The approach taken in the construction of the argument in this essay is based on the proposition that companies and firms which employ illegal immigrants face more risks than the advantages that are poised by the adoption of this action. There is a thorough exposition into the legal demerits that lurk and have the highest chance of affecting the firms thus causing dire consequences in the overall functioning of the companies concerned. While this consequence will affect the functioning and output of the company, the image of the firms also is placed at stake. The paper observes the consequences that a firm is likely to face with regard to the employment of illegal immigrants. Lack of partnerships due to fear of breach of labour and international laws of registering workers of companies is exhibited and given more insight. There is also an overview of the counterarguments of the proposition held about the adoption of such an alignment by firms.
Kruse & Mahony (2000) refers to illegal immigrants as those people who immigrate to a foreign country without following proper established registration procedures by the country of entry. Most of the immigrants enter these countries through the border points, where they collude with the administration of the area to gain access into the country. There are economic implications that are caused by the entry of these immigrants into the countries. For instance, when employers hire illegal immigrants the negative consequences outweigh the benefits, because when employers hire illegal immigrants, employers face intense risks. The risks faced by the employers of the illegal immigrants may have dire consequences on the normal running of the business of the company or firm.
This paper begins with a development on the probable legal actions and high fine risks that are likely to follow the firms that breach the employment acts of countries by employing illegal immigrants. Loss of face is then critically analyzed with the consequences that are anticipated to follow such firms. An exposition into the counterarguments of the proposition is also developed through questioning of the approaches taken thus placing the assertion in context.
Implications of employing illegal immigrants
There are many effects and implications that will be faced by the firms. Orrenius (2006) notes that one of the most potential effects caused by the entry of the immigrant persons is the attraction of high fines and intense law suits by individuals and companies against those found employing illegally bound members in the countries of operation. The company that employs members who have illegally immigrated into the country will face the prosecutorial actions adopted by different individuals. The government of the United States does not allow any company to illegally employ immigrants who do not have proper registration with the department of immigration. According to Orrenius (2006) this means that any company or firm that is found contravening the law is liable to huge fines. Therefore firms which risk employment of members who have not been registered by the relevant authorities are at stake of being subjected to hard economic stands as a result of the huge fines and prosecutions adopted by the suing agencies.
The direct consequences of employing the illegal immigrants may not be witnessed immediately, but as Orrenius (2006) claims, the consequences will sometimes explode without a warning leading to a financial crunch of the company. A company that is not well prepared for any eventualities in such a case may face a crisis especially in operation. One cannot ignore the fact that when the government carries out financial and employee audits of a company in any fiscal year it is bound to be subjected to the harsh economic fines and sanctions that may be deemed relevant by the courts of law. Kruse & Mahony (2000) argue that companies in the US have continually been attracted at the low wage compensation demanded by the illegal immigrants in the company but have ignored the consequences and risks that they pose on the company. In his argument, he notes that the company for instance may be forced to pay heavy fines and deregistration all the illegal employees from its database of employee. In addition to this the company Risks being stripped of its operation license.
There is no company that can operate without having the right number of employees required for production, nor the expertise required min the industry of operation (Kruse & Mahony, 2000). This means that one cannot therefore ignore the consequences that a company which has been placed under receivership of these tough economic measures undergoes. Crippling of a company starts with the advent of employee deficits (Kruse & Mahony, 2000). Owing to the fact that the firm placed under the tough laws was used to transacting its business by utilizing the cheap labor, the registration of its employees will lead to adoption of highly paid employees from the usual wage offers. This will lead to a financial crisis in the company. For instance, the cost of production and maintenance of the employees will lead to more expenses. Orrenius (2006) speculates that most companies will find it hard to adapt to the sudden changes, thus forcing them to introduce reconstructive measures aimed at restitution of the company from probable collapse. Most compani4s and firms in the US have been found to depend on the illegal immigrants into the country (Palivos, 2009). In fact the rate of illegal immigration into the country has been growing at an alarming rate, almost at the same rate as the official rates recorded by the country’s immigration offices. The rates have been noted to stand at 330,000 illegal entries into the country Orrenius (2006). Most of these people have been found to enter the US through Mexico and other parte surrounding the region. The farm industry was for a long time considered the place for the illegal immigrants, but the trend has changed in the recent past. Orrenius (2006) observes that most immigrant workers have now found their way into companies and firms in the country through the acceptance of cheap labor. This has been found to form the most lucrative attraction of major firms into hiring the immigrants. The economic implications as expostulated are very diverse and influential. Therefore a company cannot ignore the financial and stake of operation. This could lead to financial dents and aggravations of utter consequence on the profits and success of the company concerned.
Another risk that is poised by the immigrant workers and employees in a firm the tendency to lead to a breach of the standards of work and ethics upheld in the country (Orrenius, 2006). Most immigrant workers as reported by Orrenius (2006) have been found to accept offers that are way below the standards upheld by the country of immigration. This has led to dwindling of the work standards that have been built by the country. For instance, most critics argue that most of the jobs that are undertaken by the immigrant members are jobs that are rejected or turned down by the American population (Palivos, 2009). This can only mean that the illegal immigrants contribute to the development of poor work standards in the country. The country’s citizens will therefore be deprived of their constitutional right to have proper and well remunerating jobs due to the cheaper labor that is provided by the immigrants.
Pitts (2008) argues that the immigration into the country makes the companies in the region rush into utilizing the cheap labor that is provided by the members. Most of these people who immigrate into the countries are from poor backgrounds or poor counties where they look for greener pastures. Therefore, most of them will accept the low wages that are paid by the companies and firms. To the incumbent natives of the country the cash paid or the standards of work that are upheld in the region are poor but to them they see it as an opportunity of making it in life (Palivos, 2009). This has led to some of the companies adopting a low profile in terms of the standards of work that are upheld. Pitts (2008) argues that the production of a company or a firm has some correlation to the standards of work that a company upholds. If a company for some reason adopts low standards of work and poor remuneration of its workers in the name of utilizing the cheap labor acquired from the illegal immigrants, its output will definitely be interfered with.
The standards of production of a company are directly related to the type of work force and expertise required in the production of goods and products (Takashima, 2005). One should therefore be naturally worried at the level of production and the standards upheld by the acquisition of cheap labor by the company in question. The adoption of cheaper labor by such firms means an increased number of risks in its production. One of them is that the company risks the problem of experiencing a reduction in the extent of production and the quality output (Kalski, 2007). Immigrant workers may have the relevant expertise required by the company in production, but one should not ignore the economy’s role in changing the stand of workers. Tapinos (1999) notes that due to increase cost of living and effects of the global recession which is unpredictable, the immigrants will experience a different increase in the spending, thus the low wages paid by the companies will be a cause to grapple with during the hard economic times. This therefore will translate to major crisis with the workers. If the wages paid do not equal or measure up to the work or job they perform, workers will naturally be de-motivated thus leading to a drop in the standards and the production of the firm. This will have negative consequence on the production ability of the company and in some cases may lead to a collapse in the production ability.
Takashima (2005) expostulates that the employment of illegal immigrants by firms in the US has led to a hindrance in partnerships with other stakeholders due to the non-legitimate source of labor and employment as specified under the constitution of the country. Stable companies that have curved themselves a niche in the public for the products and services would not like their public image being sabotaged by partnership with firms which have employed illegal immigrants. The public image and the view that the public has on a specific company is very vital in determining the extent to which that company transacts its business. Orrenius et al. (2009) points out that if the company has been shortlisted in the government as one of those which employ the illegal immigrants, there is always a price to pay. Inadvertently the price to be paid includes the loss of probable partnerships with other companies and other corporate entities in partnerships. Most companies and serious corporate entities may read mischief with a firm that is found contravening the law by employing illegal immigrants. This will thus lead to an avoidance of such a firm, thereby denying the firm the possibilities of expansion and enhancements of its business through partnerships.
The business environments is always of a sensitive nature, and any unwarranted effort of happening that will shake the trust or confidence that has been built on a company may lead to dwindling results being broadcast by such a company (Orrenius et al., 2009). One of the major implications posed by the employment of illegal immigrants is what Tapinos (1999) calls insurance and financial frauds. Most of the illegal immigrants have no legal registration in the country, and therefore the range of services and financial benefits that they can enjoy are limited. Most of them operate behind the scenes, and this makes the companies and firms concerned breach the insurance and other financial obligations required of all formal employees in the country. For instance Takashima (2005) observes that most firms who have hired illegal immigrants have been found to contravene the legal requirements of financial nature. This includes the remittances that are paid as premiums for the workers to the administrative institutions. Insurance companies and other stakeholders where the workers are supposed to be involved have recorded that most of the firms do not provide accurate information with regard to the performance of the workers (Carrasquillo et al., 2000). This puts the firms in a compromising situation as they may be reaped of the benefits of operating in the markets. It is therefore essential that companies adopt a more straight forward approach that will allow transparency and thus more legally bounding approaches. This will transpire to more corporate partnerships that will automatically boost the economic returns of the companies or firms concerned.
While most the employment of illegal immigrants may lead to a spirited approach in terms of legal suits and the attraction of high financial fines, some critics may argue that these could be more advantageous than ever thought. Some hold that the immigrant members will increase company returns due to the low costs of production arrived as a result of low levels of remuneration and the low agitation nature of the immigrants (Liebert, 2010). This means that the production of the company and the operation costs adopted by the firm will be on a low scale. With reduction in the costs of production due to the cheap labor provided, the company will lead to more realization of profits that will outweigh the production costs of the company. However these critics fail to realize the eminency of the high fines and illegal suits that may be implicated on them. Even though there is low operation expenses in maintaining most illegal immigrants in the firms, the long terms legal implications on the firms may have far disastrous results than thought of (Tapinos, 1999). The company or firm for instance may face a striping of its registration for operation in the country adopted. Therefore the company will not only lose its customers, but will completely crash in its business. Carrasquillo et al. (2000) notes that at such a stage even efforts targeted at raising the company to its feet again will be very expensive and the returns may not be worth the trial. The companies would rather avoid the employment of illegal immigrant employees as the long term effects and the risks poised many lead to an overall dwindle in the operation of the company.
The argument that the cheaper labor provided by the illegal immigrants lowers the output of the company (upholding standards may be breached) plus the emphasis that the image is tainted in the corporate world thus acting more of a demerits rather than a merit is also disputed by those who are pro-employment of these type of people. While most of them argue that the cheap labor will have more advantages than disadvantages to the population, they fail to recognize the potential harm that this undertakings will have on the company. Kalski (2007) argues that the adoption of illegal immigrants in a company may lower the costs of production thus meaning that the output in terms of profit maximization will be lowered. Therefore the company will gain more in terms of reaping the results. The cheap illegal immigrants’ labor provided in to factories and industries will also transpire to lower prices of commodities since the labor utilized in their production is cheaply available (Liebert, 2010). However as earlier advanced in this essay, the adoption of such will lead to more demerits rather than merits. While this will be a possible case, one cannot ignore the external effects of immigrant population to the larger majority. Issues of congestion, taking away jobs meant for the local people, diseases from the immigrants, traffic snarl ups due to increased number of people using the roads and dropping standards of work due to the readily available immigrant workers will lead an economically destabilized economy.
Kalski (2007) argues that the native population will face more trouble and alienation of some of the basic rights that rightly belong to the inhabitants. For instance the congestion in the cities will increase competition of the available limited resources, thereby meaning that the natives will experience a deficit in the availability of the same resources. The effect of employment of illegal immigrants to companies will have more detrimental effects. The public may also fail to support the infrastructure adopted by the company due to the position held. This may have dire consequences on its production and efficiency in the domestic markets. The company will therefore lose more in financial and strategic positioning for market penetration (Liebert, 2010)
Conclusion
Employment of illegal immigrants to the country will as expostulated in this essay lead to major risks than merits. The legal structure of the native country, for instance the US in this case will does not allow the illegal immigrants to work in the country. The company affected therefore risks facing high fines and possible deregistration from transacting business in the country. The loss of face and increased reduction in the standards of work may have negative influence in the level of production. This will lead to a possible crunch in the economic functioning of the company, thus companies adopting this stand risk more on losing their business than possible merits that may be out coming from employing illegal immigrants.
References
Carrasquillo, O., Carrasquillo, A. I., & Shea, S. (2000). Health insurance coverage of immigrants living in the United States: Differences by citizenship status and country of origin. American Journal of Public
Kalski, G. (2007). Audit targets businesses that hire illegal immigrants. McClatchy - Tribune Business News, pp. n/a. http://search.proquest.com/docview/459151738?accountid=45049
Kruse, D. L., & Mahony, D. (2000). Illegal child labour in the United States: Prevalence and characteristics. Industrial & Labour Relations Review, 54(1), 17-40. http://search.proquest.com/docview/236360280?accountid=45049
Liebert, S. (2010). The role of informal institutions in U.S. immigration policy: The case of illegal labour migration from Kyrgyzstan. Public Administration Review, 70(3), 390-400,345-346. http://search.proquest.com/docview/853274210?accountid=45049
Orrenius, P. (2006). The impact of immigration. Wall Street Journal, pp. A.18-A.18. http://search.proquest.com/docview/399006900?accountid=45049
Orrenius, P. M., PhD., & Nicholson, M. (2009). Immigrants in the U.S. economy: A host-country perspective. Journal of Business Strategies, 26(1), 35-53. http://search.proquest.com/docview/204412789?accountid=45049
Palivos, T. (2009). Welfare effects of illegal immigration. Journal of Population Economics, 22(1), 131-144. Doi: 10.1007/s00148-007-0182-3
Pitts, W. O. (2008). Commentary: Illegal immigration law involves more than economics. Journal Record, pp. n/a. http://search.proquest.com/docview/259506221?accountid=45049
Takashima, R. (2005). Three essays on international trade and factor flows. West Virginia University). ProQuest Dissertations and Theses, , 102 p. http://search.proquest.com/docview/305409142?accountid=45049
Tapinos, G. (1999). Illegal immigrants and the labour market. Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development. The OECD Observer, (219), 35-37. http://search.proquest.com/docview/217476950?accountid=45049Health, 90(6), 917-23. http://search.proquest.com/docview/215112128?accountid=45049
