminate the employee or risk liability with the federal government. 3. Expanded Work Visas The third aspect of the bill which is likely to affect and hopefully beneft IDA members is the expanded eligibility of immigrants for need-based work visas. In addition to the "H1-B" visas for high skilled workers, which would be expanded under the bill, a new category of "W" visas for lower-skilled workers would also be created. Those visas would be available for a variety of service industries – most notably agricultural harvesting – as well as the construction industry. As drafted, up to 15,000 W visas per year to the construction industry, a level which is substantially lower than other industries, and which disappointed construction groups. In an April 16, 2013 press statement, Stephen Sandherr, CEO of the Associated General Contractors of America, remarked that "[i]mposing severe limitations – one-quarter of 1 percent of current construction levels – on the potential pool of available workers at a time when economists expect construction frms will add up to 350,000 new workers this year alone will undermine the sector's nascent recovery. If this proposal were to be enacted, construction employers could easily go from not having enough work to not having enough workers." Certain states have been more hard-hit than others during the economic downturn, and the loss of qualifed construction workers has been magnifed in states like Arizona and Alabama, both of which passed V O L U M E controversial immigration reform laws that drove out ineligible workers. The complaint by construction associations is that the W visa program won't provide enough new workers to replace workers who either left the construction industry entirely, or else fed certain jurisdictions, since the construction crash. However, those amounts may be increased during deliberations on the bill. Conclusion There is nothing certain about the 2013 immigration bill. There are interest groups on both sides of every issue who would like to see it changed, altered, slowed, sped up, or stopped entirely. Moreover, the compromise package that made it into bill form in the Senate may or may not get passed there, much less also getting it through the House of Representatives, and to the President's desk. For now, what matters is being aware of the issues on the table, and for members to voice their opinions to their Senators and Representatives to get the sort of immigration reform that they believe is best for their business, their industry, and their country. Brian J. Schoolman is an attorney with Safran Law Offces in Raleigh. The practice includes construction litigation, commercial litigation, and appellate practice. For more information on how Safran Law Offces went less-paper, and for advice on implementing your own less-paper systems, please contact Joe Zoller at (919) 828-1396 x242, or by e-mail at jzoller@safranlaw.com. 4 6 I S S U E 3 2 0 1 3 13