labor lawAdivision of labor law center

 After more than 15 months  of debate, the E-Verify mandate for federal contractors went into effect on September 8, 2009. The regulation also applies to most sub-contractors working on federal projects.

The new regulations apply to any business that signs or renews a federal contract worth $100,000 or more, on or after September 8, 2009. Federal contractors are also required to ensure that any sub-contractor they hire complies with the E-Verify regulations, which adds another layer of administration for many employers.

Employers may think they are covered because they already use E-Verify for all new hires, but they will be mistaken. The new regulations require employers to enroll anew in E-Verify, designating their business as a federal contractor.

A unique feature of the system is that employers must verify the work authorization of existing employees working on federal projects, as well as new hire. This means that even an employee who has been with the company for 50 years must prove that he or she is legally authorized to work in the U.S.

In a business where a single employee may handle varied tasks, it can be difficult to determine who is and is not working on a particular federal contract. In that case, the employer can verify the work authorization status of all existing employees.

However, if an employer chose to verify the work authorization status of only Hispanic employees, or only those who were non-citizens, that would be illegal discrimination based on race, color or national ancestry. The employer must re-verify all employees, or only those working on federal projects.

As part of the DHS E-Verify system, an employer can require that an employee or new hire who is a citizen use a Social Security card as one of the identity documents required on the I-9. Employers who do not use E-Verify still cannot dictate which identity documents an employee chooses to use, from the list provided on the I-9 form.

During July, both the U.S. House and Senate took measures that would require more employers to use E-Verify, including federal contractors and companies that benefit from federal stimulus spending.

The U.S. Senate passed an amendment to the 2010 Department of Homeland Security budget sponsored by Senator Jeff Sessions of Alabama, which will require federal contractors to use E-Verify, and extend that program for three more years.

According to Senator Sessions, this amendment will prevent illegal immigrants from being hired for construction projects funded by the federal stimulus packages. A similar bill was introduced in the House of Representatives.

The Society for Human Resource Management or SHRM has long opposed the mandatory use of E-Verify. SHRM argues that a biometric component such as fingerprints or retinal scan needs to be added to E-Verify. The problem is identity theft. Suppose a new employee presents documents for E-Verify as “John Turner”. E-Verify can check that John Turner can legally work in the U.S. However, there is no way for E-Verify to determine if the person presenting those documents is actually John Turner or not. SHRM and New York Senator Charles Schumer argue that E-Verify should not be used until the system can authenticate identity. Opponents claim that such a biometric system would be a violation of privacy.

While a number of states require employers to use E-Verify, federal contractors are still in limbo. In 2008, President George W. Bush signed an executive order that would have required federal contractors to implement E-Verify. However, it has been delayed and is currently being challenged in court by SHRM and other employer groups.

Nevertheless, many employers continue to voluntarily adopt the E-Verify system. E-Verify compares information provided by the (more…)

Employers throughout the U.S. are carefully watching what is happening these days in the District of Columbia.

D.C. has approved a controversial new act known as the Accrued Sick and Safe Leave Act of 2008, which essentially requires employers to provide paid sick leave to their workers. The act may be the harbinger of paid sick leave elsewhere, and has become an important topic among HR professionals.

Employees who would be eligible are those who, first of all, spend at least 50% of their work time in the District of Columbia. They must also have accumulated a year of continuous service and at least 1,000 hours of work in the previous 12 months, under the proposed act.

The new law is quite broad. Employers would be required to give paid sick leave to any of these eligible employees for any absences connected with (more…)

The controversial Accrued Sick and Safe Leave Act of 2008 went into effect late in 2008 in the District of Columbia.

Human Resources professionals are watching closely because this new act requires employers to provide mandatory paid sick leave.

Such paid sick leave may become the next hot labor topic. Employers may comment on the new regulation. After that, the D.C. Department of Employment Services or DOES will release the regulations and their accompanying (and long-awaited) FAQ guidelines.

The new act actually went into effect November 13, 2008. The DOES, however, just recently issued regulations for employers to follow.

The new law mandates that all eligible employees working in the D.C. area must be given paid sick leave for any absences that are connected to either mental or (more…)

The District of Columbia recently released rules that will end employer’s confusion regarding the controversial Accrued Sick and Safe Leave Act of 2008.

That law requires all employers to provide paid sick leave to eligible employees working in the District of Columbia for any absences related to physical or mental illness. The law also requires employers to give workers paid time off for preventative medical care or family care.

One of the more unusual aspects of the law is that it requires employers to give “safe” leave to employees who are associated with stalking, domestic violence or sexual abuse.

The Accrued Sick and Safe Leave Act of 2008 went into effect on November 13, 2008. However, the D.C. Department of Employment Services or DOES just recently issued regulations for employers to follow.

Employers can comment on the “proposed” rules. Once the (more…)