DEMANDS RISE ON CONGRESS TO GUARANTEE
IMMIGRANT RIGHTS
By David Bacon
TruthOut (4/15/13)
In San
Diego, California, nine activists completed six days of a hunger
strike outside the Mission Valley Hilton Hotel on April 10 -- the day
demonstrations took place across the U.S. demanding immigration
reform. Hunger strikers were protesting the firing of 14 of the
hotel's workers, after Evolution Hospitality, the company operating
the Hilton franchise, told them that it had used the government's
E-Verify database to determine that they didn't have legal immigration
status.
"The company says that
E-Verify is making them do this, even though many of the workers have
been working here for years," said Sara Garcia, a supporter and
hunger striker from House of Organized Neighbors, a local community
organization. "But they started firing them when the workers
were organizing a union."
"I clean
16 to 18 rooms a day, and they pay me $8.65 an hour. No one can
live on that," explained Leticia Nava, a fired worker. " I'm
a widow with three children who depend on me. What is happening
is not just. We are immigrant workers, and the only thing we're
asking is to work. That's not hurting anyone."
Garcia and Nava
accuse the company of using the government system for immigration
enforcement in the workplace, a database called E-Verify, in order to
retaliate against 14 women for their union support. But they
also say that the E-Verify system is used much more extensively, to
fire workers even where no union organizing is taking
place.

San Francisco demonstrators call for an
end to immigration-based firings.
"Many
companies are doing the same thing. They're manipulating the
system because what they're really interested in is low wages," Nava
charged. "This isn't the first time this happened to me.
I was fired the same way two years ago. Now my children are all
scared because they see it's harder for me every day. Tomorrow I'll
have to go out and find another job, and E-Verify makes that more and
more difficult. The impact on us is not just money - it affects
all aspects of my life."
Nava and Garcia joined the tens of thousands of immigrants and
immigrant rights activists who demonstrated on April 10, calling for
the reform of U.S. immigration laws. Yet on the same day,
legislators drafting reform proposals in the U.S. Senate proposed
changes that would make Nava's experience more widespread than ever,
which were then contained in a bill they introduced a week
later.
Both Garcia and Nava agreed that getting rid of E-Verify
should be part of immigration reform. "This part of the law is
inhumane and unjust," Garcia says. "It has economic,
psychological and even moral effects. Instead of children
worrying about schoolwork they're worried about how they'll survive or
even just eat." Nava declared simply, "This part of the law
should be eliminated."
Congress, however, proposes to exact
a price for the legalization of undocumented immigrants.
The "Gang of Eight" Senators drafting the reform bill announced
they intend to expand the E-Verify system to cover all employers, and
make its use mandatory. This was only one of a number of
measures that would increase the severity of many of the
anti-immigrant measures already part of U.S. law.
Lorena Reyes, who was fired from her job
as a housekeeper at the San Jose Hyatt Hotel because she supports the
union and protested sexual harassment, marched for immigrant
rights.
The Hilton
workers and their supporters, as well as the union helping them,
UniteHere, all believe that immigration reform should include a
legalization process. They want one that would give the 11-12
million undocumented people living in the United States a quick and
accessible way to gain legal status. That demand ran through all
of the hundreds of demonstrations around the country, from the 30,000
people on the mall in front of the Capitol Building in Washington DC
to the thousand marchers in downtown San Francisco. It was a
demand voiced by hundreds of janitors and security guards in Silicon
Valley, and by teachers and elementary school students in Berkeley,
California.
The Senators, however, are proposing a plan that would require
undocumented people to spend a decade in a provisional status before
even being able to apply for permanent legal residence. Then
they would have to maintain that status for another three years before
they could apply to become citizens, and gain basic political rights.
The citizenship process is so overloaded that processing applications
now takes months, even years. And instead of anticipating the
logistical bottleneck of millions of people applying for citizenship
at the same time, the Senators declared that legalization applicants
would get no dedicated process.
People seeking legal status would have to "get in the back
of the line" - their visa applications would be processed only after
all other pending applications. That could have people waiting even
more years. Today the government is still processing visa
applications for some relatives of U.S. citizens and residents that
were filed over two decades ago. The undocumented would only
become eligible for residence if they learned English, and were
continuously employed for 10 years, or were family members of someone
who was.
Silicon Valley janitors and security
guards marching for immigrant rights.
The Senators further announced they would charge each
applicant a penalty of $500 to file an application, another $500 six
years later, and a further $1000 before they could apply for
residence, on top of fees to cover the costs of the program.
Leticia Nava, for instance, would have to raise $2000 right away for
herself and her children, and would acquire an additional obligation
of $6000 plus fees. At $8.65 an hour, paying it would be hard.
The idea of long waiting periods and obstacles was criticized by
AFL-CIO President Richard Trumka, who warned, "Families, including
siblings and children must not pay the price of our broken
policies."
An even greater shift in U.S. immigration policy is in the
works, however. The Senators chipped away at the family
preference system itself. They announced that there would no
longer be a category allowing visa applications for the brothers and
sisters of U.S. citizens. At the same time their bill would
create a new program eventually giving 120,000 visas a year to people
with the work skills demanded by U.S. employers, rated on a point
system. The undocumented could apply for these "merit-based"
visas, but would compete against others.
This moves U.S. immigration policy backwards in time.
Through the cold war it was structured to allow employers to bring
workers, called braceros, to labor on the railroads and in the
fields. At the same time, ferocious immigration enforcement led
to the deportation of as many as a million immigrants a year -- called
"wetbacks" -- who tried to work outside of that guest worker
program. The civil rights movement abolished the bracero
program, and with the 1965 Immigration and Naturalization Act, a
family based system replaced it.
A Silicon Valley student in the April 10
demonstration.
"Even before the braceros we had contract labor, like
the system that brought my ancestors, Chinese farmers, to build the
railroads and set up irrigated agriculture here," explained Rev.
Deborah Lee of the Interfaith Coalition for Immigrant Rights in
Oakland, California. "Whether we were Chinese migrants or
braceros, we were just labor. Companies could spit you out
and send you back home. They still can - we still have programs
like that. We need to recognize the humanity of people.
We're not just workers -- we're human beings. We need a system
in which we can create families, have our spouses come, raise our
children and be part of society. So the Senators are really
changing the definition."
Even more direct labor supply schemes will
be part of the Senators' bill. Currently the three main official
guest worker visa programs, H1B, H2A and H2B, allow employers to
recruit about 250,000 workers outside the country every year, and
bring them with visas that require them to work in order to stay.
Some allow workers to change jobs (H1B), while others require them to
remain with the employer who contracted them (H2A and H2B).
Some, but not all, visa programs require employers to recruit locally
first (H2A), and allow workers to eventually apply for residence
(H1B).
In parallel with the Senators' deliberations, the AFL-CIO and
the U.S. Chamber of Commerce announced agreement on yet another such
program, called the W visa. It would allow employers to recruit
workers to fill labor shortages documented by a new Federal
commissioner, require them to recruit locally first, and peg wages of
guest workers to an employer's existing wage scale or to prevailing
wages in the industry in which they're recruited. Workers would
be able to change jobs, but could not remain out of work for longer
than 60 days or they'd have to leave the country.
Ana Avendaño, assistant to AFL-CIO President Trumka and
director of immigration and community action for the AFL-CIO, wrote
that under this proposal "employers have the comfort of
knowing that, as the economy picks up, workers-foreign or
domestic-will be available to fill jobs that will fuel economic
growth. Workers have the comfort of knowing that local workers
will have the chance to apply for those jobs."
In San Francisco, the march included
activists from the Chinese and Filipino communities.
Making a
deal on a new guest worker program is a means to win over Republican
Senators and Representatives who respond to employer
lobbying. In its mobilization efforts around the
country, the AFL-CIO and other Washington DC-based lobbying groups
have announced their central priority is a "pathway to citizenship"
- that is, a legalization program for the undocumented.
This goal is painted in broad strokes.
"There is absolutely no distinction," said President Trumka at an
event kicking off an April 10 rally, "between workers who were born
in this country and those who came here to build a better life.
We're all in the same boat, every one of us who works for a living. We
rise or fall together."
Other organizations, however, have been critical of those
aspects of the Senators' plan that will increase enforcement and
expand labor supply programs. Communications Workers of America
President Larry Cohen warned "CWA will monitor any proposed changes
to visa programs like the H-1B visa, which are sought after by
business but have cost U.S. technicians and other workers tens of
thousands of jobs." The Senate bill would raise the numerical
limit on those visas. Columbia professor and former labor
organizer Mae Ngai noted in the New York Times "From the
agricultural 'Bracero Program' of the 1940s and '50s to the
current H-2 visa for temporary unskilled labor, these programs are
notorious for employer abuse."
In Washington State, Rosalinda Guillen, director of
Community2Community, a farm worker group that organizes cooperatives
and advocates for immigrant rights, worried that once undocumented
agricultural laborers gained legal status they would face competition
from guest workers brought into the country by growers. She
noted that the state's agricultural lobby is pushing intensely for
guest workers. The Senate bill transforms the existing H2A
agricultural guest worker program into two new ones -- W2 and
W3, and sets up a special legalization process for farm workers
in exhcange for making the programs more attractive to groweres.
The San Francisco marchers included a
contingent from the Progressive Workers Alliance, a group of
organizing projects among low wage workers.
"Farm
workers deserve an opportunity to begin building healthy sustainable
careers in the food system," she explained. "As long as
corporate agriculture is allowed to legally bring in an exploitable
workforce our food system will continue to decline and farm worker
families will continue to be the lowest paid workers in the country,
working one of the most dangerous jobs, so consumers can eat cheap
food and corporations can continue to get richer!"
Many of the April 10 rallies highlighted
other problems with U.S. immigration law. In Berkeley,
California, a group organized by teachers and the Alameda Central
Labor Council lined a pedestrian bridge across the freeway. They
were led by children from Jefferson Elementary School, who spoke to
the crowd. One, Kyle Kuwahara, read a letter he'd written to
President Barack Obama, protesting the decision by U.S. immigration
authorities to refuse to allow fourth-grade student Rodrigo Mendoza,
along with his family, to return home to Berkeley after a vacation in
Mexico.
"He has been in our school for five years and he is a friend
of mine," Kuwahara wrote. "Rodrigo is not free to come back.
In school we are learning about all these important people like Martin
Luther King and Rosa Parks who fought for people's civil rights and
freedom. So what about Rodrigo's freedom? Who is fighting for his
freedom?"
The Mendoza family's crisis higlighted the massive enforcement
wave of the last four years, in which over 2 million people have been
detained and deported. Almost all the April 10 rallies demanded
a moratorium on mass deportations while Congress debates reform
proposals. Some even demanded that the huge system of privately
run immigrant detention centers be dismantled.
Jefferson Elementary School students
called on President Obama to allow the Mendoza family to come back to
Berkeley.
Many in the
Berkeley crowd had also engaged in a long fight to save the jobs
workers at a local foundry, Pacific Steel Castings. In December
and January a year ago, 214 undocumented workers were fired after the
Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) agency examined company
records in a process called an I-9 audit. After identifying
workers who had no legal immigration status, or "work
authorization," ICE then sent the company a letter demanding it fire
them. The same process has led to the firing of hundreds of
thousand of workers across the country during the Obama
administration.
City councils throughout
the East Bay sent letters to DHS Secretary Janet Napolitano pointing
out that the firings would not only be a disaster for the families
involved, but would damage local communities. Political pressure
succeeded in delaying the firings, but couldn't stop them.
Richmond Mayor Gayle McLaughlin accused ICE of undermining her city's
already-devastated economy in the middle of a recession.
"Their firing is a violation of their human rights," she
said at the time. "When they say that [immigration] raids are
targeting criminals, it's not true. People who are just trying to make
a living are being targeted big time."
The company and the workers'
union, Molders Union Local 164, released a joint statement, in which
Pacific Steel declared, "These terminations were not only
devastating to the workers and their families, but also to the
workforce at PSC ... [We] implore the protestors to direct their
attention to the Department of Homeland Security and federal policy
makers." The union also criticized "the broken and unfair
laws used by the government to disrupt and destroy the lives of many
of our friends and colleagues."
A month before the April 10 demonstrations, one union
even went on strike against the firing of three workers in an E-Verify
check. The workers lost their jobs when Waste Management, Inc.,
fired them for lacking "work authorization." The company
sent them the notice in the middle of a bitter conflict over the union
contract with Local 6 of the International Longshore and Warehouse
Union.

Berkeley teachers and the Alameda County
Labor Council organized the students to come to the immigrant rights
demonstration.
"I believe
the