Trump winery asks to hire more foreign workers

No it says in the article did you read it? He gave it to his son seven years ago.

 

So what if his son owns it? His kids own lots of things that he has not interest in. Can YOU prove that he gets any income or has any control of the business?

 

Sure.

There was one case, apparently 35+ years ago, where a contractor he hired used illegal aliens.

The illegal aliens sued their boss and won.

I see you don't understand how hiring contractors works.

If you hire a company to cut your grass, and that company employees illegal aliens, are you somehow responsible for that?

 

Once again.........HIRE AMERICAN on the sign.
Trump pushes 'Buy American, Hire American' policy in Wisconsin

 

Once again, a farcical denial of reality to attempt to use base, limited terms to come to a conclusion.

Something you see a lot of 4 year olds do.

 

The answer could be yes, you as the owner of the company are responsible and using contractors is not a valid legal excuse. During the campaign,
there were numerous stories of Trump employees who admitted that they were undocumented workers.

In a recent, highly publicized settlement between Wal-Mart and the Department of Homeland Security (“DHS”) arising from the employment of undocumented workers by Wal-Mart contractors, Wal-Mart agreed to pay $11,000,000 to resolve charges that it violated the Immigration Reform and Control Act (“IRCA”).[1] Most employers assume that they are not responsible for the employment practices of their contractors. The Wal-Mart settlement has left many employers wondering whether they too could be held liable for IRCA violations committed by vendors and consultants they thought were independent. In this article, we explain the legal background of IRCA and what went wrong at Wal-Mart. We then offer tips to minimize the risk of incurring liability arising from contractors’ IRCA violations.

Legal Background: IRCA

Under IRCA, employers must not knowingly hire or continue to employ any person not authorized to work in the United States. Employers also have an independent obligation under IRCA to verify the employment eligibility of every person hired by the employer through the I-9 process.[2] An employer acts knowingly if it has constructive knowledge that a worker is not authorized to work in the United States.[3] Constructive knowledge can be inferred “through notice of certain facts and circumstances which would lead a person, through the exercise of reasonable care, to know about a certain condition.”[4] Such knowledge can be inferred where the employer “(i) Fails to complete or improperly completes the I-9; (ii) Has information available to it that would indicate that the alien is not authorized to work . . . ; or (iii) Acts with reckless and wanton disregard for the legal consequences of permitting another individual to introduce an unauthorized alien into its work force or to act on its behalf.”[5]

The law also makes it clear that an employer cannot evade the requirements of IRCA through the use of independent contractors. To that end, if an employer uses a contractor for the purpose of retaining the services of an illegal alien, the employer is deemed to have illegally “hired” the alien as though he or she were an employee.[6]

 

Now you're off topic.

The issue here is about hiring temp labor from outside the US instead of hiring American workers.

Or, are you claiming that no American workers qualify for these jobs that are said to pay more than $11/hour, and that the work is so temporary that these unique workers from outside the US must be hired and then discarded?

 

More ad hom.

Fail.

 

4 year olds......Sounds like the man-child Crooked Donnie.
Speaking of man-children, WTF are you mumbling about?

 

Your first two paragraphs are not even in contention - so I don't know why you bothered to type them.

And, the last sentence ignores how free market economics works.

All you are suggesting is that it's possible to hire foreign workers at a lower rate than local competitive rates for labor.

Why would you think that is unknown?

 

I am saying that some of the workers that this company are hoping to hire require temporary work permits. I'm not opposed to companies doing that. I don't know the person in charge of the hiring or what went into their decisions.

 

I agree.

Trump has no excuse here. His sons run much of his business and they are tightly tied to the executive branch.

 

This shows that you do not know the difference between guest workers and immigrants. The type of workers Trump wants/needs girls his winery are questvworkers who are temporary workers and not immigrants.

 

It has exactly the same effect on American labor as does illegal immigration.

Waving a "legality wand" over their head doesn't change anything related to labor.

 

lol.

Guest workers are a type - the type being easily discardable labor that can be paid below market value in the US.

 

Well that was because I started off by clearly defning legal vs. illegal immigration when I asked the question.

The last sentence ignores none of it, you just apparently didn't understand it.

If zero American workers are applying for the job, then there are zero American workers wages to depress.

The task, of course, is to limit temporary work visas to specific things that cannot be filled with the existing workforce.

I'd submit it would be better to make those receiving government assistance to fill those jobs in order to get government payments, but that's another discussion.

 

And the fact that immigration (illegal) has been greatly reduced under DT has had the effect of raising wages, so I think you and I can both agree that DT has done a good thing here. Do you agree? DT is not against all immigration or guest workers. He believes it should be controlled and managed in an orderly fashion that benefits the American worker. He does not believe companies should not hire temporary workers. Apparently the hiring manager at this winery feels the same way.

 

Of course it does, because the numbers of those applying must be approved, and are easily controlled based on how many visas are issued, vs mass mobs moving into the country illegally.

 

Oh I love it when the mouth foaming starts.

 

Uh, no.

Ignoring the full explanation to focus instead on specific words to come to a conclusion is exactly what he is doing, and is exactly what liberals do to try and make a case.

It is a childish argument, farcical, and just makes the person using it look stupid.

 

Before you try being a teacher you should clean up your grammar. Are you drinking and posting or something?

 

Unless, of course, you work in California where you would be thrown in jail for doing so.

Regardless, IRCA was passed in 1986, which is after the time that Trump was said to have "hired illegal aliens".

Since there is only one example of Trump having done this, and it was before IRCA, that pretty much destroys your argument.

 

And moving a factory to a lower-cost country also seems like a good business decision. But Trump vilified companies for doing that. Hiring guest workers is no different.

I'm sure there a lot of Americans who would love to take a job at 11.52 an hour. Why not them?

 

My gramma died long ago. My iPad is a horrible typing skills. My logic is just fantastic.

 

And the moon is made of swiss cheese and the earth is flat.