From the Champaign County Chamber of Commerce:
Immigration Reform: Myths and Implementation
An Issue Forum for Chamber MembersDate: Thursday, July 13, 2006
Time: 4:00 through 5:30 p.m.
Location: CHAMPAIGN COUNTY CHAMBER OF COMMERCE ”“ Large Conference Room - 1817 S. Neil Street, Suite 201, Champaign, ILBoth the United States House of Representatives and Senate have passed bills that would provide for the most substantial overhaul of immigration law in 20 years. The next step in the process is for the Senate and House leaders to meet in conference to try to come to an acceptable compromise on their separate bills. Both pieces of legislation require employers to participate in an electronic employment eligibility verification system (EEEVS) that would distinguish between legal and illegal workers. The House version requires employer participation in EEEVS within three to six years. The Senate however demands a shorter timeline for compliance: within 18 months. What remains certain at this point is that an entirely new mandated hiring process for employers and an increase in penalties and paperwork will be coming. Also some employers could also be in danger of losing workers”â€Ânearly 5% of the workforce is undocumented and many of them are working “on the books” with false documents.
The Chamber's Government Council is sponsoring a discussion forum open to all Chamber members to share their thoughts and concerns about immigration reform legislation and its impact on the business community.
The forum is free to Chamber members and while reservations are not required they are appreciated. To reserve your seat, please contact Norma Wesley by telephone at 217.359.1791 or by e-mail at NormaW@champaigncounty.org. For more information, contact Pat Shae by phone or PatS@champaigncounty.org.
One of the things often left out of the discussion of illegal workers - employers get letters from the Soc Sec Admin when the ss#'s and names don't match up on the year-end payroll tax filing. BUT, employers are instructed that termination of employees based on this information is illegal. This does not sound like a gov't that really wants illegal workers to quit working.
When they say Chamber members, who are they referring to?
Businesses that are members of the CCCC, I think. If you want to attend, send Norma an email and see what they say. Illinimedia is doubtless a member anyway.
I got a chance to form some views about the immigration issue back in 1998 when I did some temp work at a local factory. While the employers saw that they were having a hard time finding good workers, the competition for the jobs on the assembly line was fierce. It was back during the "Welfare to Work" initiative and, it was my impression that the average American unskilled laborer was not be able to successfully compete with the competition from the illegal immigrants.
I was there about six months, then came back a year and a half later. During that time, the illegal immigrants had taken over whole areas of the plant and, in fact, it turned out that about 50% of all the employees were actually illegal immigrants. How this came to light was that, after 9/11, they brought some software to verify the social security numbers. It was amazing to see about half the entire plant clear out in just a couple of months time.
Alot of the competition was fair. Some wasn't. It was very ugly and I have my share of horror stories about what I saw go on there. But the bottom line was that the illegal immigrants were really competing many Americans and legal immigrants out of jobs. They also worked so hard and so fast for so little that they created a standard of performance that was unsustainable even for them. By the time I came back, some of the lines had been pared down about 40% (from seven workers on two lines to four) and the women themselves were complaining of being overwhelmed and developing joint problems. Meanwhile, the men who had worked their way up in the company to technicians positions were bitter because they were getting paid about 2/3 of what the American technicians were making.
Illegal immigrants working in CU?
If competition between businesses is a good thing, what's wrong with competition between individuals (besides the illegal part)?
"If competition between businesses is a good thing, what's wrong with competition between individuals (besides the illegal part)?"
In and of itself, on a fair playing field, there's nothing wrong with competition for jobs. What's wrong is that the illegal part affects the competition for jobs, as well. Employers are able to exploit illegal workers, driving down wages and eroding working conditions.
The "competition" for jobs then becomes less and less fair, resulting in a race to the bottom. Eventually you create a massive underclass by vastly increasing the number of working poor among all citizens, in addition to illegals.
"If competition between businesses is a good thing, what's wrong with competition between individuals (besides the illegal part)?"
I will agree that competition can be a good thing, but it isn't always.
Much of what I saw wasn't constructive. For example, a new worker would come on a line. They would be showed how to do the job, but in such a way that it was almost impossible to do it correctly. Then the other workers on the line, who all were already highly competant, would slow down so that the line wouldn't run efficiently. When the supervisor would come to find out why the line wasn't running efficiently, it would be blamed on the new guy. That person would be switched to a different line. If the same thing happened on the next line, which was not all that unlikely, the person would be let go.
In a high paced production environment, even if the job is unskilled, you need a solid forty eight hours to learn to work up to pace and develop the coordination and rhythm necessary to keep up with the line. If nobody took you under their wing, showed you how to do your job correctly and covered your back while you got your bearings, you were out on your fanny and never knew what hit you.
I thought that it was very counterproductive in terms of our welfare to work iniative, created an unfavorable outlook for anyone in our society needing genuine rehab opportunities, and overall was undermining our efforts to get people off the public dole.
I think it will be interesting to see what the Chamber's position is on the issue of enforcement by employers. That's always been a large part of the immigration puzzle that's been missing in the past.
"The “competition” for jobs then becomes less and less fair, resulting in a race to the bottom. Eventually you create a massive underclass by vastly increasing the number of working poor among all citizens, in addition to illegals."
That's one of the reasons this smoking ban is so dangerous, because it undermines the right to self-determination of so many of our small businesses and their patrons. One of the prerequisites for a free society is a strong middle class. Ours is dwindling.
There are so few areas of the economy in which small business owners can now successfully compete. Once all we have is a nation of walmart employees and mcdonald's workers, we can pretty much kiss our freedom goodbye.
Also, with regard to the concept of the 80% of non-smokers voting to outlaw the social behavior of the 20% of smokers for the "public good", what happens when we are in a global world system and the Chinese are voting on such "unhealthy" American traditions as, say, the freedom of religion? Or the existence of God?
Wasn't there some kind of concept labeling religion as the "opium of the masses". If that was believed, religion could be banned using many of the same arguements.
The immigration law should be improved.