Swift tried to block raid Company filed injunction on Dec. 4, worried about obtrusive roundup

Denver Post ^ | 12/14/2006 | Christine Tatum

[CrawDaddyCA]

For nearly two weeks, Swift & Co. officials fought to block an impending immigration raid they knew was coming.

According to newly unsealed federal-court records filed in Amarillo, Texas, on Dec. 4, the company sought an injunction to stop U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement from raiding six of its plants across the nation.

On Dec. 7, the company's request was denied. And on Tuesday, the raid went forward.

While waging the sealed court fight, Swift scrutinized its workers' employment documents. Nearly 400 workers nationally "simply disappeared" because of that review, said Don Wiseman, the company's general counsel.

"We never fired anyone," he said. "We didn't have to."

[garandgal]

The primary goal of any corporate officer is to maximize shareholder value, barring any more specific direction.

Economic anarchy. Predictable results to follow.

[Ben Ficklin]

Its safe to assume that the Smithfield plant in Milan has roughly the same percentage illegal as Swift.

In these discussions, it never gets mentioned that the meat processors, and others using fedguv's verification system, have detected and denied employment to large numbers of illegals, thru the years.

[Eric in the Ozarks]

I have no way of knowing how many illegals are working at the plant in Milan but there are three new Mexican food restaurants on the town square. Must mean something's up...

[Rembrandt]

'"They're obviously guilty"
~~
What are they guilty of? What have they been charged with?'
~~~~
At minimum, they were naive; the same could be said of you.

[Ben Ficklin]

Naive? This is about being informed, which you are not.

But you could use the word "naive" to describe the borderbots who propose making this verification system mandatory and require every employer to verify every employee.