Posted on 11/04/2005 3:52:29 AM PST by Quaker
TALLAHASSEE, Fla. (AP) - A state law requiring workers to provide their Social Security numbers when claiming compensation for on-the-job injuries is invalid because it violates federal privacy rights, the Florida Supreme Court decided Thursday.
The seven justices unanimously upheld a 1st District Court of Appeal ruling that reinstated benefits for Ricardo Cagnoli, a South Florida man.
A compensation claims judge had denied worker compensation benefits to Cagnoli because he had failed to include his Social Security number on his application as required by Florida law.
The Federal Privacy Act, however, makes it illegal for any state, federal or local government agency to deny any benefit to people because they refuse to disclose their Social Security numbers, the appellate court stated in ruling for Cagnoli last year.
This ruling would tend to stop illegals from working rather than encourage. Employers get a benefit if they don't need to insure illegals and therefore an incentive. Take away incentives and they will be less likely to hire them. It also makes it less likely a competitor would have to hire illegals to compete.
As for the argument that they illegals do not deserve the insurance, I disagree. They worked and they should be paid. Their labor earned their employer a rate that assumes the employer will provide insurance.
That nails the heart of the matter in the first response. Which is pretty typical here, which is why I stay.
G'mornin' Robert.
Agreed. If I'm honest and hire proper people and pay properly my work comp insurance, why should I pay more than the guy who hires illegals. Now injuries do happen, and the employee needs to be made whole. That is the courts stand, and common sense. If the employer does not pay this then the system will. It is the right decision.
Right, and this employer had to be paying into workman's comp insurance in order for this guy to be covered. His (the employer's) workman's comp cost will go up everytime someone makes a claim against the employer...so I think you've hit the nail on the head
These are all good points, but there is another aspect to this ruling that should not be overlooked. The SSN HAS been used as a universal ID by feds, state, business and charities. Any ruling that restricts its use can be used in interesting ways to further restrict this defacto ID #. The libs use seemingly unrelated court decisions against us (e.g. RICO) all of the time. It nice to see a decision that we might have some use for in seemingly unrelated matters.
Oh, but you are so wrong.
It is only a protection given to illegal workers. American citizens must provide them.
The court is very right. I'm about to get a GA driver's license, which will be denied if I don't give them my SSN - which is none of their business.
I still have my original SS card issued in Tampa, FL in June of 1956. It says right across the bottom "Not to be used for identification purposes." In those days they issued the card right there when you applied for it.
Got a reference to the ruling's text? I may need it.
Oh, FLORIDA Supreme Court. Not useful to me yet.
Need coffee....
Coffee?
I need a shot of whiskey.
I now can't compete unless I hire illegals.
Effectively, I'm out of business, if I'm an
honest business-person.
My original, issued in NJ says the same thing.
It doesn't keep every Tom, Dick and Mary from requiring it for no good reason. And it makes me mad.
No, but it is required to get information about your phone bill from Sprint!
Virginia had to stop using SSN as our drivers license numbers.
I recall too that at one time my drivers license had a warning that it was illegal to make a photocopy of it. My how times have changed.
As several have pointed out, the SSN was NOT to be used as ID. That it is now used as ID does not change the fact that Americans of the 1930s were assured that the SSN would NOT be used as ID.
Also, whether the holder of an SSN is an "illegal" or a born or naturalized citizen, money provided by Workers' Compensation payments of weekly benefits is taxable by the feds and the insurance company is required to report the payment of such checks to each claimant to the IRS which is not practical without the SSN.
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.