Posted on 10/21/2005 3:50:45 AM PDT by pitinkie
Carolyn
I agree 100%.
IIRC, this isn't the first court to say this. I believe the last time something like this was posted on FR was 3 or 4 months ago and it seems to me that the court was in the SE US.
Anyone else recall?
Can someone remind me, exactly what is the advantage for being a citizen of the US?
susie
Of last THREE Mexicans my company hired: One worked three weeks before "twisting his ankle" (no one saw the incident)..he has now been on workers comp for ONE YEAR.
The second worked TWO DAYS before "smashing his finger", he did not see a doctor as ordered..but claimed his finger "will never be the same"..he is now drawing workers comp until the matter is settled.
The third one has called in every other day now because his "back hurts"..the claim is not far away.
Yet..my employer still thinks Mexicans apply here to WORK.
Protect our borders and coastlines from all foreign invaders!
Support our Minutemen Patriots!
Be Ever Vigilant ~ Bump!
Don't try to make it sound as if you can't fire someone!
If the employee upon being given the opportunity to correct identification errors cannot do so, the employer is required to dismiss him/her.
Tell your boss to go to their homes and he'll find out they are probably all working at another job.
The illegal alien is no more a criminal than the employer who hires him. This knife cuts both ways. If you hire them you are respinsible for them. You are saying that an employer can hire illegals for the most dangeroius jobs because he knows he wont have to pay them if injured and that is not right.
You must re-read my post. I said: "Anyone who knowingly hires an illegal alien should be subject to criminal prosecution."
Yup... This is a good ruling. Part of what makes hiring illegals attractive is the idea that no employment laws apply to them. Nailing these sleazy employers for workman's comp, minimum wage, and other laws will help to keep legal residents competitive in the workplace. If Juan is just as expensive to employ as LeTyrone, then LeTyrone has a better shot at getting the work that "Americans won't do".
Your post is correct.
"My understanding is tht WC is charged to employers by the state at a rate for a given job. Employers are charged much more for drilling & blating than clerical work, and "benefits" are paid from an industry-wide pool. Having more incidents, all employers, not just the one in question, have to pay more. (Purposely skipped the EMR talk)."
Some of your info is not correct. Different jobs do have different rates. But the CA WC system is handled by private insurers and they pay the benefits. In reality, the company is screwing the insurance company, since they have to pay benefits for a worker who should never have been there. However, the company gets screwed back when their rates go up.
What this article really does not communicate well is that California statutes require companies to benefits to illegals. The reason it was before a court was because the employer said federal immigration law should trump the California state law. It's a close question and not an insane ruling.
However, I hope it will have the affect of discouraging employers from hiring illegals. We'll see
Thanks.
Here's a suggestion for a just penalty:
The company that hires the illegal alien pays his compensation costs out of their own pocket.
This beauty of this remedy is that it does not penalize other employers for the increases in compensation insurance rates that will result from this ruling.
Sounds good.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.