HRTechNews.com » Company targeted in immigration raid used E-Verify

Company targeted in immigration raid used E-Verify

September 5, 2008 by Sam Narisi
Posted in: Applicant background screening, In this week's e-newsletter, Latest News & Views, Security and law
Share/Save/Bookmark

Last week a Mississippi manufacturer was raided by the feds after it was discovered it had employed 600 illegal immigrants. The twist: The company used E-Verify to check the eligibility of all its hires.

The company, Howard Industries, was the target of the largest immigration raid at a single location in U.S. history — despite using E-Verify for new hires, as mandated by state law.

How could so many undocumented workers have been hired? One big explanation could be the timing. The investigation started two years ago, before the company was using E-Verify.

Also to blame might be the fact that E-Verify doesn’t do much to prevent identity theft. If an undocumented employee uses another person’s name and social security number, the system won’t tell employers that — it only matches names and SSNs.

E-Verify is set to expire in November, unless Congress approves an extension. The House of Representatives passed a bill to extend the program for five more years, but the Senate has yet to take action.

Experts say situations like Howard’s are likely to up the ante in the debate on whether to scrap it, keep it as a voluntary or make it mandatory for employers. We’ll keep you posted.

View all the Latest Stories

Tags: , , , ,

One Response to “Company targeted in immigration raid used E-Verify”

  1. Joe Wenzel Says:

    The headline is misleading. How long ago did Howard Industries actually implement E-verify ? Only in the article does the writer explain the investigation began before the employer started the mandated program. ON the other side, the writer does suggest that identity theft may be the bigger issue. I believe more investigation is needed to determine how many ID”s were bogus, as that would shed more light on the issue.

Leave a Reply


advertisement

advertisement

See what readers are saying...

  • Acky: How discerning of you. Was it really necessary to include the teacher's name? Is this your way of name dropping, or ac...
  • Jeanette: It took them years to revise to this one, when they disallowed some of the previous List A documents. All they had to d...
  • Marlene Thompson: How about... how stupid they look because they can't make up their mind if they want to continue using this form or make...
  • JParr: Ideally, network access and user accounts for "furloughed" employees should be temporarily revoked by disabling accounts...
  • P. Baldree: That was an incredibly dumb thing to do by both parties....
  • Maryposa: I wonder if anyone at USCIS realizes how stupid it looks having a whole extra page with one paragraph on it, which just ...