Right, they are using latent racist/xenophobic attitudes to justify labour abuses, just like they did against the Irish and Italians in New York at the turn of the previous century.
I'm not sure the political action taken in LA is going to do anything, but if anything I've grown cynical about the supposed freedoms of my home country. The immigration debate in the US right now boils down to one thing: lack of enforcement of current laws. Essentially the presentation of bills in the Senate versus the presentation of bills in the House differs mostly in how they final laws will affect the immigrants themselves. Therefore since their proposals are opposing, I believe that there will be little change in the consequences for illegal aliens in the US, but that the laws for enforcement within companies will be more strictly enforced. (In case you aren't up on this, the Senate Bill {which passed by the way} proposes a general amnesty {in the guise of guest-worker permits} for illegals from certain Latin American countries. In turn the House Bill {yet to be voted upon} proposes to make illegal immigration a prosecutable FELONY.) It is my opinion that each proposal for what to do with the illegals currently in the country is mere talk, and that neither house wants to pass that portion of their Bills into Law. They are using them for political posturing and position prior to the upcoming Congressional elections in November. They aren't going to put either bill to the final vote before then, because if they do, they risk either losing Latino votes, or losing Southern Conservative votes. The meat of both bills is actually in the legalese for how to make companies enforce existing labour-laws. I haven't actually read the bills, but from what I've read about them, one bill proposes to make companies be more consistent in who they hire, and how they document them. And the other bill proposes to put those documentations into some sort of national registry. I'm sort of vague on those parts of the bills.
I've got a friend in the restaurant industry in Chicago, and at one of the companies, a national company (now a franchise, but before previously a corporation proper), they had one girl with three sets of papers that they kept re-hiring every time she got caught and came back again. She was Yolanda, and then Maria, and finaly Marina or something like that. I'm sure the photos on the ID's and the girl herself was recognisable, but because there is no check-up on that part of the paperwork, she could be hired each time. The people at the company didn't care if she was illegal. They cared that she'd work for shit-money, and that she worked well.
But regardless of whether or not these new laws are actually enforced, they certainly contribute to an increasing level of and social and legal hostility against illegal immigrants.
I'm not sure the political action taken in LA is going to do anything, but if anything I've grown cynical about the supposed freedoms of my home country. The immigration debate in the US right now boils down to one thing: lack of enforcement of current laws. Essentially the presentation of bills in the Senate versus the presentation of bills in the House differs mostly in how they final laws will affect the immigrants themselves. Therefore since their proposals are opposing, I believe that there will be little change in the consequences for illegal aliens in the US, but that the laws for enforcement within companies will be more strictly enforced. (In case you aren't up on this, the Senate Bill {which passed by the way} proposes a general amnesty {in the guise of guest-worker permits} for illegals from certain Latin American countries. In turn the House Bill {yet to be voted upon} proposes to make illegal immigration a prosecutable FELONY.) It is my opinion that each proposal for what to do with the illegals currently in the country is mere talk, and that neither house wants to pass that portion of their Bills into Law. They are using them for political posturing and position prior to the upcoming Congressional elections in November. They aren't going to put either bill to the final vote before then, because if they do, they risk either losing Latino votes, or losing Southern Conservative votes. The meat of both bills is actually in the legalese for how to make companies enforce existing labour-laws. I haven't actually read the bills, but from what I've read about them, one bill proposes to make companies be more consistent in who they hire, and how they document them. And the other bill proposes to put those documentations into some sort of national registry. I'm sort of vague on those parts of the bills.
I've got a friend in the restaurant industry in Chicago, and at one of the companies, a national company (now a franchise, but before previously a corporation proper), they had one girl with three sets of papers that they kept re-hiring every time she got caught and came back again. She was Yolanda, and then Maria, and finaly Marina or something like that. I'm sure the photos on the ID's and the girl herself was recognisable, but because there is no check-up on that part of the paperwork, she could be hired each time. The people at the company didn't care if she was illegal. They cared that she'd work for shit-money, and that she worked well.
--a
Reply
Reply
Leave a comment