Sunday, October 7, 2018

ICE Block: California Law Turns Employers Into Sanctuaries


On Monday, my class on immigration and employment will work through this scenario. For those who are not in class, feel free to share your thoughts on FB or at mhl@illinois.edu.
Immigration Simulation
Under California’s AB 450 (2017) [AB stands for Assembly Bill], employers are prohibited from providing Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) with access to nonpublic areas of the workplace and employment records when ICE has not obtained a warrant or subpoena.
AB 450 requires employers to notify workers when ICE plans to conduct an audit and inform workers about the details of the audit. Employers can be fined $2,000 to $5,000 for the first violation, and $5,000 to $10,000 for each additional violation.
In addition, employers are prohibited from requiring their existing employees to reverify their work authorization at a time or manner not required by federal immigration law, and may face penalties of up to $10,000 for each violation.
Suppose you are part of the HR leadership team at Amazon, which is the largest California employer of workers on an H-1B visa. Your group has read the “Hire American” Executive Order, calling for rigorous enforcement of your industry. See Section 2(b), at https://www.whitehouse.gov/presidential-actions/presidential-executive-order-buy-american-hire-american/.
Further suppose that ICE showed up recently at a research park office where you employ 150 H-1B visa workers. Amazon denied entry. ICE told your office manager they would return, and would gain access to your workplace and your records.
How far do you want to go to cooperate with ICE?
How far do you want to go to comply with AB 450?
Consider these elements (think short-term and long-range):
Physical hardening of your work site: Do you want to create a more secure perimeter at your parking lot (your “hard” security perimeter begins in your office lobby)? How much physical hardening do you want for your workplace?
Security: Do you want to hire perimeter security? Cost is not an issue, but it will create a different feel for your workplace. If you go this route, do you outsource security or in-source it? Do you arm your guards? Do you instruct them to use force for illegal entry? Do you have a hotline to the local police, and have a protocol with them for this situation?
Audits: How do you train HR representatives to handle conflict between President Trump’s ICE and California’s AB 450? Do you keep immigration records at your Bay-area worksite, where AB 450 offers protection but also exposes Amazon to physical inspection; or do you move the records to Seattle where ICE is not currently auditing your Bay-area offices but where they might go next (and AB 450 offers no protection)?
Potential Litigation: Some Silicon Valley employees are outspoken about excesses of liberal thought and policies. Potentially, Amazon might have an HR person who will provide access and handover records, in violation of AB 450, because they believe in the “Hire American” order.
Do you want to screen employees for their views on immigration? What question would you ask? How would justify these questions as more than “PC brainwashing” of employees? Are you willing to fire an employee who expresses allegiance to federal policy and hostility to AB 450? 
Housing: Currently, assume that you pay for long-term hotel accommodations at a Residence Inn near the workplace. You recognize that AB 450 would not apply to an ICE sweep at the hotel—ICE could show up a breakfast and start detaining your employees.
How much do you want to plan for this? Not at all? A little bit—perhaps by telling employees to not wear badges until they come to work? A bit more, by providing breakfast at your worksite? Do you want to go all-in and purchase or rent homes, and scatter employees in residential neighborhoods? If you take that route—and assuming that money is not an issue— do you locate your H-1B workers in white suburban neighborhoods? Urban condos where there is a diverse population?

No comments: