Bloomberg News on 1/27/2011 released the findings of its report on a proposal to require every U.S. employer to use E-Verify to confirm the legal status of all new hires.  The report  revealed that businesses with less than 500 employees would undoubtedly bear the greatest burden, spending about $2.6 billion a year to use the government’s “free” web-based program, compared with less than $100 million for the 4% that used it in 2010.

A study conducted in December 2010 by Westat that was commissioned by the government as part of a multi-year evaluation of the E-Verify program represents the result of their 2009 findings of a nationwide survey of 511 respondents that encompassed nonusers (companies that have never signed a Memorandum of Understanding) to participate in E-Verify, focus groups of nonusers, surveys of users, and interviews with employees that received TNC’s (Tentative Non-Confirmations).

The primary finding of the survey and the principal barrier to participation in E-Verify appears to be a lack of awareness of the Program. Among the case study participants, 63 percent were not familiar with E-Verify. Case study participants were often positive about the characteristics of E-Verify, and among the 101 who answered a question concerning their future plans, 23 percent definitely planned to participate in E-Verify in the future (while 32 percent would not participate unless mandated to do so).

For those employers who have heard of E-Verify, the information often came from professional associations, media outlets and government materials or publications.

The other primary reasons for not participating were not perceiving a benefit from participating, and thinking it would be too costly or time-consuming to participate.  The perception of burden is based in part on employers’ negative experiences with other government Internet-based programs (such as the Social Security Administration/Business Services Online Website).

Large employers were much more likely to be familiar with E-Verify than small employers. A majority of large employers in the case study (56 percent) were familiar with E-Verify, compared with 29 percent of medium-sized employers and 17 percent of small employers.

The case study participants supported many program changes to E-Verify, with the most popular including the increased use of technology to identify fraudulent documents and to verify identity, allowing a formal appeal by an employer and/or employee of a final case finding, and allowing verification of job applicants before a job decision is made.

Some participants who decided not to use the program did so because they did not perceive any benefit in using it compared to the cost, the manpower, training and the logistics required to use the program.  Others were not using it because they felt that it was a government priority rather than a business priority.  Some felt that it wasn’t their responsibility to control illegal immigration and that it should be the government’s responsibility.

One insightful response came from a business owner who stated, “Hold me, personally, and my company harmless from any loopholes in the system that become exploited by the undocumented population . . . bottom line . . . I don’t want to make the 5 o’clock news by complying with a broken system.”

In summary, E-Verify is not perfect – it doesn’t identify identity theft issues, but it is immigration compliance best practice and should carefully be considered and the pro’s and con’s discussed with an immigration attorney that is informed and specializes in employer compliance issues prior to enrollment.

We link to the Westat Study here.  More on E-Verify Strengths and Weaknesses

We link to our I-9 Employer Compliance Resource Center here.