Last week, U.S. Immigrations and Custom Enforcement (ICE) told 652 employers their I-9 forms were being audited. That’s more than the number of audits ICE conducted in the entire previous fiscal year. In addition to I-9s, many of the audits will also include subpoenas for EINs, payroll records and correspondences with the Social Security Administration regarding no-match letters.

The nationwide inspection follows an April announcement that ICE planned to focus the majority of its resources on prosecuting employers who hire illegal immigrants.

The list of companies being audited hasn’t been released. ICE has described the effort as a “first step,” meaning there will likely be more mass inspections in the near future.

What should HR managers do if they get a Notice of Inspection (NOI) from the feds?

Preparation is key. Employers must act quickly — the NOIs generally require HR to turn over all I-9s within three business days.

If I-9 records don’t pass muster with ICE, the agency could launch a criminal investigation. But even if there are no criminal charges, employers could face civil fines for faulty record-keeping.

An audit doesn’t always mean charges or fines are coming. After receiving an NOI, employers should:

• Respond quickly, even if it’s to ask ICE for a time extension
• Choose one point person to correspond with ICE — that will avoid any inconsistencies in the information given
• Notify all managers and employees who deal with I-9s and related documents
• Secure all applicable records — any missing documents could be seen as an attempt to destroy evidence or sabotage the investigation, and
• Consider conducting their own internal audit.

If you look closely at the upper right-hand corner of the Form I-9, you’ll see it’s supposed to expire today. What should you do now?

An easy answer: nothing.

The current form lists an expiration date of 6/30/09, but last week, the U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) announced the form will remain valid after today.

On June 26, USCIS asked the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) to approved continued use of the current version. While the request is pending, the form will not expire, despite the date listed at the top of the first page.

When the extension is approved — and a new expiration date is set — USCIS will update the form.

But for now, just keep using the form on the agency’s Web site, dated “Rev. 02/02/09″ at the bottom of each page and the June 30 expiration date at the top.

Note: When the form is updated, it’s unlikely USCIS will make any substantial changes, just add the new dates.

HR is a goldmine for confidential personal information that’s often the target of identity thieves. Anyone working in the HR department needs to be careful about keeping that data safe. The first step: secure passwords.

Some tips for passwords that are tough for hackers to break:

1. Use at least 8 characters, with a mix numbers and upper and lowercase letters. When a password’s only made  up of five letters, there are 11.9 million possible combinations. Sound pretty safe? Not when you consider that a password with eight mixed characters has 899.2 trillion possibilities.
2. Come up with nonsense. Many people create passwords out of actual words or phrases, because they’re easy to remember. But those are also easier for hackers to find out.
3. Change it up. Everyone in the HR department should come up with a new password once a month. One tip: Load monthly reminders on your and staffers’ computers.
4. Log off. The best password in the world doesn’t do any good if the user stays logged in constantly. When working with sensitive information, it’s important to log when stepping away even briefly. Otherwise, any passer-by should find a screen full of valuable info.

One of the benefits reported by companies who use electronic appraisals: It puts everything in a searchable database, making it easier to track who the company’s top performers are and who needs improvement.

The software can also help make sure managers get the job done and get it done right — HR can set up a schedule for each employee and see who’s past due for a review at any given time. Also, using an electronic system helps make sure employees throughout the company are evaluated consistently.

Some systems even include a legal filter that will search for dangerous words and phrases.

Does your company use performance appraisal software? Are you considering it? Let us know your experience in the comments section below.

Google recently announced a feature to its Gmail client that allows users to un-send a sent message. Once its added, users will see an “undo” button after they send an e-mail.

They’ll have to act quickly, though — the button disappears after five seconds.

Don’t use Gmail? A similar solution can be set up in Microsoft Outlook to delay messages from being sent for a certain period of time. Here’s how to do it in Outlook 2003:

1. Click on the “Rules and Alerts” option in the “Tools” menu.
2. Click “New rule,” then “Start from a blank rule.”
3. In the menu that appears, highlight “Check messages after sending” and click “Next.”
4. Select “Defer delivery by a number of minutes.” The next dialog box will ask you for a number.

Now after you write an e-mail, Outlook will delay delivering it for a certain amount of time. That will give you some extra time to confirm you want to send it or look for any mistakes.

One of the problems with e-mail: A message easily can be misinterpreted and taken out of context. And when it happens to a manager, the repercussions can be serious.

In one recent case, a manager’s comments about a prospective employee got his employer wrapped up in a costly court battle. Here’s what happened:

A pregnant woman was turned down for a job as a casting assistant for a movie production company.

She sued, claiming she was rejected because of her pregnancy. The employer claimed she just wasn’t the most qualified candidate.

Who won the case?

The employer’s defense was sunk by one key piece of evidence: an e-mail from the hiring manager to another employee. In the message, he expressed concern that the applicant would not be able to handle the stress and long hours of the job because she was expecting.

Regardless of the qualifications of the person who was hired, the manager’s e-mail made it tough to ignore his assumptions about the pregnant candidate, and the employer couldn’t prove his decision was unbiased.

The company ended up paying the woman a $75,000 settlement.

Can’t be erased

All managers need to understand the dangers of discussing employment decisions over e-mail, especially those centering on a sensitive topic like in the case above.

E-mails are permanent records. Any relevant messages will always be brought into court in the event an employee or job applicant sues — and they’re often read out of context or interpreted in ways that hurt the employer’s case.

The solution: Train managers to watch what they write and know which conversations to hold in person.

Cite: EEOC v. Crick Pictures, et al.

A hearing officer recently ruled a Denver city employee fired for drinking at work couldn’t be terminated. Why? Because the city failed to print out the results of his Breathalyzer test.

John Delgado work for the city as an equipment-operator specialist. In 2007, he failed a drug test required for all employees in safety-sensitive positions.

Rather than lose his job, he sought treatment and was required to abstain from drugs and alcohol for three years. He was fired after he failed an alcohol test last year.

The printer attached to the Breathalyzer machine malfunctioned and failed to print the results.

Even though Delgado didn’t dispute the positive results, the hearing officer decided he should keep his job because the city lacked hard proof. He was returned to his position and given back pay for the time he was out of work.

The city plans to appeal the ruling. In the meantime, the printer has been fixed and a backup system has been installed.

The agreement was electronic, and the company failed to get sufficient proof that the employee actually signed it.

Here’s how the process worked:

The arbitration agreement was posted on the company’s intranet. All employees could access the intranet with a unique user ID and password.

Employees were told to read the agreement and “sign” it by entering their social security number and password, indicating they’ve read and understood the agreement. Afterward, employees received an e-mail asking them to respond if they denied that they signed the document.

So when the employee brought her discrimination claim forward, the company told her she’d already agreed to arbitrate out of court. The company had a record of her signature, and an examination of her e-mail showed she’d gotten the follow-up message and never responded.

However, she claimed she never signed it — and alleged that her manager did it for her without her permission. At one point, she said, she forgot her password and asked her manager to reset it for her. That meant the supervisor had access to her log-in information for a period of time.

The company admitted that could’ve happened and, therefore, couldn’t prove the employee had actually signed the agreement.

That was enough for the judge. Without proof, the court couldn’t force the employee to arbitrate, and the case was allowed to move forward.

The lesson: In most cases, it’s easier and safer to have legal documents signed on physical paper.

Does your company use electronic agreements? Why or why not? Let us know in the comments section below.

Cite: Kerr v. Dillard Store Services, Inc.

Read the facts of this real-life case and decide: Who won?

The facts:

Two employees resigned from an employer to accept jobs at one of the company’s competitors. Before they left, they took their company-issued laptops home and copied a bunch of confidential data, including customer lists and specifications for products being developed. They brought that info to their new employer.

The employer:

The company sued the former employees and the new employer for violating the Computer Fraud and Abuse Act (CFAA). Estimated losses: about $5,000 in revenue because of the theft.

Who won the case?

Answer: The employees.

Why: The court ruled the CFAA doesn’t protect against monetary damage caused by the theft of data — only actual damage to computer files and the systems they’re stored on. Since the employees left the info intact after they copied it, the company had no standing to sue under that law.

Fixing damage cause by departing employees can be extremely difficult. Experts recommend keeping a close eye on employees who resign or are terminated and remove those employees’ access quickly to avoid theft in the first place.

Cite: Andritz, Inc. v. Southern Maintenance Contractor, LLC

Going green has many HR benefits, like better recruiting and retention.

According to some reports, many employees — especially those in their 20s — appreciate working for environmentally conscious employers.

Here are some green HR strategies experts recommend:

• Encourage commuters to bike or take public transit and take advantage of tax breaks offered by federal, state and local governments
• Donate used office furniture to charities or offer them to employees before they’re thrown away
• Switch to electronic systems instead of paper forms and use e-mail whenever possible, and
• Help employees find co-workers who live in the same area so they can carpool.

What efforts has your company made to be more environmentally friendly? Share your experience in the comments section below.