Agricultural Personnel Management Program
University of California

6/13/03  News Report -- The Omaha (Neb.) World Herald

The federal government is scaling back a program that sparked an outcry from industries that use immigrant labor.

No longer is the Social Security Administration sending out nearly 1 million letters a year to employers whose workers' Social Security numbers appear invalid.

This year the administration reduced the number of so-called "no-match" letters and added a caution that the letter alone is no reason to fire a worker.

Those who favor tighter border control say the move undermines enforcement of illegal immigration.

Those who advocate for immigrants hail the decision, saying it should reduce problems for foreign workers and confusion for employers.

"The program not only caused concern for the many immigrant employees - both documented and undocumented - but confused the employers who depend on immigrants to fill their jobs," said Shelley Schrader, director of the Interfaith Immigration Services of Nebraska.

The administration had said the expanded letter program was an effort to correct records so that billions of dollars of unaccounted Social Security earnings could be properly linked to workers for retirement benefits.

About 950,000 notifications went out last year, sparking criticism from industries that hire immigrants, the U.S. Chamber of Commerce and immigrant rights leaders.

The letters were seen as a side-door effort to rid companies of undocumented workers while federal immigration authorities focused on finding terrorists and felons - not ordinary laborers working illegally.

This year the number of "no-match" letters was to be reduced to about 130,000, which is slightly above the 2001 level.

"We made a business decision to implement the new procedure," said Social Security spokeswoman Carolyn Cheezum. She could provide no statistics but said last year's expanded effort yielded a "substantially low number" of corrected records.

Now, instead of notifying all employers that have even one questionable worker, the agency is to contact only those with more than 10 workers who filed mismatched tax information and all companies that submit mismatched forms for more than .05 percent of their employees.

The new letters caution employers that some mismatches result from a typo or other errors, not necessarily from immigration status.

A new companion letter sent to the employee includes a Spanish translation and a message that "this letter does not, in and of itself, allow your employer to change your job, lay you off, fire you or take other action against you."

What happened earlier, immigration experts said, is that some immigrant workers were fired and others quit unnecessarily as confusion circulated.

Some employees confessed to their employer that they were in the country illegally, and the employer felt obligated to fire them.

Amy Peck, an immigration attorney in Omaha, said she received numerous inquiries from workers and employers.

"The employer is not required to take action - in fact, shouldn't take action merely because of the no-match letter," she said. "The employee should be instructed to take care of it."

She and others said small businesses probably will feel some of the greatest relief from the revised policy. "They are not as able to adapt to an employee shortage as maybe a larger company," Peck said.

Mark Krikorian, director of the Center for Immigration Studies, said the result will be illegal immigrants safely keeping their jobs.

"The no-match letters were an example of how other agencies of the government - like the Social Security Administration or the Internal Revenue Service - can help immigration authorities do their job," Krikorian said.

Although he said the broader program wasn't intended to enforcement immigration, it did anyway.

"In fact," he said, "the reason it is being scaled back is probably because of its success in identifying" illegal immigrants.

Schrader and Ed Leahy, director of the Immigrant Rights Network of Nebraska and Iowa, remain somewhat skeptical of the change.

They said the debate highlights the need to reform immigration laws on a broader scale.