Immigration reform debate last year on Capitol Hill
splintered both parties. But strengthening employer verification and
implementing tougher sanctions for hiring illegal workers drew bipartisan
support this week.
As momentum builds to return to the topic, several large
human resources organizations are uniting to shape verification policy, which
they contend Congress fumbled the last time around.
On Wednesday, March 7, five groups launched the HR Initiative
for a Legal Workforce, a campaign designed to educate lawmakers about employer
aspects of immigration reform.
The $1 million lobbying effort involves the Society for Human
Resource Management, the HR Policy Association, the American Council on
International Personnel, the International Public Management Association for
Human Resources and the College and University Professional Association for
Human Resources.
In a Washington media briefing, the initiative’s
leaders outlined five principles they believe should be incorporated into
verification provisions: shared responsibility among government, employers and
employees; fair enforcement; accuracy and reliability; ease of use; and
deployment of the latest technology.
Legislation last year addressed verification in large part by
calling for an expansion of the Basic Pilot electronic verification system,
which is used by about 13,000 employers.
Many in the business community have criticized Basic Pilot
for being inefficient and prone to error. The Bush administration says the
system is working and touts it as the key to turning off the job magnet that
attracts illegal immigrants.
The mechanism, which checks applicants’ Social Security
numbers against a federal database, drew further rebuke when it proved
ineffective in stopping identity theft.
In December, the Department of Homeland Security arrested
1,282 people for immigration violations at six Swift & Co. meat processing
facilities. Despite Swift’s use of Basic Pilot, it became the target of
enforcement because illegal workers stole identities to pose as eligible
applicants. The Swift raid is part of DHS’ increased enforcement
emphasis.
Beyond relying on Basic Pilot, HR initiative officials said
Congress erred last year in providing too lengthy a timeframe for verification
procedures, requiring employers to maintain a paper I-9 system while switching
to electronic verification, imposing penalties on employers for hiring done by
subcontractors, and requiring that all incumbent employees be verified in
addition to new hires.
“What we saw happen last year … drove us to coming together
and developing this [initiative],” says Susan Meisinger, SHRM president and
CEO.
The goal is to give Congress the employer
perspective.
“We want to make sure that whatever they do makes sense in
the real world,” Meisinger says.
The group’s leaders asserted that the Basic Pilot system is
not robust enough to cover all 5.6 million employers. They also cautioned that
companies should not be an “immigration patrol,” and they shouldn’t have to pay
to use a compliance system.
The group shared it views with nearly two dozen lawmakers
during the past couple weeks, a time in which immigration reform has gained
momentum.
The Senate Judiciary Committee held a hearing last week that
featured DHS Secretary Michael Chertoff and Commerce Secretary Carlos Gutierrez.
Many of the questions they fielded had to do with employer
verification.
During the past week, Sen. Edward Kennedy, D-Massachusetts
and chairman of the Senate Health Education Labor and Pensions Committee, has
held several events to advocate comprehensive reform. He may introduce a bill as
early as next week.
The issue died last year when the House and Senate failed to
negotiate differences in their separate immigration bills. The House measure,
backed by conservative Republicans, focused only on border security and
enforcement.
The Senate version encompassed enforcement and a guest worker
program as well as a path to legalization for the approximately 12 million
illegal aliens currently in the country.
The fact that Democrats took over the House and Senate in the
November elections doesn’t change the political calculus for the HR initiative,
leaders say.
“We don’t have an ideological agenda,” says Daniel Yager,
senior vice president of the HR Policy Association. “It’s not a Republican
agenda. It’s not a Democratic agenda. It’s an agenda that wants to build
something that works.”
In meetings on Capitol Hill, the group promotes
pragmatism.
“It’s a very focused issue that we’re trying to address, and
it’s, frankly, common sense,” Meisinger says.
Lawmakers have been receptive.
“There’s greater attention to the details around employer
verification than there was last year,” says Lynn Shotwell, executive director
of the American Council on International Personnel. “They’re realizing that
nobody has the exact perfect solution at this point, so there’s a need for more
conversations.”
Conventional wisdom says that this year, which is free of an
election, would be a better time than next year to pass an immigration bill.
But Michael Aitken, SHRM director of governmental affairs,
notes that many major immigration measures have passed in election years.
And despite differences on the issue within both parties and
between organizations within the same interest group—like unions and business
organizations—many Republicans and Democrats, as well as the Bush
administration, favor passing a bill.
“Folks have a lot of skin in the game,” Aitken says.
“Comprehensive reform will get done.”
—Mark Schoeff Jr.