In 2007, a U.S. District Court judge in California had enjoined the U.S. Department of Homeland Security from enforcing new rules that changed the language of the no-match letters issued by the Social Security Administration and the requirements for how employers must respond to the letters. DHS announced that its final no-match rule was taking effect Oct. 28, 2008.

The year that the Society for Human Resource Management (SHRM) predicts will carry “the most sweeping HR-related changes in 30 years” starts with a bang this month as HR professionals must adapt to important changes to two key employment laws—the FMLA and the ADA—and replace their I-9 forms.

U.S. employers must begin using a revised version of the I-9 Form starting Feb. 2. Employers that use the current edition of the I-9 (dated 06/05/2007) after Feb. 2 may be subject to fines.

How should employers respond to a government “no-match letter” that identifies discrepancies between an employee’s name and the Social Security number provided for I-9 purposes? The Department of Homeland Security tried to clarify that issue last year with new regulations, but a lawsuit held it up.

It will soon be time once again to trash those blank I-9 forms that you have stuffed in your files. The feds announced on Dec. 17 that U.S. employers must begin using a revised version of the Form I-9 by Feb. 2, 2009.

Station Casino executives want to know what their employees dream about. A 20-question “dream survey” asks workers at the Las Vegas-based organization questions like, “Do you dream of owning your own house?” and “Do you dream of owning your own computer?”

Federal law says employers are allowed, but not required, to make copies of the drivers' licenses and other documents that their employees show for I-9 purposes. But is it legally wise to make those copies? Attorneys are split on the issue. Here's our analysis, plus answers to six common I-9 questions ...

While the Obama victory grabbed the headlines on Election Day, voter referendums in several states and cities ushered in important employment law changes. Here are some key results.

Employees who claim their employers somehow discriminated against them because they have immigration problems or aren’t U.S. citizens can’t automatically sue for national-origin discrimination under the Minnesota Human Rights Act or Title VII. Instead, they must prove that the underlying discrimination was based on national origin.

An employee is an employee, regardless of his or her right to be present in the United States and work here. Thus, even illegal immigrants who were hourly employees can sue for back pay if their employers didn’t pay at least minimum wage and overtime.

The Department of Homeland Security has, for the second time, issued a final rule on what employers must do when they receive "no-match" letters questioning the employment eligibility of their workers. Immigrant-right groups are preparing to oppose the rule. Next stop: a federal court in California, where a judge will decide whether the new rule is constitutional.

In the largest raid ever conducted in the Carolinas, U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) detained more than 300 workers at Columbia Farms, a House of Raeford Poultry plant in Columbia, S.C. Roughly 100 agents swept through the plant just before 9 a.m. on Oct. 7, sending workers scattering ...

The number of people immigrating to the United States, both legally and illegally, has slowed dramatically. Main reasons: increased enforcement of immigration laws coupled with the sputtering U.S. economy.

Five Mexican citizens living illegally in the United States pleaded guilty to forcing undocumented workers to labor on their family farm in Immokalee ...

Besim and Gentiana Tabaku, owners of Toni’s Family Restaurant in Mount Clare, recently pleaded guilty to employing illegal immigrants. The Tabakus employed at least five Mexican men who were in the United States illegally ...