Comments on: Years after they became mandatory, employment checks are spotty http://azcapitoltimes.com/news/2012/12/15/e-verify-immigration-checks-spotty-years-after-becoming-mandatory/ Your Inside Track to Arizona Politics Wed, 19 Jun 2013 17:19:12 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.1 By: I-9 and E-Verify Outlook for 2013 - The I-9 and E-Verify Blog http://azcapitoltimes.com/news/2012/12/15/e-verify-immigration-checks-spotty-years-after-becoming-mandatory/comment-page-1/#comment-83658 I-9 and E-Verify Outlook for 2013 - The I-9 and E-Verify Blog Thu, 27 Dec 2012 10:02:38 +0000 http://azcapitoltimes.com/?p=54195#comment-83658 [...] may well sit this one out to see what the federal government does.  In fact, it’s proven costly for states that have implemented mandatory E-Verify to verify which employers are indeed using the system and [...] [...] may well sit this one out to see what the federal government does.  In fact, it’s proven costly for states that have implemented mandatory E-Verify to verify which employers are indeed using the system and [...]

]]> By: Red Black http://azcapitoltimes.com/news/2012/12/15/e-verify-immigration-checks-spotty-years-after-becoming-mandatory/comment-page-1/#comment-81612 Red Black Tue, 18 Dec 2012 12:12:22 +0000 http://azcapitoltimes.com/?p=54195#comment-81612 I am an E-Verified employee and know from first hand experience that confirming one's legal employability status is lighting fast, accurate and free. There's no valid reason for any employer not to use E-Verify. Despite what Cato says, there is no need for a lawyer to supervise the E-Verify process or to have a Human Resources department. The firm that E-Verified me does not have a personnel department and the person who supvervised my E-Verify application is not a lawyer. The claim that each application costs $147 is nonsense. It's like saying everytime an employee goes to lunch it costs me $XYZ. If employers want to make sure that their workforce has a legal workforce, E-Verify is the simple, failsafe program to use. I am an E-Verified employee and know from first hand experience that confirming one’s legal employability status is lighting fast, accurate and free. There’s no valid reason for any employer not to use E-Verify.

Despite what Cato says, there is no need for a lawyer to supervise the E-Verify process or to have a Human Resources department. The firm that E-Verified me does not have a personnel department and the person who supvervised my E-Verify application is not a lawyer.

The claim that each application costs $147 is nonsense. It’s like saying everytime an employee goes to lunch it costs me $XYZ.

If employers want to make sure that their workforce has a legal workforce, E-Verify is the simple, failsafe program to use.

]]> By: There's an App for That: Apps for Job Seekers | Som2ny http://azcapitoltimes.com/news/2012/12/15/e-verify-immigration-checks-spotty-years-after-becoming-mandatory/comment-page-1/#comment-81130 There's an App for That: Apps for Job Seekers | Som2ny Sun, 16 Dec 2012 13:26:25 +0000 http://azcapitoltimes.com/?p=54195#comment-81130 [...] Years after they became mandatory, employment checks are spotty But the Department of Homeland Security reported that Arizona businesses used the database just 982,593 times in 2011, even though the Census Bureau said there were 1.5 million new hires in the state that year, a 66 percent compliance rate. Fewer than … Read more on Arizona Capitol Times [...] [...] Years after they became mandatory, employment checks are spotty But the Department of Homeland Security reported that Arizona businesses used the database just 982,593 times in 2011, even though the Census Bureau said there were 1.5 million new hires in the state that year, a 66 percent compliance rate. Fewer than … Read more on Arizona Capitol Times [...]

]]>