When labor, immigration laws clash, NLRB decides — Business Management Daily: Free Reports on Human Resources, Employment Law, Office Management, Office Communication, Office Technology and Small Business Tax Business Management Daily
  • LinkedIn
  • YouTube
  • Twitter
  • Facebook
  • Google+

The U.S. Department of Homeland Security recently started authorizing more raids on workplaces it suspects include undocumented workers—and employers, not the workers, are being charged with breaking the law.

That’s why employers are working harder than ever to make sure workers’ employment eligibility documents are in order.

To help you prepare for what’s happening – and what’s GOING to happen – the Management Labor and Employment Roundtable is proud to present the Labor and Employment Law Advanced Practices Symposium (LEAP).

At the same time, the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) is taking a more aggressive stance, pushing employers to settle unfair labor practice cases and ordering them to rehire employees terminated for exercising National Labor Relations Act rights.

But what happens when those fired workers are actually ineligible to work?

Recent case: C&C Roofing faced three unfair labor practice charges, all filed by a union. The NLRB and the company agreed to settle and reinstate employees whose terminations had led to the unfair labor practices charges.

When it came time to rehire the workers, however, C&C said it couldn’t reinstate some because it now believed they didn’t have legitimate employment eligibility documents.

Access our complete Immigration Law Update, covering regulation, enforcement, recordkeeping and more

The court said that the way to challenge individual reinstatements would be to bring the illegitimate documents to the NLRB. The 9th Circuit reasoned that a federal agency would not require an employer to rehire those who might be in the country illegally—but would require some sort of proof that was the case.

The company couldn’t simply ignore the agreement it had made to settle the case. (NLRB v. C&C Roofing, No. 08-70335, 9th Cir., 2009)


Final note: Some courts have ruled that employers must pay employees for work performed even if they weren’t legally authorized to work. If discharged, however, they would not be entitled to back pay for time not worked. That’s because that sort of back pay is predicated on being available for work—something someone without proper documents is not.

LEAP 2009 brings together nearly 40 of America’s top legal and HR minds to keep you out front on the coming changes – while giving you the opportunity to network with these experts AND your fellow HR pros.

Some of the topics we’ll be covering include:
  • D.C. Developments – The Latest News & What Employers Should Expect in 2010
  • Union Organizing – The Rules Have Changed (Are You Prepared?)
  • FMLA Update – New Rights, New Interpretations
  • Recordkeeping – How the New Ledbetter Fair Pay Act Changes What You Thought You Knew!
  • Discrimination “Hot Spots” – Disability and Religion
  • Workplace Harassment – New Claims, More Litigation
  • Jerks at Work – What’s an Employer to Do?
  • Immigration Law Update – Regulation, Enforcement, Recordkeeping and More
  • Web 2.0 and Employment Law – Blogs, Facebook, Twitter and More!
  • Avoiding the Wage & Hour “Collective Action” Crush
  • And Many Others!
Register now for this Washington insider's event!

Leave a Comment

Previous post:

Next post: