Immigration debate, legal charges against employers (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Dungeon of Political and Religious Discussion



Message

Vendaval -> Immigration debate, legal charges against employers (5/27/2010 2:07:01 AM)

The L.A. Times ran this story last weekend about an immigration raid where the employer rather than the employees was the target. Should the restaurant owner be prosecuted and serve prison time? Should his business and property be seized by the federal government?

(one paragraph bolded for emphasis, format edit)



"Immigration agency targets upscale San Diego restaurant"

Federal officials hope the prosecution of Michel Malecot, owner of San Diego's French Gourmet, will deter other employers from knowingly hiring undocumented workers. Malecot has pleaded not guilty.

May 25, 2010|By Richard Marosi and Anna Gorman, Los Angeles Times
Reporting from San Diego

In this palm-lined seaside neighborhood, Michel Malecot is known for dishing out the tasty baguettes, pastries and wedding cakes that have made his French Gourmet restaurant a fixture for 31 years.

The chef, popular in San Diego catering and philanthropic circles, was indicted last month on 12 felony counts of knowingly hiring illegal immigrants.

The indictment reflects a new approach by federal authorities as they crack down on the hiring of illegal immigrants in the United States. After years of conducting sweeps of undocumented laborers, the federal government is now focusing more on the employers who knowingly hire them.

Malecot, 52, has pleaded not guilty. If convicted, he could face a maximum of five years in prison per count and a $250,000 fine per count. The government is also seeking to seize the restaurant, which includes the bakery and a catering business as well as a neighboring building owned by Malecot, saying the property should be forfeited because it was used in a crime.

The indictment charges that Malecot and his manager, Richard Kauffman, 51, knowingly hired illegal immigrants for several years, even after being notified that the workers' Social Security numbers were false.

A gregarious man who built his business after emigrating from France, Malecot said that he's a "stickler on paperwork" and that the undocumented workers represented a tiny fraction of the hundreds he has employed over the years. "We're just regular guys trying to make a living," he said in an interview at his restaurant, which has remained open since the raid.

His lawyer criticizes the government's effort to seize the restaurant. "The forfeiture laws are made for crack and methamphetamine [cases], not crème brûlée," said attorney Eugene Iredale.

But the government's strategy seems to have accomplished one of its goals — using a high-profile case to warn other businesses that they, too, could be hit. In San Diego, the French Gourmet case has generated extensive media coverage."


http://articles.latimes.com/2010/may/25/local/la-me-imm-gourmet-20100525



Elisabella -> RE: Immigration debate, legal charges against employers (5/27/2010 2:16:03 AM)

I love how he doesn't even bother trying to say it's not true, he just tries to justify it.



mefisto69 -> RE: Immigration debate, legal charges against employers (5/27/2010 3:19:42 AM)

This type of prosecution should have commenced Years ago - and I hope they fuck him hard.



eyesopened -> RE: Immigration debate, legal charges against employers (5/27/2010 3:48:16 AM)

As far as I'm concerned this is really going to be the only way to effectively solve the problem.  No where did Malecot cry that he could not find any US citizens willing to work.  Or that paying minimum wage would put him out of business. 

It is a simple and free task to check SSNs.  Employers who don't need to investigated.  Making it less profitable to hire illegals than legal citizens is also a step toward easing unemployment.  Personally, I'd be willing to pay a little more for a really great baguette if I also knew the business supported the American worker.

I know I've mentioned this story before but my own son was nearly prevented from working at Target because they DO check ssn numbers and his came back as being used by somone who happened to have a hispanic name.  We were the ones who had to go to Social Security and fix the problem and then monitor his credit report to make sure the identity thief didn't also ruin his credit.  For that reason I will pay more to shop at Target for everything (and we have a Super Target where I can also buy my groceries) rather than to patronize WalMart. 

I can't fix the problem but I can make an effort to support the US legal worker wherever I can.




pahunkboy -> RE: Immigration debate, legal charges against employers (5/27/2010 3:53:57 AM)

I would take them out for ice cream, and then we all would go to Disneyland. 



Louve00 -> RE: Immigration debate, legal charges against employers (5/27/2010 4:10:23 AM)

I'm glad they finally did it.  I hope they not only make an example out of him, but continue to do this and eventually it sinks in to businesses like this.  As Elisabella pointed out he's not even recognizing he broke the law, but only making justifications for himself.  Thats how long overdue...and how much of an accepted standard its become.  Good!



Elisabella -> RE: Immigration debate, legal charges against employers (5/27/2010 4:27:56 AM)

quote:

No where did Malecot cry that he could not find any US citizens willing to work.  Or that paying minimum wage would put him out of business. 


Exactly.



LadyEllen -> RE: Immigration debate, legal charges against employers (5/27/2010 4:29:22 AM)

Jail the owner, pay off the workers and deport them, informing them that should they be discovered in the US again without lawful excuse then they shall face jail time too and be deported again afterwards. If they have not received minimum wage for the entire time they have worked then they should be compensated accordingly from the value of the restaurant - less whatever taxes might have been due had they been working legally (probably meaning they get nothing if they have not paid taxes).

Then oblige the accountant to the owner to prove what element of the value of the restaurant can be attributed to lawful working practices. The owner gets to keep that part and whatever cannot be proven to have been acquired lawfully is assumed to have been the proceeds of crime and confiscated.

This is what "being tough on illegal immigration, and tough on the causes of illegal immigration" is about.

Interesting though that a French guy is targetted. Testing the waters perhaps on someone less likely to receive popular sympathy?

E



Louve00 -> RE: Immigration debate, legal charges against employers (5/27/2010 4:52:18 AM)

hehe.  I have to chuckle to myself about testing the waters to see what response would be taken.  When I say, first off, who cares about the response.  If the gov't doesn't starting doing something more and more states and people will take law (and action of law) into their own hands.  Second off, he emmigrated from France.  And it was stated he was a stickler for paperwork.  I can understand him wanting to give an immigrant a job, but why not help them become legal immigrants like he did?  That would have been a greater justice than just employment at (or below) minimum wage. 



catfightservice -> RE: Immigration debate, legal charges against employers (5/27/2010 5:20:56 AM)

When will we wake up? Illegal immiration is not the big problem in this country. Its a drop in the barrell. This country was started by immigrants. Immigrants that stole the land from native americans. Oh ya and then they imported kidnaped africans to be slaves over here and to ther labor that the settlers were to F***ing lazy to do. Real nice. Something this country should be proud of right?Sickening. Now we are up on our soap box pointing our fingers on who can come in and who cant? Back to my point of the problem. Ok there is a certain amount o undoccumented workers here.about 4 million. Thats less than 1% of the over all population. Yes they do sometimes take jobs that citezens could be doing. But that is not the problem. There is something far greater right under everyones nose. And I get frustrated because people are so naieve and apathetic of it. The super corporations!!!! Walmart, McDonalds, Dunkin Doughnuts, Burgerking, Home Depot. These corporations are ruthless bastards. They have no allgence to this country what so ever. None!!!! They are the ones that are killing this economy. They make it so the independent businessman doesnt stand a chance. Look at Walmart. They are so good, they only hire documnted workers. Gee thats great. BUT....... They buy all the crap in their stores from CHINA!!!!! from factories that pay their workers 1or 2 dollars an hour!!!!!! far less money than an illegal will work in this country for!!!! They buy this crap from china for change. short money. and they they mark it up 700-1000% So when you buy from walmart you give your money to china, and you make the shareholders fatter and fatter. At the same time you are also defering potential revenue that could be going to independent business men. Walmart has got it locked up so american factories cant even produce anything anymore. Watch a movie called "Walmart the high costs of low prices". You have asimmilar situation with restraunt franchises. They serve crap food that hasbeen marked up 6 0r 7 hundred% They are on every corner.They've got areas so saturated that its tough for the new restraunt owner to make it. What they both have in common? They are super powers. Multi billion dollar corporations, that are operated by workers at minimum wage, with no benefits, no health insurance. Walmart and the food franchises will onl hire workers for 38.5 hours a week because they are so afraid of paying overtime. But they are legal.The share holders, and corporate workers are all documented workers.... that are RAPING this country. So go ahead and call ICE on the poor mexican mowing someones lawn, that risked his life to come here, just to make some money so he could buy medicine for his sick mother in Mexico. That will fix the economy. Please!!! Enough. We need to start putting our effort into protesting, and boycotting these unethical super corporations.



pahunkboy -> RE: Immigration debate, legal charges against employers (5/27/2010 5:36:15 AM)

OMG.


I need a cigarette.



ThatDaveGuy69 -> RE: Immigration debate, legal charges against employers (5/27/2010 5:37:18 AM)

Cat:
First let me say: Punctuation is your friend.

Second, the stereotype of Mexican illegals doing only landscape work is SO old. Take a look around at construction sites, meat packing plants, and the IT industry, to name just a few. The construction industry is virtually flooded with undocumented workers. And that is certainly NOT something that Americans are too lazy to do. I've worked in IT for over 25 years and over the last 10 I've had to compete with the insane H1B program. It's tough make a living when a guy from India is willing to do the same job for less than 1/2 the wage.

As for the mega-corps, I agreee that shopping at Walmart is not in our best national interest. But they're really just taking the whole low price thing to it's logical conclusion. Walmart didn't export the manufacturing jobs, they're just exploiting the situation to the fullest extent possible. Perfectly leagal, morally bankrupt.

McD's & BK? I don't even know where to go with that.

~Dave



Moonhead -> RE: Immigration debate, legal charges against employers (5/27/2010 5:42:36 AM)

I doubt I'd call either a restaurant, myself. They're restaurants the same way that Robbie fucking Williams is a jazz singer.



Sanity -> RE: Immigration debate, legal charges against employers (5/27/2010 5:43:31 AM)


Awesome  [sm=applause.gif]

Thanks for posting the article Ven. We don't have to round up tens of millions of illegals, we just have to do this a few times and the illegals will stop coming here and the ones who have already snuck in will be forced to go back home on their own accord.



thishereboi -> RE: Immigration debate, legal charges against employers (5/27/2010 5:43:47 AM)

quote:

I can understand him wanting to give an immigrant a job, but why not help them become legal immigrants like he did?


Just guessing because obviously I have not idea, but I would say it's because then he would have to pay them fair wages and give them benefits. I think that's the main reason a lot of people from California want the US to ignore the illegal immigrants. Then they won't be able to take advantage of all that really cheap labor.



LadyEllen -> RE: Immigration debate, legal charges against employers (5/27/2010 5:45:41 AM)

Absolutely CFS - but that is what you all voted for, over and over again - a corporate coup d'etat. The warning signs were not only there but they were pointed out repeatedly. And each person who pointed them out was denounced as a "socialist" and written off. And if you want to protest now, you'll be a terrorist and a socialist.

Good, innit?

And these same seditious forces are what have driven the pull for illegal immigration throughout. So that when people wake up to whats going on not only can they be directed to illegal immigrants as the source of their troubles but they can also be written off as racists for wanting the law enforced. And the band shall play on.

So that when some guy comes into the game and promises to change things, anyone with any sense wants that change and votes for him, but then doesnt realise that the forces he's up against are so deeply entrenched in the seats of power and so adept at manipulating the minds of the masses that they soon come to see him as a socialist and a threat to their very beings, even though he can achieve little because of their resistance and denouncements of him for every little thing he does.

E





DaddysInkedSlut -> RE: Immigration debate, legal charges against employers (5/27/2010 5:45:52 AM)

It's long over due and IMO only when we start punishing the employeers will we really stop illegals from working in the US. The employeers up to this point haven't had to face any REAL consequences for breaking the law.



thishereboi -> RE: Immigration debate, legal charges against employers (5/27/2010 5:48:34 AM)

quote:

So go ahead and call ICE on the poor mexican mowing someones lawn, that risked his life to come here, just to make some money so he could buy medicine for his sick mother in Mexico.


So the answer is to keep taking advantage of him and paying him below minimum wage because he is so desperate? Do you honestly think it's ok to take advantage of him like that?



pahunkboy -> RE: Immigration debate, legal charges against employers (5/27/2010 5:50:49 AM)

The issue is not Mexican personhood.   It is corporate personhood.

I dont hate people.    Tho- I would sign the form to cut of tax payer money to most "services".  Stop funding it and the problem corrects.

Cat is spot on.  We oppress people the globe over.     We do it again and again.  

Sure I prefer to live around people who are just like me.  but - if we hype this too much- what effects occur?

Cut the money.   Easy fix.



Moonhead -> RE: Immigration debate, legal charges against employers (5/27/2010 5:52:25 AM)

As Lady E points out, your current management is trying to set this one rolling but the last CEO was one of those Texas businessmen who wouldn't want to force his peers to pay somebody a living wage when they could hire a wetback for peanuts instead. Iirc, Bush blathered a lot about immigration, while doing absolutely fuck all about the problem.



Page: [1] 2 3 4 5   next >   >>

Valid CSS!




Collarchat.com © 2025
Terms of Service Privacy Policy Spam Policy
0.03125