House, Senate Outline FY10 Budget Resolutions

COBRA Continuation Coverage - New Economic Stimulus Package Expands Employer Obligations

U.S. Department of Homeland Security Makes New Effort to Clarify “Safe Harbor” to No-Match Letters

Judge Puts Hold on Immigration Penalty Letters to Employers

BSCAI Member Alert: DHS Set to Finalize New Verification Requirements for Employees

BSCAI Legislative Update: Immigration Reform and Employee Free Choice Take Center Stage in Senate

BSCAI Legislative Update: Minimum Wage and Immigration Reform

Proposed DHS Changes to "No-Match" Letters On Employees

Update on Current Efforts to Impose State Sales Tax on Services

Immigration Enforcement Alert: DHS Enforcement Ramps Up

Immigration Reform:  Challenges and Legislative Updates

Legislative Proposals on Immigration Reform

***************************************************
House, Senate Outline FY10 Budget Resolutions: 

 Both House and Senate leaders this week outlined budget plans for fiscal year 2010, with a goal of trimming President Obama’s spending request while preserving funding for most of the administration’s key priorities.

President Obama released in February a $3.6 trillion budget blueprint that makes a $634 billion “down payment” on health care reform and invests heavily in renewable energy and education. Democratic leaders are under pressure from Republicans and moderates in their own party to pare down Obama’s spending plan and reduce colossal deficit projections for next year and beyond.

In the House, Budget Committee Chairman John Spratt (D-SC) introduced a budget that would cut more than $150 billion from Obama’s budget blueprint for next fiscal year, and would scrap the president’s plan to make permanent relief from the alternative minimum tax (AMT) and the $800 tax cut for working families making less than $250,000. Both tax cuts were enacted temporarily in the economic stimulus package signed by Obama last month.

The Senate plan makes $608 billion in adjustments from the president’s blueprint to get down to a deficit of less than 3 percent of gross domestic product (GDP) at the end of five years. House and Senate budget leaders downplayed differences between their plans and the administration’s, and asserted that the president’s priorities around education, health care reform and energy independence are fully embraced in their own outlines.

OMB Director Peter Orszag also praised the respective budget plans, saying they are “98 percent in line” with the president’s proposal. “The resolutions may not be identical twins to what the president submitted, but they are certainly brothers that look an awful lot alike,” Orszag said yesterday.

Assuming both budget plans are approved in committee and reach the floor next week, a sticking point between House and Senate negotiators is likely to be around reconciliation instructions included in the House plan. Reconciliation is a process that would allow the Senate to approve a major initiative such as Obama’s health care reform proposal with 51 votes instead of the 60 needed to overcome a filibuster. Senate Budget Committee Chairman Kent Conrad (D-ND) has opposed using reconciliation to pass substantive legislation. Orszag yesterday reiterated the administration’s position that reconciliation is “not where we’d like to start, but we are not willing to take it off the table.” Source: NAM

***************************************************

New Executive Orders Signed   

 President Obama last week issued three new executive orders regarding labor issues. The White House has said that these orders are "designed to ensure that federal contracts servce taxpayers efficiently and effectively." However, these new orders will significantly restrict federal contractors' employee relations.

A breakdown and link to each executive order is below:  

·         Notification of Employee Rights Under Federal Labor Laws: This order instructs “all Government contracting departments” to include provisions in every government contract that require companies contracting with the government to post signs informing employees of their rights under federal labor laws that encourage collective bargaining. The order describes that employees should know their rights to “avoid disruption of federal contracts.”

·         Nondisplacement of Qualified Workers Under Service Contracts: This order requires that service contracts with the federal government shall include a clause that requires successor contractors of federal contracts to hire the predecessor contractor’s employees.

·         This order further details that the contractor, and its subcontractors, under a contract that succeeds a contract for performance of the same or similar services at the same location, to offer those employees (other than managerial and supervisory employees) employed under the predecessor contract whose employment will be terminated as a result of the award of the successor contract, a right of first refusal of employment under the contract in positions for which they are qualified. The order states that “here shall be no employment openings under the contract until such right of first refusal has been provided.

·         Economy in Government Contracting: This order prohibits funds paid to government contractors to used to reimburse for employer expenses incurred that influence union organizing or collective bargaining.

***************************************************

U.S. Department of Homeland Security Makes New Effort to Clarify “Safe Harbor” to No-Match Letters
The U.S. Department of Homeland Security (DHS) has released a Supplemental Proposed Rulemaking for the No-Match Rule previously issued on August 15, 2007 and now enjoined by the Northern District of California. That rule attempted to articulate how employers could avail themselves to a “Safe Harbor” if they received a No-Match letter from the Social Security Administration, or a “Notice of Suspect Documents” from the U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE).

The stated intention of the Supplemental Proposed Rulemaking is to provide a more detailed analysis of how DHS developed the No-Match policy and help responsible employers ensure that they are not employing unauthorized workers.  It is also clear that DHS is positioning a final rule once it is clear of the current litigation.

According to DHS –

• The supplemental proposal to the pending rule “simply outlines clear steps an employer may take in response to receiving a letter from the Social Security Administration indicating that an employee’s name does not match the social security number on file.”
• “If the business follows the guidance in the No-Match Rule, comprising various actions to rectify the no-match within 90 days of receiving the letter, they will have a safe harbor from the no-match letter being used against them in an enforcement action.”

Specifically, the new proposal attempts to clarify two aspects of the currently enjoined August 2007 Final Rule: