Illegal workers hired by city through a contractor

[moneymaker]

Does it bother anyone that our local governments hire illegals to work through a contract company similar to what Walmart’s janitorial service got nailed for years back? It doesn’t bother me that they are not union, but illegal employment indirectly by the government leaves a bad taste in my mouth. When they do shit like that while nit picking about permit processes it really gets my goat.

[FlyerInHi]

Doesn’t bother me as long as the workers are paid a decent wage.

When I hire contractors, I don’t ask about immigration status. I would rather pay the workers directly for their work rather than a middleman.

Legalize everyone. Problem solved.

[spdrun]

Do they knowingly do so?

Does CA have a requirement for local gov’t contractors to use eVerify? Can eVerify still be gamed in some way?

[moneymaker]

Last I heard E-verify was a voluntary system. Admittedly I am not calling anyone (INS or whatever they call themselves these days) because I want the work to be completed, it was already delayed once, doesn’t mean it doesn’t bother me that the government gets away with so much that we cannot. They don’t have to smog their vehicles, they don’t have to pull permits, they are “above the law”. When I see road work being done by contractors they seem to put out the minimum number of traffic cones, cones that only cost $7 and are nearly indestructible.

[spdrun]

Some states require government contractors and/or agencies to use eVerify. Not sure if CA is one of those states.

[moneymaker]

Here’s the scoop http://www.unioncounsel.net/developments/immigration/news/no_mandatory_e_verify_in_california.html
and this is for employees so when it comes to contractors I think we are still living in the wild west as far as any kind of E-verify laws. In a nutshell for those that don’t go to the above link, CA seems very anti E-verify.

[Anonymous]

Federal government requires contractors to use E-verify. However, I doubt this is enforced in practice. I work on DoD base and several of the cleaning contractors we have had over the years are clearly hiring illegals.

[Anonymous]

[quote=FlyerInHi]Legalize everyone. Problem solved.[/quote]

Yup. If there is a market for labor that labor should be legal.

It would bother me if these people were being exploited or their employer were not following labor laws intended to protect employees.

But if the only issue is that the employees don’t have some piece of paper simply because they were born on the wrong side of an arbitrary line in the desert, we should give them that piece of paper.

[Anonymous]

Sure, then when that person born on the “wrong side of the border” is no longer able to work and needs government assistance are you going to pay for it? You open borders people have your heads so far up your asses it is unbelievable.

[Anonymous]

[quote=deadzone]Sure, then when that person born on the “wrong side of the border” is no longer able to work and needs government assistance are you going to pay for it? You open borders people have your heads so far up your asses it is unbelievable.[/quote]

It’s preferable to having my head up Trump’s ass.

Lemme guess, your response is going to be prefaced with “I’m no Trump supporter, but…”

[Coronita]

I never understood the logic of people who work at a defense business/job complaining about h1bs or illegals. Neither of them directly impacts their job security. How unecessarily big a bloated defense budget we end up having does…which is ironic. Defense business and employment is just one step down from government handouts IMHO. It’s a much bigger burn on our tax dollars and epitome of government waste than all the social welfare that illegals consume.(not that I particular support illegal aliens either)

How much did we spend on that joint strike fighter again?

There’s also unnecessary waste in our legal systems. Particularly how ridiculously expensive.legal counsel is. Just a few months ago, I was in a jury selection group for a case that was going to trial over someone that shoplifted some toiletry items at Walmart. Seriously, we need a two day trial for this?

[spdrun]

^^^

Well, most cases of shoplifting would likely end with the accused being bullied into a plea bargain. If the accused stood on his/her right to jury trial….

[bearishgurl]

[quote=flu] … There’s also unnecessary waste in our legal systems. Particularly how ridiculously expensive.legal counsel is. Just a few months ago, I was in a jury selection group for a case that was going to trial over someone that shoplifted some toiletry items at Walmart. Seriously, we need a two day trial for this?[/quote]flu, the crime you describe here is a misdemeanor in CA and typically adjudicated quickly and sentenced without trial. Your “defendant” must have had numerous (2 or more, but likely more than 2) priors of petty theft and/or grand theft.

The facts of the crime and the circumstances surrounding the offender often dictate whether prosecutors and judges go with the misdemeanor or felony label….

(emphasis mine)

See: http://www.nolo.com/legal-encyclopedia/what-wobbler.html

and: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Three-strikes_law

[Coronita]

[quote=bearishgurl][quote=flu] … There’s also unnecessary waste in our legal systems. Particularly how ridiculously expensive.legal counsel is. Just a few months ago, I was in a jury selection group for a case that was going to trial over someone that shoplifted some toiletry items at Walmart. Seriously, we need a two day trial for this?[/quote]flu, the crime you describe here is a misdemeanor in CA and typically adjudicated quickly and sentenced without trial. Your “defendant” must have had numerous (2 or more, but likely more than 2) priors of petty theft and/or grand theft.

The facts of the crime and the circumstances surrounding the offender often dictate whether prosecutors and judges go with the misdemeanor or felony label….

(emphasis mine)

See: http://www.nolo.com/legal-encyclopedia/what-wobbler.html

and: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Three-strikes_law%5B/quote%5D

Thanks for support my claim that our legal system is bloated with unnecasriky complicated and circular jargon with the sole intent and purpose to add thick layers of bureaucracy and bloat, and I guess, provide additional jobs that normally would not be needed if the legal system was actually just simplified.

[FlyerInHi]

[quote=deadzone]Sure, then when that person born on the “wrong side of the border” is no longer able to work and needs government assistance are you going to pay for it? You open borders people have your heads so far up your asses it is unbelievable.[/quote]

Immigrants are very entrepreneurial, more than natives. They grow the economic pie, pay taxes, etc. We should “take advantage” of people already here by giving them legal papers so they can contribute more.

http://www.npr.org/2016/03/05/469180918/here-to-stay-how-indian-born-innkeepers-revolutionized-americas-motels

[Author]

Posts