ABA Journal - Law News Now

Comments

• Report Abuse

1. Posted by J.D. - 2 months, 3 weeks, 4 days, 2 hours, 56 minutes ago

   ONCE you allow illegal immigration and the continued exploitation of illegal aliens, you’re ALSO going to get other labor violations.

   You can blame the ACLU, the SEIU, La Raza, MALDEF, the Chamber of Commerce, and a host of other entities for trying to STOP enforcement of immigration law. They’re responsible for this child labor exploitation.

   Think about it: If these groups got their way and immigration raids were ended months ago, these children would STILL be working in this factory.

   Support lawlessness, and you just get more of it.

2. Posted by Jennifer - 2 months, 3 weeks, 3 days, 20 hours, 32 minutes ago

   There is a difference between being a coyote and actually bringing in undocumented workers (I consider that the closest thing to “allowing illegal immigration”) and dealing with reality.  Most of the groups you have mentioned are civil society members who want to address the issue of what to do with the existing population of undocumented workers within the framework of the law.  Don’t take corporate responsibility out of private hands and put it into the hands of the organizations who in their own way are examining this lawlessness.

   Those businesses know what they are doing.  It isn’t the responsibility of community organizations who advocate for worker rights for businesses employing and abusing their workers.

   I’m sorry that you are a holder of J.D.

3. Posted by df - 2 months, 3 weeks, 3 days, 18 hours, 42 minutes ago

   Hmm, I’m somewhere in between the first two posters…I find immigration stories like this a good illustration of the difference between malum prohibitum and malum in se. I also think either enforce the law effectively (especially going after employers) or change the law to reflect reality, don’t have this weird state of selective enforcement by state/city and what police can/can’t do.

   I don’t think it’s very wrong—though it is illegal—for someone to lie about their age to get work (malum prohibitum; in a greatly different context, there are many heroic soldiers in WW1 and WW2 who lied about being old enough to enlist). It is, however, wrong in and of itself (malum in se) for a business to deliberately or through wilful blindness hire underaged workers for dangerous/industrial jobs (or for any jobs where they’re not in school etc.).

   As for the illegal alien aspect, however wrong or illegal it is (and reasonable people can disagree on whether it’s wrong in and of itself or only because it’s prohibited/illegal), I think it is MUCH worse and wrong in and of itself for U.S. citizens and U.S. corporations and their controlling minds to deliberately, or through wilful blindness, employ illegal aliens etc. Which I strongly suspect is the case here and in many other instances.

   What’s more, I consider any immigration enforcement that doesn’t aggressively target employers to be idiotic (i.e. the current administration). If one wants to reduce illegal immigration, target employers (i.e. U.S. citizens and corporations including piercing the corporate veil) with real penalties. If not, don’t tell me you’re actually trying to enforce the law but change it to reflect reality.

   In short, I have sympathy for (otherwise law-abiding) illegal aliens just as I do for many other people who break these types of laws which I consider malum prohibitum. I have virtually none for business like this and their directing minds.

   I can’t resist remarking, merely because these underaged workers may have been over 13 doesn’t make them adults…[the NYT has had some interesting stories about whether illegal/unethical/immoral labour practices at a kosher slaughterhouse affected whether the meat should still be certified kosher, etc.]

4. Posted by Native New Yorker - 2 months, 3 weeks, 3 days, 10 hours, 43 minutes ago

   Immigration and legal advocacy groups are not responsible for the hiring and poor treatment of workers.  The employers are.  They will do so irregardless of any organization or law as long as they think they can get away with it.

5. Posted by J.D. - 2 months, 3 weeks, 3 days, 8 hours, 1 minute ago

   @ Jennifer & Native:

   Don’t get me wrong: the businesses are ABSOLUTELY responsible for violating the law, and they MUST be held accountable under the INA.

   Of course, any business can determine worker eligibility by use of E-Verify, a program that has been running successfully for over a decade; thousands of employers use it.

   But GUESS WHO is working to stop this employee verification program from being mandated nationwide? Answer: the Chamber of Commerce, LaRaza, MALDEF, the SEIU, Big Business, etc.

   So yes, they are part of the problem. They are assisting—aiding and abetting—the continued illegal employment of illegal aliens.

   And, here, it has worked to create child exploitation.

6. Posted by Native New Yorker - 2 months, 3 weeks, 2 days, 18 hours, 20 minutes ago

   J.D.  Please give everyone at this e-zine a break.  Your analogy is parallel to saying the judge who grants a divorce is against families and anti-marriage and the lawyers aided and abetted the children’s kidnapping.  Those who legally advocate for laws to be changed are not “assisting”, “aiding and abetting” laws to be broken and certainly are not partners with those who exploit children.  Next thing you will tell us is that the ACLU provided the chains to the plant door and/or the dorms.

7. Posted by J.D. - 2 months, 3 weeks, 2 days, 12 hours, 15 minutes ago

   @ Native.

   If only the ACLU and Friends were “advocating the laws to be changed.“

   In reality, they’re advocating NON-ENFORCEMENT of existing laws. They are fighting tooth and nail any effort to hold individuals accountable. They are working for mass amnesty which is the DEFINITION of anarchy.

   I’m sorry you’re so under-informed about what is taking place in immigration arena these days. Clearly, you’re taking the elitist position on the issue: Bush, Big Business, Mexico, and the cheap-labor seekers thank you!

8. Posted by kf - 2 months, 3 weeks, 1 day, 13 hours, 6 minutes ago

   Give me a break.  Having owned a business that employs numerous teens and young adults, I would bet these “child labor violations” are mainly or entirely minor infractions involving teens who happened to, say, work a few minutes past the arbitrary and unrealistic state-mandated stop time (which is as early as 6pm in some states), or worked more than the, again, arbitrary and unrealistic state-mandated limit on weekly hours (which in some states is as little as three hours per day), or performed a prohibited job-task (which in some states includes using a knife to cut vegetables).  These are actual, verifiable examples, on the books.  Each instance would constitute a separate violations, which quickly add up.  This probably accounts for the 9311 alleged violations here, where 32 under-18 workers were involved.  These archaic state rules saddle businesses and young workers, and are routinely broken, particularly by small/family businesses. Agencies do not regularly monitor compliance, so transgressions often go unpunished.  The frequency of these occurrences and lack of consistent enforcement doesn’t excuse the rule-breakers, but this sounds like a case where, for whatever (political) reason, the enforcement agencies chose to make an example, when the real targets were undocumented workers.  I see little, if any, relation between these “child labor violations” and the immigration debate on which you have all focused in this forum.

9. Posted by wb - 2 months, 3 weeks, 1 day, 12 hours, 13 minutes ago

   Actually, kf, it is illegal under state and federal law for children under 18 to work in a meat processing plant in the slaughter/butchering process, and the packaging process (assuming there is power equipment involved).  There are very few jobs that I can think of that a person under 18 could perform at this company (administrative/clerical); so it’s pretty implausible that they made the innocent mistake of employing dozens of kids.  And the hours violations?  A lot of these kids reported working over 12 hours a day.

   You can read a story on the violations (and generally egregious working conditions) here:
   http://www.nytimes.com/2008/07/27/us/27immig.html?scp=9&sq=agriprocessors&st=cse

10. Posted by Matt - 2 months, 3 weeks, 1 day, 12 hours, 9 minutes ago

    I would think that you need some sort of authorization to work if you’re under a certain age and since these people were working without any sort of authorization that would be why the state can take the additional step of fining the company for employing underage children.

11. Posted by Matt - 2 months, 3 weeks, 1 day, 12 hours, 5 minutes ago

    I withdraw my last comment i did not see that it is illegal for children under 18 to work at a meat processing plant

12. Posted by anon - 2 months, 3 weeks, 1 day, 10 hours, 29 minutes ago

    JD is right in one respect, the ACLU is at the forefront of the decline in personal responsibility in this nation.

13. Posted by rwc - 2 months, 3 weeks, 1 day, 10 hours, 7 minutes ago

    Never mind the child labor.  I wish someone would check into how this company treats animals before and during slaughter process.

14. Posted by Daniel - 2 months, 3 weeks, 1 day, 10 hours, 5 minutes ago

    I really wonder sometimes if any of the people commenting on the ABA stories are attorneys. The comments are often about name calling and staking out completely unfounded “facts”.

    If JD is a J.D., our bar has really fallen - “the ACLU is at the forefront of the decline in personal responsibility in this nation.“ Really?? And I am not saying this out of any support for the ACLU; I say this because such comments add nothing to a reasoned debate, which is what lawyers are supposed to be trained to do.

15. Posted by J.D. - 2 months, 3 weeks, 1 day, 8 hours, 10 minutes ago

    Well, Daniel, I hope you don’t have a J.D. either, because you’ve attributed a quote to me that I never typed.

    You should do some research on the immigration positions of the groups I listed. I can’t write up a dissertation for you. After all, this is a “comment” board, not a thesis board.

    If you don’t understand that these groups are absolutely hostile to all forms of immigration enforcement, then you are simply not paying attention.

16. Posted by Concerned - 2 months, 3 weeks, 23 hours, 31 minutes ago

    rwc, I have a hard time believing that you would be more concerned about animals than minor children.  Apparently, you are not much past your own majority and are not a parent.  In time you will learn to focus on what is truly important, and what is important is the health and well being of the next generation, not animals.

17. Posted by Don't believe the truth - 2 months, 3 weeks, 22 hours, 10 minutes ago

    The comments that have been made don’t amazed me, it’s the same anti -immigrant rhetoric used over and over. The immigration topic has turned into a heated debate that doesn’t provide real solutions, it only polarizes people.

18. Posted by J.D. - 2 months, 2 weeks, 5 days, 11 hours, 14 minutes ago

    ^ This debate isn’t about “immigrants.“ It’s about illegal immigration. It’s about the rule of law.

    Advocating for “amnesty” and open-borders is anti-immigrant. Why? Because immigrants—people who have come here legally—do not want low-wage competition from people who did not take the time, money, and effort to come here the right way.

    Immigrants oppose illegal immigration. That’s something the media fails to report.

    Unfortunately, #17, you fail to understand that you’re working for the cheap-labor lobby.