LinkFromBlog

Link from blog is a unique and very good opportunity for both advertiser and blogger to get more traffic and earn revenue. Try it for free.

Friday 24 August 2012

Immigration Reform and Control Act and the Effect on the Labor Market

By Charles Wheeler


The immigration laws, passed in the twentieth century, that molded the inflow of people from various countries, started with rules to deal only with numbers, and not work-related abilities. Two regulations were introduced in the 1920's that imposed quotas on people entering into the United States from other nations.

They were the Emergency Quota Act of 1917, and the Immigration Act of 1924. The former, passed by Woodrow Wilson and an overwhelming majority in Congress, barred entrance of "undesirables" including individuals with mental illnesses and those under sixteen years of age who were illiterate. That law also introduced the ability to read a text as a condition of citizenship.

The Bracero Program of 1942, enacted into law by Franklin Roosevelt, was a migrant worker plan, enabling laborers from Latin America to enter into the United States to work on farms, only. Immigration and Nationality Act of 1952, added deportation to people suspected of being a Communist sympathizer. The Immigration and Nationality Act of 1965 was the first legislation to do away with limits based on national origin, and to give precedence to individuals with immediate family already in the country. This law also ended those entering through the Bracero Program, and prompted the first wave of illegal immigrants from Latin America, a result of the lack of ability to enter under the migrant worker program.

The Immigration Reform and Control Act, or IRCA, was initiated to deal with the influx of illegal workers who began to come into the United States soon after the termination of the migrant worker program. The regulation stated that employers who knowingly employed illegal laborers would be considered responsible. The regulation also set up the I-9 form as a means of confirming status for working.

The immediate consequence that the passing of the IRCA had on hiring practices was minimal. Employers continued hiring practices with those of unverified status, and the I-9 forms were not actively enforced. There was a move to the hiring of subcontractors as opposed to direct hiring. This allowed the employer to not have to deal with the status of the workers. Rather, the subcontracting firm was responsible for legal status of its workers. The laborer suffered a decrease in wages, as subcontractors held a portion of the worker's pay to cover overhead expenses.

The reform act known as IRCA is still in force, today. Little is being done to verify the information supplied on the I-9 forms. When a worker is suspected of not having legal status, the enforcement is largely imposed upon the laborer, and not on the employer. There is need change the immigration laws so that they come into line with what is practiced, or for stricter enforcement of statues currently in place. Having one set of laws, and a separate practice for enforcement is not a good way to control immigration.




About the Author:



No comments:

Post a Comment