Author: Peter Rousmaniere

More on Utah’s new immigration related laws

On the heels of Utah’s passage of an immigration – related law, Farmer Justice’s president Bruce Goldstein wrote an op-ed in the Salt Lake Tribune saying that the state should be paying more attention to reforming an existing guest worker program, the H-2A program. Goldstein is concerned that guest worker programs tend to be inadequate in protecting the interests of both guest and American workers. He plugs for AgJOBS, which was part of the failed immigration reform effort in Washington in 2007.
The article in full:
Paying for a guest worker law already in place
By BRUCE GOLDSTEIN
Published: April 14, 2011 12:10AM
Bruce Goldstein is president of Farmworker Justice, a nonprofit organization based in Washington, D.C., that works to improve living and working conditions for migrant and seasonal farm workers.
Amidst the debate and controversy surrounding Utah’s new immigration laws, state legislators in Salt Lake City seem to think they’ve created a model for America. They portray their pilot guest worker program as a compromise that others might use as a model.
They must think Utah’s taxpayers aren’t paying careful attention, because they’ll be saddled with spending money to duplicate a program that largely already exists.
Last month, Utah Gov. Gary Herbert signed into law four bills heralded by some commentators as a holistic and comprehensive state approach to immigration reform. One of the bills would create a pilot program to bring guest workers from the state of Nuevo Leon, Mexico, to perform temporary work. (Another would create a guest worker status for undocumented workers already working in Utah.)
If the pilot bill for managing guest workers in Utah sounds familiar, that’s because, in spite of the media attention and self-congratulation that accompanied the state law, we have had a federal system in place since the 1940s that does virtually the same thing. In fact, the United States already has two such programs for temporary or seasonal jobs, the H-2A visa for agricultural work and the H-2B for nonagricultural work. Each visa already requires state involvement.

Continue reading More on Utah’s new immigration related laws

Critique of H-2A farmworker visa program

Congress held hearings this week on the seasonal agricultural worker program called H-2A. Testimony by the president of Farmworker Justice included this: “More than one million undocumented farm workers are making U.S. agriculture productive. We need to stabilize the workforce and keep agriculture productive by allowing undocumented workers to obtain legal immigration status and by improving wages and working conditions. “
The program currently brings in about 30,000 workers a year, somewhat more than 1% of America’s farm workforce.
Summary of Testimony: Bruce Goldstein, President, Farmworker Justice, before the Judiciary Subcommittee on Immigration Policy and Enforcement April 13, 2011
04/13/2011
Mr. Chairman and Members: Thank you for the opportunity to testify about the H-2A agricultural guestworker program.
The H-2A program is deeply flawed and should not be a vehicle for filling the nation’s 2 to 2 ½ million jobs on farms and ranches. In addition, Congress should not get mired in previously-fought battles.. Many agribusiness groups lobbied in the 1990’s for changes to “streamline” the H-2A program by cutting worker protections and reducing government oversight. Their legislation would have created a system of exploitable guestworkers and set their wages and other job terms at unconscionably low levels. These efforts failed, as did efforts of farmworker advocates to pass their own policy proposals. Recognizing the need for a policy solution and the inadequacy of the H-2A program, growers and workers reached a compromise, known as the AgJOBS bill. That compromise would allow eligible undocumented farmworkers to earn legal immigration status, revise the H-2A program in balanced ways, and provide America with a stable, productive and decently-treated farm labor force.
The Bush Administration, in its last few days, made drastic, anti-worker changes to the H-2A program: the wage formula changes reduced earnings by $1.00 to $2.00 per hour, key recruitment protections for US workers were eliminated, and government oversight in an already abusive program was restricted.
Fortunately, the Department of Labor under Secretary of Labor Solis reversed these harmful changes, although for more than one year, thousands of U.S. farmworkers and guestworkers at H-2A employers suffered low wages and other harm. The Department also instituted additional common-sense protections, such as a surety bond requirement for labor contractors, a requirement to disclose job terms to workers by the time of the visa application, and increased opportunity for US workers to learn about H-2A employers’ jobs via an online job posting.

Continue reading Critique of H-2A farmworker visa program

Welfare use among immigrants

The Center for Immigration Studies (CIS) reports that immigrants use welfare programs more than non-immigrants, and that illegal immigrants use some welfare programs (food stamps and Medicaid) more than legal immigrants. The overall participation rates are very heavily driven by lower education levels of immigrant families, especially Hispanic.
The study fails to analyze welfare participation rates by household income, which of course is more directly causative of welfare use than is education level.
To its credit, CIS dispells the myth that immigrants come here to get on welfare. “An unwillingness to work is not the reason immigrant welfare use is high. The vast majority (95 percent) of immigrant households with children had at least one worker in 2009. But their low education levels mean that more than half of these working immigrant households with children still accessed the welfare system during 2009.”
Immigrant households not only much more likely to be headed by some one without a high school degree (30% compared to 10%). CIS estimates that 80% of adult illegal immigrants have not completed high school or have only a high school education. CIS does not estimate household income levels.
These low education households are, I expect, among immigrants, and more among illegal immigrants, to earn less than native low income households.
Hispanic immigrant households use cash assistance and housing assistance about as much as native households (both in medium single digits – illegal immigrant use of cash assistance is at 1%). They are about twice as likely to use food stamps and Medicaid.
One of the notable findings in the CIS report is that welfare use among both immigrants and native households has risen significantly during the Great Recession.

Hispanic population now 16% of total

This report summarizes Census results for 2010:
The Hispanic population surged 43% in the last decade and Hispanics now make up more than 16% of the nation’s population, according to just-released Census figures.
The surge in Hispanics’ share of the population, larger than demographers initially had expected, underscores the growing importance of the nation’s fastest-growing ethnic group in national — and local — politics.
Every state in the nation saw a surge in Latinos, and traditional Latino gateways along the border still have the highest percentage, other states also saw rapid Hispanic growth: There are now 17 states where Hispanics make up at least 10 percent of the population, including Utah, Rhode Island and Kansas.
In five states, Hispanics now account for at least a quarter of the population. In states such as Texas and Arizona, that could be good news for Democrats, who have been benefiting from a Hispanic backlash against Republicans’ tough rhetoric on illegal immigration. Exit polls indicated that President Obama got two-thirds of the Hispanic vote in the 2008 election.
Non-Hispanic whites now comprise just under 64% of the population, the Census shows.

The Utah Compact on immigration

Business, religious and community leaders in Utah signed on November 11, 2010, the following Utah Compact. This Compact set the stage for a package of immigration bills enacted this month.
Utah Compact:
A declaration of five principles to guide Utah’s immigration discussion
FEDERAL SOLUTIONS: Immigration is a federal policy issue between the U.S. government and other countries — not Utah and other countries. We urge Utah’s congressional delegation, and others, to lead efforts to strengthen federal laws and protect our national borders. We urge state leaders to adopt reasonable policies addressing immigrants in Utah.
LAW ENFORCEMENT: We respect the rule of law and support law enforcement’s professional judgment and discretion. Local law enforcement resources should focus on criminal activities, not civil violations of federal code.
FAMILIES: Strong families are the foundation of successful communities. We oppose policies that unnecessarily separate families. We champion policies that support families and improve the health, education and well-being of all Utah children.
ECONOMY: Utah is best served by a free-market philosophy that maximizes individual freedom and opportunity. We acknowledge the economic role immigrants play as workers and taxpayers. Utah’s immigration policies must reaffirm our global reputation as a welcoming and business-friendly state.
A FREE SOCIETY: Immigrants are integrated into communities across Utah. We must adopt a humane approach to this reality, reflecting our unique culture, history and spirit of inclusion. The way we treat immigrants will say more about us as a free society and less about our immigrant neighbors. Utah should always be a place that welcomes people of goodwill.
Supported by the Mormon Church
Statement from The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints:
As a worldwide church dealing with many complex issues across the globe, The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints promotes broad, foundational principles that have worldwide application. The Church regards the declaration of the Utah Compact as a responsible approach to the urgent challenge of immigration reform. It is consistent with important principles for which we stand:
* We follow Jesus Christ by loving our neighbors. The Savior taught that the meaning of “neighbor” includes all of God’s children, in all places, at all times.
* We recognize an ever-present need to strengthen families. Families are meant to be together. Forced separation of working parents from their children weakens families and damages society.
* We acknowledge that every nation has the right to enforce its laws and secure its borders. All persons subject to a nation’s laws are accountable for their acts in relation to them.
Public officials should create and administer laws that reflect the best of our aspirations as a just and caring society. Such laws will properly balance love for neighbors, family cohesion, and the observance of just and enforceable laws.

New guest worker and other legislation from Utah

Utah has enacted in March a law that attempts to set up, on a single state basis, a guest worker program allowing illegal workers to participate. Though of doubtful constitutionality – it will take a waiver from Washington for Utah to effective write a guest worker program – it is an example of creative thinking about immigration.
According to the Pew Hispanic Center, Utah has about 110,000 illegal immigrants, of which 75,000 are in the workforce.
The legislation follow up on the Utah Compact, which business, religious and community leaders in Utah agreed to in late November. I am posting on that compact in another post.
The Deseret News editorialized it support of the legislation, saying that “This year, Utah’s lawmakers have managed to accomplish legislatively what has eluded Congress: increased enforcement that weeds out dangerous criminals while providing a guest worker program coupled with tough but common-sense safeguards.”
One report describes the guest worker law, HB 116, as follows:
On Tuesday March 15, Utah Governor Gary R. Herbert signed immigration bills including HB 116 into law, which addressed immigration enforcement, guest-worker visas and employment verification by employers in Utah. Utah became the first state to enact laws to let illegal workers remain in the state along with their families.
Governor Herbert called it “the Utah solution.” He said, “Utah has taken a thoughtful, rational approach and found common ground.”
While most acknowledge immigration is primarily a federal issue, Governor Herbert said these bills provide him some leverage at the federal level to engage the federal government in addressing Utah’s challenges, according to the press release.
The federal government would have to grant a waiver, since the U.S. Congress can only enact immigration laws and enforce them. If the federal government fails to grant a waiver, Utah might engage in a legal challenge by the U.S. Department of Justice.
The guest-worker program under HB 116 will take effect in two years. It would allow the Utah Department of Safety to issue state visas to more than 110,000 undocumented immigrants in the state. Immigrants would have to pay $2,500 for permits or pay $1,000 for overstaying a visa in the U.S. Their families would be included in the permits. Undocumented workers would have to go through a background investigation once they sign up for the guest-worker program. They would be expected to learn English, but would not be required.
Another new law, HB 466, allows the governor to enter into a pilot program with the Mexican state of Nuevo Leon to supply legal workers through existing federal guest-worker programs.
A third bill, HB 497, requires police to check the immigration status of suspects who are arrested for felony or serious misdemeanor charges, placing an immigration enforcement activity in the hands of local police officers. This law is expected to face immediate legal challenges.

Portrait of Middle Eastern and North African immigrants

The Migration Policy Institute issued a profile of these 830,000 immigrants. “Iraqis are the largest single immigrant population from the Middle East and North Africa in the United States, followed closely by Egyptians. Iraqi, Egyptian, and Lebanese immigrants accounted for over half of the foreign born from the Middle East and North Africa in 2009.”
“Compared to other immigrant groups, the foreign born from the Middle East and North Africa are much better educated and tend to have higher levels of English proficiency. California, Michigan, and New York are home to the largest populations of Middle Eastern and North African immigrants in the country.
“There were 2.0 million members of the Middle Eastern and North African diaspora residing in the United States in 2009.”
“Foreign-born adults of prime working age (25 to 55) from the Middle East and North Africa had a median annual family income of $54,000, which is somewhat higher than the median of $51,200 for all immigrant adults of the same age group. [The median household income of the entire U.S. in 2009 was $52,029.] However, there are notable differences among countries of origin: the median family income of adults of prime working age from Lebanon ($72,400), Kuwait ($70,500), and Algeria ($70,000) was much higher than the median family income of adults in that age group from Yemen ($36,000) and Sudan ($34,000).”
The report in full:
Middle Eastern and North African Immigrants in the United States
By Aaron Terrazas
Migration Policy Institute
Article Image
Of the 830,000 immigrants from the Middle East and North Africa living in the United States in 2008, about 9 percent were children.
March 2011
Immigrants from the Middle East and North Africa have a long history in the United States. As early as 1920, the country was home to at least 50,000 immigrants from the region – primarily from what was then Palestine and Syria, including present-day Lebanon.
By 2009, there were about 830,000 immigrants in the United States from the Middle East and North Africa. Accounting for just 2.2 percent of all immigrants in the United States, immigrants from the region have received growing attention in the post-9/11 era, particularly with US military action in the Middle East and the recent string of uprisings and political unrest in North Africa that have displaced thousands of refugees.

Continue reading Portrait of Middle Eastern and North African immigrants

The immorality of denying workers comp benefits to illegal workers

Mark Noonan, a very smart workers compensation professional, weighed in today on the issue – legal and moral – over withholding workers compensation benefits from undocumented workers. Here is his column in Risk & Insurance Magazine:
Raising Debate Beyond the Borders
By Mark Noonan
By taking one simple pass through any news source, it’s obvious that we have a growing national dilemma with immigration–an issue that becomes more heated and emotional as the subject of workers’ compensation for undocumented workers is brought into the debate.
The issue of workers’ compensation benefits becomes complex as state statutes clash with the federal immigration law. Under federal law, undocumented immigrants cannot lawfully work in the United States and employers are prohibited from knowingly hiring them. Once hired, however, most states do provide workers’ compensation benefits regardless of immigration status.
Wyoming is currently the only state that has a statute prohibiting illegal immigrants from receiving workers’ compensation benefits. Georgia, Montana, New Hampshire, Ohio and South Carolina are considering passing bills that would deny workers’ compensation benefits to undocumented workers. The state of Arizona has unsuccessfully introduced bills the past two legislative sessions. Silent on the issue are Alaska, Delaware, Indiana, Maine, Missouri, Rhode Island, South Dakota, Vermont, Washington, West Virginia and Wisconsin.
All other states expressly include undocumented workers in their workers’ compensation statues.
State workers’ compensation laws are designed to provide (among many other things) wage replacement for periods of disability caused by workplace injuries or illnesses, and promote return to work if possible. Although federal law can still impact what benefits they may receive, courts have generally ruled in favor of entitling workers’ compensation benefits to the undocumented worker, some with limitations. Courts in California, Nebraska, and Oregon, for instance, have upheld decisions to deny vocational rehabilitation benefits to undocumented workers.
We may begin to see fewer differences between state and federal law. On December 23, 2010, in the case Asylum Company and Insurance Designers of Maryland v. District of Columbia Department of Employment Services, the District of Columbia Court of Appeals ruled that an undocumented worker is entitled to temporary total disability benefits.
The District’s administrative law judge found the undocumented worker, Palemon Cassarubias Gonzales, was eligible for workers’ compensation. On appeal, the employer argued that the federal Immigration Reform and Control Act of 1986 (IRCA) pre-empted the workers’ compensation law. IRCA bars employers from hiring individuals, including illegal aliens, who are not entitled to work in the United States. The employer, who did not know his employee was illegal, argued that IRCA makes an undocumented workers’ hire illegal and bars him from receiving workers’ compensation benefits.
Because other state court rulings have observed that, by not providing benefits to undocumented workers, some employers could exploit a financial incentive to hire them in the first place knowing they may not have to pay workers’ compensation benefits, the District of Columbia Court of Appeals ruled that it could not find a reason to disagree with other state court. In spite of the IRCA argument, it upheld the previous decision to provide Gonzales with benefits.
MISSING THE POINT
Over the past two years, the government has stepped up enforcement for employee verification. The Department of Homeland Security views E-Verify as a critical step to keep employers in compliance with immigration employee verification requirements. An Internet-based system, it compares information to confirm whether or not a job applicant is a legal U.S. resident.
It’s a good concept, but E-Verify alone will not force an undocumented worker to leave the country or to stop pursuing employment with false identification. It is a misplaced effort that doesn’t address the problem for employers: What to do with an injured undocumented worker.
There are more than 8 million undocumented workers and, whether the employer is aware of their illegal status or not, the injured worker deserves to be covered by workers’ compensation benefits. Legally and morally, it is the right thing to do.
As we celebrate the 100th anniversary of workers’ compensation, let’s not forget the intent– providing injured workers with benefits to assist them as they recover, while freeing the employer from the threat of litigation, thus allowing both sides to achieve a positive result.
I’ve never seen anything to suggest that someone should be excluded from receiving medical and indemnity benefits because of their citizenship status. It’s inappropriate and, in my opinion, discriminatory.
MARK NOONAN is a managing principal and the senior knowledge manager for workers’ compensation for the Casualty Practice within Integro Insurance Brokers.
The opinions expressed in this column are the author’s and do not reflect the position of this publication or Integro Insurance Brokers.

Continue reading The immorality of denying workers comp benefits to illegal workers

States may bar workers comp for illegal immigrants

This is a refrain from recent years: state legislators who want to screw illegal workers who are injured or die on the job. Not only do these proposals violate a standard of fairness, but they threaten to open employers up to tort suits outside the workers comp system. Very capable Henry Ceniceros of Business Insurance describes proposals in Georgia, Montana, New Hampshire and South Carolina.
His article in full.
States may bar comp for illegal immigrants
Roberto Ceniceros
With conservative lawmakers in control in several states, more legislation is being introduced that would deny workers compensation benefits to illegal immigrants who are hurt on the job. And while such efforts have failed in recent years, today’s changed political climate could result in some of that legislation becoming law this time around, some say.
Bills that would bar illegal immigrants from collecting workers comp benefits are pending in Georgia, Montana, New Hampshire and South Carolina.
There is growing demand from legislators and their staff for information on barring illegal immigrants from collecting workers comp benefits, said Ann Morse, program director, immigrant policy project for the bipartisan National Conference of State Legislatures in Washington.
“It seems to be making a resurgence this year,” Ms. Morse said. “It just seems like it’s heating up right now.”

Continue reading States may bar workers comp for illegal immigrants