ILW.COM - the immigration portal Immigration Daily

Home Page


Immigration Daily

Archives

Processing times

Immigration forms

Discussion board

Resources

Blogs

Twitter feed

Immigrant Nation

Attorney2Attorney

CLE Workshops

Immigration books

Advertise on ILW

VIP Network

EB-5

移民日报

About ILW.COM

Connect to us

Make us Homepage

Questions/Comments


SUBSCRIBE

Immigration Daily


Chinese Immig. Daily




The leading
immigration law
publisher - over
50000 pages of
free information!
Copyright
© 1995-
ILW.COM,
American
Immigration LLC.

View RSS Feed

I-9 E-Verify Immigration Compliance

California Supreme Court Rules in favor of Undocumented Worker

Rating: 3 votes, 5.00 average.
By Bruce Buchanan, Siskind Susser

Click image for larger version. 

Name:	social_security.jpg 
Views:	62 
Size:	4.1 KB 
ID:	815Click image for larger version. 

Name:	california_flag.jpg 
Views:	63 
Size:	2.9 KB 
ID:	811

The California Supreme Court recently found, in Salas v. Sierra Chemical Co., that an undocumented worker who filed a claim under the California Fair Employment and Housing Act (FEHA) was not barred from receiving damages for lost wages.

The employee alleged that Sierra failed to reasonably accommodate his physical disability and refused to rehire him, in retaliation for his filing of a worker’s compensation claim. During discovery, Sierra learned the employee in question was undocumented and had used someone else’s Social Security number for employment.

Sierra argued the employee was not entitled to back pay or damages because of his undocumented status, citing the U.S. Supreme Court’s decision in Hoffman Plastics Compounds, Inc. v. NLRB, 535 U.S. 137 (2002). In Hoffman, the court held the NLRB could not “award back pay to an illegal alien for years of work not performed, for wages that could not lawfully have been earned, and for a job obtained in the first instance by criminal fraud.”

The employee argued that an amendment to California’s FEHA entitled him to all remedies available under state law, except reinstatement, regardless of his immigration status. Interestingly, the California FEHA amendment was passed in response to the U.S. Supreme Court’s decision in Hoffman.

The Issue
Does the federal Immigration Reform and Control Act (IRCA) preempt the California FEHA anti-discrimination law?

In this case, the California Supreme Court found that FEHA generally is not preempted by federal law and did not directly conflict with IRCA because compliance with both federal and state law is possible. Although IRCA prohibits unauthorized use of false documents to get a job, it does not prohibit an employer from paying, or an employee from receiving, wages earned during employment wrongfully obtained by document fraud, so long as the employer remains “unaware” of the employee’s unauthorized status.

Stated another way, an employee may be entitled to lost wages for the period of time from unlawful termination until the employer discovers the fraud. In this case, the Court held that the employee was not entitled to any award for loss of employment during the post-discovery period because Sierra learned of his undocumented status during discovery and IRCA prohibits “knowingly” employing an unauthorized worker.

The California FEHA amendment did not frustrate the purpose of the IRCA statute, insofar as it made available to the employee the remedy of pre-discovery period lost wages for unlawful termination. By not allowing unauthorized workers to obtain state remedies for unlawful termination, including pre-discovery period lost wages, the California Supreme Court reasoned that it would effectively immunize employers who violate California state law by discriminating against their workers on grounds such as disability or race, retaliate against workers who seek compensation for workplace injuries, or who fail to pay the wages required under state law.

The Takeaway
This case shows that California employers cannot hide behind an employee’s undocumented status in attempting to deny back pay after violating a state employment law. It also reinforces the importance to employers of proper completion of I-9 Forms and proper use of DHS E-Verify which can help employers identify document abuse and/or fraudulent social security numbers used by undocumented workers.

A copy of the court opinion is available here.

Submit "California Supreme Court Rules in favor of Undocumented Worker" to Facebook Submit "California Supreme Court Rules in favor of Undocumented Worker" to Twitter Submit "California Supreme Court Rules in favor of Undocumented Worker" to Google Submit "California Supreme Court Rules in favor of Undocumented Worker" to StumbleUpon Submit "California Supreme Court Rules in favor of Undocumented Worker" to Reddit Submit "California Supreme Court Rules in favor of Undocumented Worker" to Digg Submit "California Supreme Court Rules in favor of Undocumented Worker" to del.icio.us

Comments

  1. Retired INS's Avatar
    As a veteran INS agent I agree completely with this decision. I was trained early on by the Border Patrol that illegal aliens are entitled to their pay, even if they were working illegally. To arrest an alien while working, and not collect his pay, gave a bonus to the employer. You could also argue that working without compensation is a form of slavery. You will be pleased to hear that the old time Border Patrol agents trained me to never let an employer off the hook when it came to collecting wages due to illegal aliens. If an illegal alien is injured on the job, he or she should be entitled to compensation. To do otherwise rewards the employer, who was also breaking the law by hiring illegal aliens.
Put Free Immigration Law Headlines On Your Website

Immigration Daily: the news source for legal professionals. Free! Join 35000+ readers Enter your email address here: