Associated Press (03/28/12)

Approximately 60 Democratic members of Congress have filed a friend-of-the-court brief with the U.S. Supreme Court expressing their opposition to Arizona’s 2010 immigration enforcement law and urging that the court uphold earlier legal rulings that bar the state from enforcing the law’s most controversial sections. Arizona Gov. Jan Brewer has asked the Supreme Court to overturn a lower-court ruling that, among other things, barred a requirement that police—while enforcing other laws—question the immigration status of those they suspect of being in the country illegally. The Democratic members of Congress assert that federal immigration law trumps state law. The Supreme Court will hear arguments on the Arizona law on April 25.

Associated Press (03/29/12)

Alabama companies must enroll in E-Verify, the federal government’s electronic employment eligibility verification program, by April 1. All companies must comply, regardless of size. Companies that fail to comply may lose their licenses.

Associated Press (03/28/12)

The U.S. Justice Department has reached a settlement with Wilton, CT-based Onward Healthcare over allegations that it posted discriminatory advertisements limiting jobs to U.S. citizens. The health care staffing company has agreed to pay $100,000 in civil penalties and change internal policies and manuals to reflect laws protecting noncitizens who are legally authorized to work. Authorities say Onward Healthcare limited applications to U.S. citizens over the course of a year even though lawful permanent residents and others should have been allowed to apply.

Palm Beach Post (Florida) (03/28/12) John Kennedy

Florida Gov. Rick Scott has signed into law a measure that will save businesses $800 million in unemployment payments over the next three years. The new law assesses lower taxes on companies for the benefits paid to unemployed workers and provides training to workers who receive low scores on a work skills test.

Lexology (03/22/12)

New guidance from the U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission indicates that employers could be in violation of the Americans With Disabilities Act if they require a high school diploma for certain jobs, particularly if they screen out applicants whose learning disability made it impossible for them to obtain a diploma and they cannot demonstrate that a diploma is job-related and necessary to the business. In a November 2011 letter, which is clarified in the new guidance, the EEOC said employers should determine whether applicants with learning disabilities could perform the job’s essential functions with reasonable accommodation. The guidance says employers should permit these individuals to demonstrate in a way other than with a high school diploma that they qualify for the position. However, employers considering multiple applicants do not have to give preference to the applicant with a disability if another applicant could do the job better.

Computerworld (03/28/12)

The U.S. Congress has not yet changed the H-1B visa cap, which stands at 85,000, including 20,000 visas for individuals with advanced degrees. A separate legislative move to make green cards somewhat automatic for individuals with advanced degrees in science, technology, engineering, or math-related subjects has also stalled. However, use of the L-1 visa has been increasing. There is no L-1 cap, although L-1 visa applicants must have specialized knowledge, which is defined by U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services as “beyond the ordinary and not commonplace within the industry.”

USCIS is considering broadening the definition of specialized knowledge. However, the Economic Policy Institute cautions that a broader definition could result in job losses for highly skilled American workers and exert downward pressure on wages. EPI says its data indicate that top users of the L-1 program are outsourcing companies “whose business model is to first hire L-1 workers to learn the work done by Americans, then to transfer that work overseas.”

Law.com (03/23/12) Cynthia Foster

The U.S. National Labor Relations Board mandate that companies hang a poster in lunch and break rooms notifying workers of their right to join a union and bargain collectively is being viewed by some management-side attorneys as a headache. The notice may spur questions from workers, and management may not respond appropriately to those questions, because much of the U.S. management force is “unsophisticated” when it comes to labor relations, says employment law attorney Fred Alvarez. A questionable response from management could be viewed as anti-union speech and trigger an unfair labor investigation. The poster is scheduled to be hung in most workplaces on April 30.