New Look to Green Cards & EAD Cards  

USCIS will start issuing redesigned cards with enhanced graphics to applicants.  The new cards will start being issued on May 1, 2017.

These redesigns use enhanced graphics and fraud-resistant security features to create cards that are highly secure and more tamper-resistant to prevent document tampering, counterfeiting and fraud; than the ones currently in use.

The Redesigned Cards

The new Green Cards and EADs will:

  • Display the individual’s photos on both sides;
  • Show a unique graphic image and color palette:
  • Green Cards will have an image of the Statue of Liberty and a predominately green palette;
  • EAD cards will have an image of a bald eagle and a predominately red palette;
  • Have embedded holographic images; and
  • No longer display the individual’s signature.

Also, Green Cards will no longer have an optical stripe on the back.

How To Tell If Your Card Is Valid

Some Green Cards and EADs issued after May 1, 2017, may still display the existing design format as USCIS will continue using existing card stock until current supplies are depleted. Both the existing and the new Green Cards and EADs will remain valid until the expiration date shown on the card.

Certain EADs held by individuals with Temporary Protected Status (TPS) and other designated categories have been automatically extended beyond the validity date on the card.

Employers, please note that both the older version and the new cards are acceptable for Form I-9, Employment Eligibility Verification, E-Verify, and Systematic Alien Verification for Entitlements (SAVE).

Some older Green Cards do not have an expiration date.  These older Green Cards without an expiration date remain valid.

Individuals who have Green Cards without an expiration date may want to consider applying for a replacement card bearing an expiration date. Obtaining the replacement card will reduce the likelihood of fraud or tampering if the card is ever lost or stolen.

Nalini S Mahadevan, JD, MBA ▪ nsm@mlolaw.us ▪ Office: 314.932.7111 & 314.402.2024

Disclaimer:  Not meant as legal advice! For information purposes only.

 

Post Footer automatically generated by Add Post Footer Plugin for wordpress.

Social Share Toolbar
Facebooktwittergoogle_pluslinkedinrssyoutubeby feather

The Good Faith Criterion: Lessons Learned From US vs. M&D Masonry and Form I-9

In 2010, ICE alleged in two counts that M&D Masonry committed 364 violations against the Immigration and Nationality Act (INA). The first count charged that 277 of M&D’s employees didn’t correctly complete section 1 and 2 of Form I-9; the second count charged that M&D didn’t have proper paperwork for 87 additional employees. The company refuted ICE’s allegations, and protested to 40 of the 277 violations named in Count I, and six of the 87 violations named in Count II.

For Count I, the government contests that M&D failed to ensure that:

  • 34 employees signed the attestation in section 1 of Form I-9;
  • 60 employees checked a box in section 1;
  • three employees attested to only one status in section 1; and
  • 10 employees who attested to status as lawful permanent residents entered their respected alien numbers on the adjacent line.

For Count II, M&D failed to:

  • complete section 2 of Form I-9 properly;
  • sign section 2;
  • record the issuing authority for a List B document;
  • provide the document number for List A, List B, and List C documents; and
  • review both List B and C documents.

Additionally, M&D instead accepted unacceptable documents, and didn’t examine or authenticate many I-9 forms within three business days of the individual’s hire date.

Among the defenses, the company alleges that the proposed monetary fines are exorbitant and do not consider the M&D’s financial abilities; and that ICE’s enforcement practices are unreasonable and impulsive. On January 6, 2014, ICE revised its complaint and retracted 25 of the named persons in Count I. According to the US government, M&D supplied satisfactory evidence that demonstrated that those employees had been dismissed before ICE’s inquiry, and wasn’t within the purview of the audit.

Lesson 1

A newspaper article is actually what led ICE to inspect and fine M&D Masonry. On April 30, 2010 an article titled “Illegal hiring for airport construction?” was printed in the Atlanta Journal Constitution. The article cited a hiring foreman for M&D who said that the company was hiring people without sufficient work authorization. ICE conducted a worksite enforcement inquiry on May 7, 2010; subsequently, ICE served M&D with a Notice of Inspection (NOI) for current and past employee I-9 forms from May 7, 2007 to May 7, 2010, and for employment records, payroll data, and wage and hour reports. ICE then issued M&D with slew of other notices throughout 2010 and 2012, including a Notice of Technical and Procedural Failures (NTPF), a Notice of Suspect Documents (NSD), and a Notice of Intent to Fine (NIF).

Lesson 2 & 3

M&D was timely in their response to ICE, and filed a Request for Hearing a month after ICE issued the NIF.

After acquiring and studying M&D’s Wage Inquiry by Employer Number records—obtained from the Georgia Department of Labor—Count II of ICE’s allegations concluded that M&D failed to prepare I-9 forms for 87 employees. M&D’s violations in Count II are far more egregious than Count I because failure to properly prepare and/or present I-9 forms destroys the purpose of the INA.

Penalties

M&D believed that ICE should fine the company based on its financial means; however, the governing statute asserts that such consideration is only applicable in five certain circumstances; M&D did not fall within the scope of those circumstances. While some OCAHO cases have previously taken financial means into consideration when determining penalties in a case, such leeway is not required of the government.

ICE fined M&D $332,813.25 for 339 violations, where each violation cost $981.75. Each violation incurred a baseline penalty of $935, also taking into account the employer’s 84% error rate. ICE heightened the penalties by 5 percent for the significance of the violations—over 100 I-9 forms were purportedly verified by signature stamp, although section I of the forms reflected various dates—and 5 percent for the size of the company: M&D had been in business for over 20 years, employed over 400 workers in a three year period, had a payroll of $4.3 million, and a large amount of contracted work. ICE handled the inclusion of unauthorized workers and absence of previous violations as neutral; ICE also lessened the penalties by 5 percent due to the good faith criterion.

ICE was charitable by applying the good faith criterion in M&D’s case. The good faith criterion is gauged by a study of whether the employer tried to comply with the INA obligations before the delivery of the NOI. Since M&D’s case isn’t the most extreme example of the INA violations, the penalties were lessened to a grand total of $228,300.

Takeaway

Incorrectly preparing and/or presenting a Form I-9 is one of the grievous paperwork violations an employer can make. Good faith is only taken into account when an employer actually attempts to determine its legal duties and yield to them. When judging suitable violations of the INA, the following must be favored:

  1. size of the employer;
  2. employer’s good faith;
  3. gravity of violations;
  4. whether an individual is an unauthorized alien; and
  5. employer’s history of previous violations.
See you in my next blog.
Nalini S Mahadevan, JD, MBA
Immigration Attorney St. Louis, Missouri
nsm@mlolaw.us

logo
The information is not meant to create a client-attorney relationship. This blog is for informational purposes only, and is not a substitute for legal advice. Situations may differ based on the facts.Copyright 2014. All rights reserved.

Post Footer automatically generated by Add Post Footer Plugin for wordpress.

Social Share Toolbar
Facebooktwittergoogle_pluslinkedinrssyoutubeby feather

The New and Improved I-9 Form

On March 8, 2013, USCIS published a new Form I-9 for employers to use for new hires, which is for immediate use. USCIS received over 6,000 comments on the form and has tried to incorporate some of the suggestions. To ensure that the correct form is being used, look for the form’s date in the lower right-hand corner of the form.

When Should Employers Use the New I-9

The new form is to be used for all new hires. The 3 day rule remains, which is to fill Section 1 within 3 days of starting work. The form can also be filled in advance, as long as an offer of employment has been made and accepted. If the old form was used and the employee has not started work, a new form should be used in lieu of the old form.

The new form should be used for both US citizens and non-citizens, if they are working within the geographical boundaries of the United States of America. If a new office or an employee is hired in Mexico or Canada, there is no obligation to maintain a Form I-9 for the new hire. Employers should use the new Forms I-9 from 8 March, 2013 onwards. Older forms dated 02/02/2009 and 08/07/2009 can be used until May 7th, 2013.

The Spanish version can be filled out by new hires only in Puerto Rico. On the mainland, the Spanish version can be utilized as a translation tool for Spanish speaking new hires, but only an English language version Form I-9 can be filled out by both the employer and employee and retained by the employer.

The New Form

The new form is 7 pages of instruction and two pages of form to be filled. Section 1 occupies its own page, with expanded areas for the employee to fill personal identifying information. The expanded area allows work-authorized non-citizens to complete their information.

Page 2 of the form is divided between Section 2 and 3. Section 2 is renamed to include authorized representative review and Section 3 is now called “Reverification and Rehires”, instead of “Updating and Reverification”. Section 3 is to be used for employees who return to work after an absence of time. Once the initial I-9 is filled out by the employee, the employer cannot ask legal permanent residents or US citizens to present new documents to complete reverification for work authorization.

The Takeaway

The form is more detailed and thus, may have more pitfalls. Print the new form on both sides of the paper to keep both pages together. The 67 page book of “Instructions” is now called “Guidance”. The important step is to start using the new form and to cease using the old form. Section 1 cannot be populated by electronic programs used to ‘onboard’ new hires. Employer liability, audits and monetary fines remain the same under the old and new forms.

We are available to discuss the new form or needs for training and assistance.

See you in my next blog.

Nalini S Mahadevan, JD, MBA
Immigration Attorney
Lowenbaum Partnership, LLC
St. Louis, Missouri

The information is not meant to create a client-attorney relationship. This blog is for informational purposes only, and is not a substitute for legal advice. Situations may differ based on the facts.

Tara Mahadevan

Copyright 2013. All rights reserved.

Post Footer automatically generated by Add Post Footer Plugin for wordpress.

Social Share Toolbar
Facebooktwittergoogle_pluslinkedinrssyoutubeby feather

Negotiating I-9 Fines

In my previous blog, I wrote about OCAHO negotiating I-9 fines. To negotiate fines either with ICE or OCAHO, the employer must be willing to file a brief with OCAHO to request a hearing, and then ICE may be willing to ‘come to the table’.

Prior to the hearing, the employer and counsel must analyse each count against the company, either to accept or refute and prepare a brief accordingly. Both ICE and OCAHO consider the 5 factor test before negotiating a fine:

  1. The size of the employer’s business,
  2. The employer’s good faith,
  3. The severity of the violation(s),
  4. Whether individuals involved were unauthorized aliens, and
  5. A history of former violations by the employer.

Employers must be careful to tender only Forms I-9, which are for current employees, and refrain from tendering purged documents.

Methodical analysis of the NIF (Notice of Intent to Fine), counts and legal basis is a must in order to be ready to negotiate with ICE and, if necessary, to request a hearing from OCAHO.

See you in my next blog.

Nalini S Mahadevan, JD, MBA
Immigration Attorney
Lowenbaum Partnership, LLC
St. Louis, Missouri

The information is not meant to create a client-attorney relationship. This blog is for informational purposes only, and is not a substitute for legal advice. Situations may differ based on the facts.

Tara Mahadevan

Copyright 2013. All rights reserved.

Post Footer automatically generated by Add Post Footer Plugin for wordpress.

Social Share Toolbar
Facebooktwittergoogle_pluslinkedinrssyoutubeby feather

Planning For the New Year: Form I-9 and E-Verify

With the new year approaching, employers can make some changes and improvements to processing and maintaining Form I-9s. There are Form I-9 best practices that employers should follow to avoid being fined by ICE in an audit. The following are methods to ensure that you, as an employer, are complying with Form I-9 guidelines that have been implemented by USCIS and enforced by ICE. Please also see my Form I-9 series.
  1. Train your team in-house on how to complete I-9 forms and use E-verify successfully.
  2. Don’t be creative while completing forms. If, for instance, the HR specialist forgot to date the form, or the employee did not fill in Section 1 fully — don’t attempt to back-date the form and ask to the employee to complete Section 1. There is always someone who knows the situation and is watching. You could be threatened with punishment, or other employees could rat you out.
  3. The days of the wild, wild west are gone. Today requires a culture of compliance with the rules and laws. It is too expensive for employers and companies to do otherwise.
  4. Hire outside counsel to conduct a year-end audit of all the new forms created since the beginning of the year. At a recent immigration conference, I heard that more than 85% of I-9 forms are filled incorrectly, which means that self-audit is probably not a good idea. Having another employee conduct an audit can be a tricky situation because he/she may not want to point out a superior’s mistakes. The best way is to engage outside counsel to perform the audit; this audit can be part of a wage and hour audit.
  5. Brainstorm about your on-boarding policies and your “exit” interviews. Review policies for document examination; and recording and re-verification of documents for various visa-based and non-visa-based employees. Aim for consistent employee procedures — this means creating a handbook for procedures. Ensure your employees review the handbook before they attempt to examine and record documents on the I-9.
  6. Beware of audits by other federal agencies — they share information and are looking to collect fines. A wage and hour audit can turn into an I-9 and E-verify audit nightmare.
  7. Audits take time and are an unproductive task: they cost company money and employee time, and lead to lost profits. Take the time to understand the I-9 process.
  8. Audits ruin company reputations — names of companies that are audited are made public on federal websites. ICE, OSC and DOL publish announcements of audits.   Sushi Zushi, a San Antonio restaurant, lost workers and shut down after an announcement of an ICE audit. Employees left in droves; without employees, the restaurant had to shut down 8 locations.
  9. The new I-9 will create new challenges. Allocate a budget for training and compliance.
  10. Reduce liability by purging old I-9s.

See you in my next blog.

Nalini S Mahadevan, JD, MBA
Immigration Attorney
Lowenbaum Partnership, LLC
St. Louis, Missouri

The information is not meant to create a client-attorney relationship. This blog is for informational purposes only, and is not a substitute for legal advice. Situations may differ based on the facts.

Tara Mahadevan

Copyright 2012. All rights reserved.

Post Footer automatically generated by Add Post Footer Plugin for wordpress.

Social Share Toolbar
Facebooktwittergoogle_pluslinkedinrssyoutubeby feather