Thursday, July 10, 2008

Who is Who in the Immigration Debate! Who has Hidden Agendas?

click on picture for larger view:Who is Who in the Immigration Debate? It can be confusing! The American Public believes there are only two sides to this discussion with both sides pointing fingers and making outlandish accusations against each other. Once you study this issue and peel back that old onion, behold, you see what is really happening! In addition to PRO and ANTI, the Administration and Business each have agendas. Some also have hidden agendas! The American Public is being fooled. They are being manipulated. Here is a peek into the Business perspective. (Note: All italic Fonts are my added comments into this article.)
The New York Times reports:
Employers Fight Tough Measures on Immigration
Under pressure from the toughest crackdown on illegal immigration in two decades, employers across the country are fighting back in state legislatures, the federal courts and city halls. Business groups have resisted measures that would revoke the licenses of employers of illegal immigrants. They are proposing alternatives that would revise federal rules for verifying the identity documents of new hires and would expand programs to bring legal immigrant laborers. Though the pushback is coming from both Democrats and Republicans, in many places it is reopening the rift over immigration that troubled the Republican Party last year. Businesses, generally Republican stalwarts, are standing up to others within the party who accuse them of undercutting border enforcement and jeopardizing American jobs by hiring illegal immigrants as cheap labor. Employers in Arizona were stung by a law passed last year by the Republican-controlled Legislature that revokes the licenses of businesses caught twice with illegal immigrants. They won approval in this year’s session of a narrowing of that law making clear that it did not apply to workers hired before this year. Last week, an Arizona employers’ group submitted more than 284,000 signatures — far more than needed — for a November ballot initiative that would make the 2007 law even friendlier to employers...After years of laissez-faire enforcement, federal immigration agents have been conducting raids at a brisk pace, with 4,940 arrests in workplaces last year.
Although immigration has long been a federal issue, more than 175 bills were introduced in states this year concerning the employment of immigrants, according to the National Conference of State Legislatures. State lawmakers said they had acted against businesses, often in response to fervent demands from voters, to curb job incentives that were attracting shadow populations of illegal immigrants. “Illegal immigration is a threat to the safety of Missouri families and the security of their jobs,” Gov. Matt Blunt (up for re election, panderer of the panderers), a Republican, said after the Missouri Legislature passed a crackdown law in May. “I am pleased that lawmakers heeded my call to continue the fight where Washington has failed to act.”
But because of the mobilization of businesses, the state proposals this year have increasingly reflected their concerns. State lawmakers “are starting to be more responsive to the employer community because of its engagement in the issue,” said Ann Morse, who monitors immigration for the national legislature conference.
The offensive by businesses has been spurred by the federal enforcement crackdown, by inaction in Congress on immigration legislation and by a rush of punitive state measures last year that created a checkerboard of conflicting requirements. Many employers found themselves on the political defensive as they grappled, even in an economic downturn, with shortages of low-wage labor.
Mike Gilsdorf, the owner of a 37-year-old landscaping nursery in Littleton, Colo., saw the need for action by businesses last winter when he advertised with the Labor Department, as he does every year, for 40 seasonal workers at market-rate wages to plant, prune and carry his shrubs in the summer heat. Only one local worker responded to the notice, he said, and then did not show up for the job. Mr. Gilsdorf was able to fill his labor force with legal immigrants from Mexico through a federal guest worker program. But that program has a tight annual cap, and Mr. Gilsdorf realized that he might not be so lucky next year. His business could fail, he said, and then even his American workers would lose their jobs. “We’re not hiring illegals, we’re not paying under the table,” Mr. Gilsdorf said. “But if we don’t get in under the cap and nobody is answering our ads, we don’t have employees.”(Liquid, need your analysis here) His group, Colorado Employers for Immigration Reform, is pressing Congress for a much larger and more flexible guest worker program.
“The silent masses of businesses out there should have been on the phone with their Congressional representatives calling for rational reform,” said Hobey Bauhan, president of the Virginia Poultry Federation (the truth from one of the worst offenders), whose members include some of the biggest low-wage employers in the state. Virginia lawmakers ultimately adopted verification rules aimed at employers who systematically hire illegal immigrants. In this legislative session, Arizona businesses rallied behind a bill to create what would have been the first state guest worker program in the country. Their advertising campaign used the slogan “What part of legal don’t you understand?” — a tweak of the battle cry of their opponents, who use the same phrase with the word “illegal.” Arizona employers said they knew that passage would be difficult for the bill, because only the federal government can issue visas to immigrant workers. Although the bill never came to a vote, (FAKE!!!) employers said the debate helped make their views known in Washington. (Political pandering by politicians up for re-election)
“It’s a message to the federal government,” said Joe Sigg, director of government relations for the Arizona Farm Bureau, “that we need a legal and reliable means to recruit workers.” Employers’ groups have not succeeded everywhere. Under a bill passed this year, Mississippi is the first state to make it a felony for an illegal immigrant to work. The measure also allows terminated employees to sue their employer if they were replaced by an illegal immigrant.
President Bush on June 9 ordered all federal contractors to check new workers with E-Verify. The administration is pressing forward with a rule that would pressure employers to fire within 90 days any worker whose identity information does not match the records of the Social Security Administration, as frequently happens with illegal immigrants. The first version of the rule was held up last year by a federal court injunction. While many businesses have come forward, they say they speak for many others with immigrant workers that are lying low after finding that the crackdown has left them in a perilous legal bind. While raids and sanctions are increasing, employers with low-wage immigrant workers are barred by antidiscrimination rules from examining identity documents of new hires too closely or checking the immigration status of employees after they have been hired. “The problem for business is that despite their complete compliance with the law, it is inevitable for employers with large numbers of immigrant workers that a certain percentage will be unauthorized workers using false documents,” said Peter Schey, a lawyer who represents two California companies facing scrutiny by federal immigration agents. “The system is just as broken for employers as it is for immigrants.” (Excuse or Reality?)
One employer facing this problem is the chief executive of a $20 million company on the outskirts of Los Angeles that assembles electronic parts. She said she had come to fear that her company — including its legal workers — is at risk of being crippled by an immigration raid. The executive spoke on the condition that neither she nor her company be identified by name, for fear of attracting immigration authorities. A human resources manager who worked for the company a decade ago hired a number of workers without conducting an extra check of their documents with the Social Security Administration, the executive said. Now she has received notices from the agency of mismatches in the identity documents of 20 workers who were hired 10 years ago, out of 90 workers on the assembly floor today. Because of the antidiscrimination rules, the executive cannot check to be certain that the 20 workers, mainly Hispanic women, are illegal. Moreover, they have advanced through training, she said, and excel at their jobs, which require the repetitive assembly of tiny parts by hand, often under microscopes. “I can’t replace those people,” the executive said. She said that despite offering competitive wages from $9 to $17 an hour, the company had failed over the years in repeated efforts to attract nonimmigrant workers because of the state’s tight technology labor market and because of the nature of the work, exacting and tedious. If the workers were fired or arrested, she said, she could fail to meet her contracts. “If we have to terminate 20 people, that’s going to jeopardize 100 other jobs of people who are legal, Americans, people who are making a good living,” she said. (Liquid, your analysis?)
Angelo Paparelli, an immigration lawyer who represents the company, said: “This is not an employer who wants to turn a blind eye to lawbreaking. She is facing a tightening of the enforcement vise that does not take into account Congress’s failure to create a workable system.”
California employers were shocked by the raid earlier this year at Micro Solutions Enterprises, an established manufacturer of printer cartridges that is based in Los Angeles and has more than 800 workers. Officials said 138 workers were arrested. In a message to his customers, Avi Wazana, the Micro Solutions owner, said the company had been verifying the legal status of all new hires through federal programs for nearly a year.
Bush administration officials said the crackdown was the price employers must pay to persuade voters to agree to open the gates to immigrant workers. In an interview, Mr. Chertoff, the homeland security secretary, said, “We are not going to be able to satisfy the American people on a legal temporary worker program until they are convinced that we will have a stick as well as a carrot.”


Liquidmicro said...

"Because of the antidiscrimination rules, the executive cannot check to be certain that the 20 workers, mainly Hispanic women, are illegal."

She can't go back and re-run the documents that were used 10 years ago by her HR manager. However, if she receives SS No Match letters, then she must follow the instructions of the No Match Letters.

Safe Harbor for Employers Who Receive a No-Match Letter

The DHS regulations and the ICE letter describe with specificity what steps employers should take upon receipt of a no-match letter: 1) verifying within 30 days that the mismatch was not the result of a record-keeping error on the employer’s part; 2) requesting that the employee confirm the accuracy of employment records; 3) asking the employee to resolve the issue with SSA; 4) if these steps lead to resolution of the problem, follow instructions on the no-match letter itself to correct information with SSA, and retain a record of the verification with SSA; and 5) where the information could not be corrected, complete a new I-9 form without using the questionable Social Security number and instead using documentation presented by the employee that conforms with the I-9 document identity requirements and includes a photograph and other biographic data. Employers unable to confirm employment through these procedures risk liability for violating the law by knowingly continuing to employ unauthorized persons.

ICE has developed a comprehensive interactive Safe Harbor Information Center which will answer no-match related questions, or inquiries may be directed to ICE at 800-421-7105.

Liquidmicro said...

She is under the presumption that she must terminate them thus leading to possible laying off of jobs for other 'legal' workers. She needs to follow the rules as outlined on her "No-Match Letters", if she does that, she will be cleared of any and all possible future charges. If she does not follow the rules of the 'letters' she risks lawsuits by firing her employees that she is assuming to be "Illegal". As we all know, Federal Law trumps state law.

Liquidmicro said...

"But that program has a tight annual cap, and Mr. Gilsdorf realized that he might not be so lucky next year. His business could fail, he said, and then even his American workers would lose their jobs. “We’re not hiring illegals, we’re not paying under the table,” Mr. Gilsdorf said. “But if we don’t get in under the cap and nobody is answering our ads, we don’t have employees.”"

Maybe he should offer more than just wages. He needs to lure workers to him, unless he offers benefits and something more than the other guy, he won't get his workers, unless he gets continuously lucky with the h-2b visa.

What ever happened to companies offering benefits? Employees have lost everything when it came to the work place environment. The owners pay less and less for the employee, while costs continue to increase for everything. The laborer is now nothing more than a replaceable commidity, if Joe won't due it for $8.00 per hour, Juan will, and Juan will do it for no health or dental benefits, too.

Now, you as an employer, what would you do? Which would you hire, Joe or Juan?

What would you want as an employee? If you were Joe would you work for this company?

Liquidmicro said...

"While raids and sanctions are increasing, employers with low-wage immigrant workers are barred by antidiscrimination rules from examining identity documents of new hires too closely or checking the immigration status of employees after they have been hired. “The problem for business is that despite their complete compliance with the law, it is inevitable for employers with large numbers of immigrant workers that a certain percentage will be unauthorized workers using false documents,” said Peter Schey, a lawyer who represents two California companies facing scrutiny by federal immigration agents. “The system is just as broken for employers as it is for immigrants.” "

"examining identity documents of new hires too closely" This is BS. It's only for employees that they have already employed. New hires, if thought to have fake/false documentation, they have every 'right' to further investigate and/or ask for other I-9 documentation to verify the information.

This is Big Business just wanting cheap labor with no strings attached. Look to my previous post above about benefits.

Dee said...

Ok Liquid. Here is what I dont understand.

GM just went through layoffs of its senior, high paid, high benefit employees. They did this so they could hire $14 an hour, no benefit employees. We all talked about this. Most on your side said that was ok because that was the only way GM could stay in business.

How is this different than what other businesses are doing. In order to compete competitively, they need to cut down on the highest cost, employee wages and benefits.

I do not agree with Agriprocessors mode of operations. They were exploitive, abusive and evil. However, I can understand what GM did.

Aren´t most of the employers like GM and seeking ways to stay in business?


are they just trying to rake in the profits by exploiting and underpaying illegal immigrants?

Liquidmicro said...

Aren´t most of the employers like GM seeking ways to stay in business?

All business seek ways to stay in business and profit. For GM to do it, they had to come to an agreement for futures. It was a future look into the company and trying to predict the outcome of the economy.

"Just hours after threatening to strike at one or more GM plants, the UAW and the General have agreed on two-tier wages for certain job types. The move to clarify which jobs were "non-core" at the national level came as local UAWs were threatening to strike because they felt GM was asking for too many lower-paid positions at their plants. The more regimented deal identifies 16,000 positions that will soon be paid $14 per hour, which will save GM up to a half-billion dollars per year. It will take years to fill all of those positions because GM has to entice existing workers to retire before they can be replaced."

[Source: Detroit News]

Note: those $14 per hour positions won't be in use until now employed workers either retire or enter into buy outs. That doesn't mean that the $14 per hour position will be any less with benefits.

The auto industry doesn't have the problem as Agriprocessors has in way of regulations. The auto industry is pretty well regulated, while the meat processing has been loosely regulated.

Da Tiger said...

I agree with your outline of the Pro vs ANTI debate. If you look very closely, at the list labeled “employers hidden agenda,” you will notice that it is, in essence, the very definition of UNION BUSTING. To me, that has been the employers’ main goal all along. In my opinion, unions are what made America’s middle class as strong as it had been. However, unions are being decimated at every opportunity.
Organizations, such as the United Farm Workers (UFW), have finally made a few inroads towards unionizing farm workers. But, as can be seen at

their progress is stymied at every turn. These are LEGAL American citizen workers. But, as your outline shows, the employer’s hidden agenda negates ALL unionization efforts. The sad fact is that whenever the employers use a broad brush attack against illegal workers, their same tactics are coincidently working against legal workers also. I would encourage everyone reading your blog, to read the UFW site, and if they are so inclined, to click on the button showing their support of the UFW union.

dianne said...

My dad was a Teamster. He worked on a receiving dock, back breaking work, night shift. He had 6 kids. I'm 61, the oldest of the bunch. We scraped by but thank God there was a union that provided decent wages cause even back then, that union job afforded us a car (one), we owned a house (old, but ok and room to plant a huge garden), and insurance and a pension for dad's later years.

Show me a labor job today for a person with a minimal education that can support 9 people. I don't think such a job exists, but they did back then, lots of jobs such as those including meatpacking, that AMERICANS did. Even though the employers most surely abused them, at least they paid them a living wage and a lot of that was due to union protection.

Construction is the only field I can think of today that pays (or did) well enough for a family to live on for a person with a minimal education. And, that field has been inceasingly taken over by illegals...who will work for low wages, day labor, no benefits, etc.

You see, Dee, we are losing the standard of living for people who are not college educated and those people are suffering more every day as their wages go down and their benefits are lost. It's not that Americans are too lazy to do the job, it's that the jobs don't pay anything anymore and benefits are almost nonexistent in those fields. They can't survive. Their standard of living is going backwards.

When you couple the above with manufacturing moving out of the country, you've got a whole class of people, millions of them, who can't make it and when you add the downward pressure that illegal immigrants put on the wages and benefits, American citizens understandably cry foul.

And the employer - well he only gives a rip about the cheapest labor he can find. The Chamber of Commerce is the single biggest lobby in Congress and yes, the Republicans (thankfully not all of them) cave in to their demands time and time again.

And, as for the benevolent democrats, don't kid yourself. They live off of people being economically depressed so they can claim they will "help" them and get their votes. They want people to be hurting.

It's all a big joke.

dianne said...

Oh, and a little housekeeping matter. I referred to 9 people in my family cause grandma also lived with us.

Dee said...

Da Tiger,
You are right. Business´s goal is to bust the unions. The Agriprocessors case is a classic example. They solicited, hired and provided false papers to Guatemalens at their Postville plants. They exploited and abused them. Then, when they were attempting to join the union, they contacted ICE for the sweeps to clean up their problem. The brought this all on themselves! The union is still following up and staying with this investigation. I am hearing there is so much pressure on this case there may in fact be indictments against Rubashkin and his sons in the weeks ahead.

Dee said...

You are right. The unions used to be strong now they are all but powerless.
In the business environment, you cannot get an office job without a high school diploma. You cannot get into supervision or into management without a degree or a closely monitored plan to complete college within a designated time frame.
There are very few if any manufacturing or labor jobs left that pay a living wage so a family can survive.
The only jobs I know that pay without a degree are sales type jobs and in order to get these jobs you must be talented and agressive.
Jobs in the Auto industry are now paying only $14 an hour. That seems to be the standard top wage now. Its the same for Construction or Meat packing and most are now without health benefits. Thats only 560 a week, probably about $450 bring home. You cannot pay mortgage, electricity, car, gas and groceries on that amount, much less support a family.

patriot said...

All the more reason not to allow competition for blue collar jobs by illegal aliens. Thanks for making us anti's case.

ultima said...

The concept that is missing from the Anti position relates to the question of what it takes to actually secure the borders. "Secure the borders" is a meaningless phrase unless there is a plan for border defense in depth, that is not just at the border itself but also internally with prompt and effective employer and employee sanctions. The former can involve the denial or removal of the business license, fines and jail time. For the illegal employees it must involve expeditious detection, apprehension, detention and repatriation at their own expense.
Family separations should not be allowed. Minor children must accompany their repatriated parents. Denial of birthright citizenship until age 21 or until the completion of a four year enlistment in the armed forces would facilitate the family problems.

One cannot be for secure borders while at the same time denying us the tools and in depth defense needed to solve the problem.

Those who favor private contractors for border security do so only because businesses have a reputation for getting the job done when there is a profit is to be made. Moreover,businesses may be able to move more quickly without the burden of government red tape.

Dee said...

Ultima, (nice to see you back)

I agree that your side needs to lay out your ideas about how employers should be punished, sanctioned, imprisoned, stopped. This area is severely lacking in your agenda.

Second, be clear. Most here working illegally are nice people. Look at the people at Agriprocessors. Nice people. Brought here, illegally and provided fake papers by the employers.

Why dont you recommend some humanitarian way to repatriate instead of this heinous cattle barn justice, then sent despicable conditions in crony owned detention centers. This is like spitting in the wound then turning the knife? What your side is doing now is NOT working. Time for a change.

Liquidmicro said...

ILLEGALS Upset that UFW is Replacing Them with LEGAL Workers

Here's one for your picture. The UFW working to displace "Illegal Immigrants" Classic, I think!

Mucho Gracias to our good friend and correspondent in Mexico City, Edgar Martinez, for this story & translation.

Summary: The United Farm Workers union (UFW) has signed an agreement with the state of Michoacan in Mexico to recruit and hire LEGAL workers with 6 month temp. worker visas. Well, the illegal aliens who are currently working in the San Joaquin Valley in California are mad because they know they will be displaced and there won’t be a need to “legalize” them.

San Joaquín Valley, California. - Migrants of the San Joaquín Valley reacted with deception and anger upon realizing the agreement that the Union of Agricultural Workers of America (UFW) signed with the government of Michoacán to recruit and obtain temporary worker visas for migrants known as the H-2A that permits them to work for 6 months in agriculture very similar to the bracero program of the 40s, 50s, and 60s.

In April, Arturo Rodriguez, president of the UFW, travelled to Michoacán to sign the pact of cooperation so that at least 20 thousand migrants from Michoacan can enter the United States legaly to work in agriculture. The governor of the state Leonel Godoy and the holder of the Office of the secretary of the Migrant, Alma Griselda Valencia, promised to recruit and to choose the migrants inmunicipalities with the most marginalization in the state.

“Many have arrived from Mexico with work visas and the undocumented Mexicans have been displaced even though we have been working here for years expecting an opportunity to legalize ourselves” added Santiago Joaquín Peral, immigrant from Michoacan, Mexico who lives in Turlock California, who has just returned from his native Santiago Tangamandapio and comments that he has already paid 500 pesos to begin the process of obtaining a visa.

Teresa Martínez, activist from Stockton who coordinated recently a letter campaign opposed to federal changes to the H2-A program, considers that to revive a new bracero program without consulting the migrants that are here is a lack of respect to whom already face a daily struggle to compete for the few jobs in agriculture. “This will divide us more and will create different classes of migrant workers and it will bring new abuses”.

For Miguel Robles, Coordinator of the Alliance for the Rights of the Immigrants in San Francisco, says that these agreements create the sectorización of the immigrant movement. Why don’t they defend the legalization of the undocumented workers that are already here?” and adds “this pact promotes a wave of new workers that will replace those who are already here even the ones that already have papers”.

The majority of the immigrants believe that those who signed this agreement did it as a shameless defense of their interests which does nothing but promote the deportation and marginalization of workers lacking identity papers.

patriot said...

Our side has already layed out a plan to stop the employers from hiring illegal aliens in the first place via the SAVE ACT and mandating the e-verify system. You already know this but object to it. Stiff fines for those who are caught not complying up to and including prison time and loss of business licenses. So what do you mean we have no plan? We just don't have a plan that you like!

What difference does it make how nice an illegal alien is in regards to enforcing our immigration laws? Did you know any of the Guatamalans personally that were caught at Agriprocessors? If not, how can you claim they were nice and as I said, what difference does that make anyway?

Knock off you stupid "Cattle Barn Justice BS"! It was only used because of the huge numbers that had to be processed and they were only there a day or two. Your melodramatics get tiresome. You do it to illicit sympathy for these people and it is unwarranted.

They were locked up for 5 months to get a point across. No more simple deportations. If you enter our country illegally you will serve some time for it. It is called a deterrant.

What our side is doing IS working. Aprehensions are down and the illegals are moving from these states where raids have taken place and many have gone back voluntarily to their homelands.

The Arizonian said...

First off, GM layed off employees to appease their shareholders.

In my opinion, the markets- being stock and commodities- are what is driving the real economic problem. Not so much illegal immigration, but the simple notion that share holders don't want to afford them, although they could. Not to mention that GM seems to have overlooked the lack of interest by consumers in their products. People use to be brand loyal, not so much anymore.
I'll say it: GM, your products suck now.....

It is sad to think that it would be discriminatory to simply check that someone working for you is allowed to work in the first place. EVERY time I applied for a job, I had to submit paperwork saying I was allowed to work, and I'm "white", can I claim discrimination?

If employers have to check and see if the person they are hiring is a felon or sex offender, then how are "unauthorized immigrants" -(DHS term, not mine) slipping through?

Dee said...

I can understand why some are concerned that this new Bracero type program is coming out without plans for some type of legalization for those already here (some for decades). For Latinos, seniority (respect for elders) is part of the culture.

Dee said...

btw, thought you didnt venture over to alleypac. wazzup?

Dee said...

You dont throw out the baby with the bathwater. Why on earth would we throw out our civil liberties, have unmanned aircraft over our neighborhoods, blackwater patrolling our streets, and have e-verify codes implanted in all of us? The SAVE Act will solve nothing and will never pass.

Dee said...

Welcome Arizonian,
Employers that want to hire within the law do ensure they have legal workers. Even WalMart has a staffing process requiring a Birth Certificate, pictured ID, proof of citizenship, valid SS# and Blood Tests. Most employers do.
Most companies that hire illegal immigrants know it.
I dont think any sane person could possibly think a company like Agriprocessors didnt know they hired illegal immigrants. They provided their illegal workers false documents. There were news reports that said there were copies of these documents in their HR department. Of course they knew. I think those companies who deny this are not being forthright.

patriot said...

There will be no civil liberties violated by enforcing our immigration laws. It is just something your side claims to stop that enforcement. You bitch about the employers but yet you don't want e-verify to pass to stop them! That is where your true agenda comes shining thru everytime.

By the way, you obviously don't even know what e-verfiy is! It has nothing to do with any implants put in us. It is a database to check the validity of a potential hires papers that authorize them to work in this country. Now you try and tell me that if there is no possible way for an illegal can work in this country that it won't work! LOL!

patriot said...

By the way, law enforcement already patrols our neighborhoods and highways and have for decades. I don't hear you bithing about that!

Liquidmicro said...

The interpretation wasn't from Alipac. It was from One Old Vet. Seems the UFW is doing exactly what they should be doing, ridding the union breakers, just like the old days, no. Besides, I gave you the link to the actual article from Mexico City, I'm betting if you can translate it, it will say what the interpretation says.

Liquidmicro said...

"For Latinos, seniority (respect for elders) is part of the culture."

You call it respect for elders, while I bet many call it respect for the law. It's not a new 'bracero program', its actually using the H-2A program they way it should be used. So then why should the others respect violators?

Dee said...

Pat, Pat, Pat,
Of course I know what eVerify is today. But there is discussion about ID implants, particularly for Guest Workers. Go google it.
Once them, then its only a matter of time before its us too.
And of course police patrol our streets, but the time is here when people like Arpaio use his secret volunteer police complete with masks. He is doing it now! SAVE Act talks about hiring private contractors (e.g. Blackwater!). Plus unmanned aircraft bought from contractors. Hence, loss of Civil Liberties.

Dee said...

Here is the part of the article that wasnt translated. This explains WHY they are against it. Im not saying I agree (although I understand), just what their reasons are:

"In California, or at least in the Central Valley, most of the pro-immigrant groups are against this agreement between the UFW and the Gulf of guest worker program or braceros. Octavio Santiago a farm worker went to Florida to pinch of orange. In Immokalee Florida participated with the union of the Coalition of Imokalee workers, but unable to find work in the field, had to return back to Stockton to cut asparagus.

"Many have arrived from Mexico with work visas and we have moved to undocumented Mexicans who already have years working here waiting for an opportunity to legalize" added Santiago. Joaquin Pear, which lies in Michoacan migrant Turlock California, has just returned from his native Santiago Tangamandapio and says it is already giving a coyotaje where they are charging up to 500 pesos per start processing these visas.

Teresa Martinez, Stockton activist who coordinated a campaign of letters recently to oppose changes to federal H2-A, believes that reviving a new bracero program without consulting migrants who reside here is a lack of respect for those who already face a daily competition the few jobs in agriculture "This gives us more divided and will create different classes of migrant workers and bring further abuse." For Miguel Robles coordinator of the Alliance for Immigrant Rights in San Francisco, said that these agreements create the sectorization of the immigrant movement. "Why do not advocate the legalization of undocumented workers already here?" And adds "this pact promotes a wave of new workers to replace those who are already here even with those who already have roles."

Most immigrants agreed that those who signed this agreement do so as an unabashed defense of their interests that do not promote anything other than deportation and exclusion of undocumented workers."

Dee said...

You know Liquid, Ive been thinking about this. Why is this program brining in even more workers when we have workers here that have experience and are looking for a path to legalization?
Very curious!

Liquidmicro said...

Why are the workers, those already here, looking for a path to legalization? Their visas ended, they should leave, let the next wave have a chance to support their families. You talk respect of elders ,when all I see is greed on those already here's behalf.

Liquidmicro said...

Those already here knew the H-2A Visa was a temporary work visa, not a visa for permanent residence. Why then can they not follow the rules? Why should the rules be changed just for them? they knew they were suppose to leave at the end of their visas, yet they didn't, why? All the more reason to boot them out, with no return for 10 years, if caught, then 2 years prison.

Why can't others who also need the opportunity to support there families have that chance?

patriot said...

If ID implants is what it will take to keep foreingers out of this country that have no right to be here then I have no problem with it. E-verify has nothing to do with implants just as I already stated!

What civil liberties are we going to lose by hiring private contractors for security? Please be specific. Are they going to shine a light into our bedrooms or bathrooms with their unmanned aircraft, lol. Dee you are so transparent that it is a wonder you don't embarrass yourself while posting.

Dee said...

You know Liquid, I feel saddest for those who were solicited and hired by a company and provided false papers.
I think anyone who has been here and has lived felonious free shoudl be provided an opportunity to move to legal status then to get in line and apply for citizenship.

Liquidmicro said...

Dee said...

You know Liquid, I feel saddest for those who were solicited and hired by a company and provided false papers.
I think anyone who has been here and has lived felonious free shoudl be provided an opportunity to move to legal status then to get in line and apply for citizenship.

Those that appear to have been "solicited and provided false papers by a company", still crossed the border "Illegally". What gives them the right to cut all of those that have done the paperwork and are waiting in line already for their opportunity to come here? How can they then come and have an opportunity to work if all those that have "illegally" came have taken the jobs? Just because they came "illegally" why should they be given special treatment over the others? Where is the fairness in that?

It doesn't matter if they are felonious free, they violated immigration laws. Immigration laws demand that they be repatriated to country of origin, or other country of reception if their origin does not receive them such as N. Vietnam, Cuba, etc.

We all feel for their plight, however it does not excuse them for their violations. Most only come here because they can make more here vs. their own country, send monies home to better their status there.

The visa system is already swamped due to 'family unity' from 1986, how do you think this is going to effect the system afterwards if those here are granted legal status? How much further out is it going to push the already long wait for a visa? Will this then not encourage even further "illegal Immigration" due to family members not wishing to wait? Isn't this what we really are already seeing and trying to solve? Why make it harder on us?

patriot said...

Do you also feel sorry for hit men who were solicited to kill someone? Do you also feel sorry for the person solicited to drive the getaway car in a bank robbery? We are all ultimately responsible for our own decisions and actions. Being coerced is no excuse in the eyes of the law.

Page Hits