Re: Internal Passports

At 07:37 PM 8/5/96 -0700, you wrote:
>At 1:01 AM 8/6/96, Duncan Frissell wrote:
>
>>The SS resists issuing new numbers in spite of widespread duplication and
>>theft.  Soon people will find themselves denied the right to work in this
>>country unless the SS reverses this reluctance.  If your SS# is stolen and
>>used "too many times"  in a future worker verification program, you're
>>screwed.  And there won't even be any welfare for you.
>>
>>Use Alta Vista to find the SS Number FAQ.  There's more stuff.
>
>BTW, I attempted to comply with the law in a recent request posted to
>ba.jobs.offered and scruz.general: I solicited workers for some brush
>clearing on my place, but advised them to only apply if--appearing to be
>Hispanic, Latin, Mexican, or otherwise unOfficial--they provided proof of
>their legal ability to work for me.
>


Hmmm. Actually a long time ago I lost my job with Greenpeace out of refusal
to sign an I-9 which was in '86 the Department of Justice's form to exhibit
eligibility to work in the US. The form required that I present two pieces
of photo identification or a driver's license to be authenticated by my
employer. Maybe it's a CA state law that adds an additional skin tone
criterium to for the filing of an I-9.

--j

At 9:47 PM -0700 8/5/96, John F. Fricker wrote:
>Hmmm. Actually a long time ago I lost my job with Greenpeace out of refusal
>to sign an I-9 which was in '86 the Department of Justice's form to exhibit
>eligibility to work in the US. The form required that I present two pieces
>of photo identification or a driver's license to be authenticated by my
>employer. Maybe it's a CA state law that adds an additional skin tone
>criterium to for the filing of an I-9.
>
I have found that promising to provide the necessary docs, and then failing to do so, is the least confrontational and most effective way around this.

"Delay is the deadliest form of denial"


-- Marshall

Marshall Clow     Aladdin Systems   <mailto:mclow@mailhost2.csusm.edu>

"We're not gonna take it/Never did and never will
We're not gonna take it/Gonna break it, gonna shake it,
let's forget it better still" -- The Who, "Tommy"

jfricker@vertexgroup.com (John F. Fricker) writes:
> Hmmm. Actually a long time ago I lost my job with Greenpeace out of refusal
> to sign an I-9 which was in '86 the Department of Justice's form to exhibit
> eligibility to work in the US. The form required that I present two pieces
> of photo identification or a driver's license to be authenticated by my
> employer. Maybe it's a CA state law that adds an additional skin tone
> criterium to for the filing of an I-9.

I-9 lists the documents that can be accepted as 1) proof of identity, 2)
proof of the right to work in the U.S. A U.S. passport can be used for both.
When I need to fill out the I-9, I simply present my passport. (Before I
had the passport, I used to present my naturaliation certificate, which is
also acceptable.)

A driver's licence is not sufficient because it only proves your identify,
but doesn't prove that you're allowed to have a job. There are classes of
aliens who are allowed to drive, but aren't allowed to work - e.g.,
students on J-1 visa.

---

Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM
Brighton Beach Boardwalk BBS, Forest Hills, N.Y.: +1-718-261-2013, 14.4Kbps