This is insanity!!!!

[Tyr-Ziu Saxnot]

http://news.yahoo.com/california-sup...001010786.html

California Supreme Court rules for migrant who used other's ID

Reuters
13 hours ago

LOS ANGELES (Reuters) - A California law that protects workers from discrimination regardless of immigration status could be used by a migrant to sue his employer even though he used another man's Social Security number, the state Supreme Court ruled on Thursday.

The 5-2 decision by the court came in the case of a man who sued his former employer, Sierra Chemical Co., contending he was not brought back for seasonal work in retaliation for filing a worker's compensation claim.

Justice Joyce Kennard, writing for the majority, cited a 2002 California law intended to grant unauthorized immigrants the same protections as other workers.

"Nothing in the statute states or implies that its central directive would not apply to any unauthorized alien who used false documentation to obtain employment," wrote Kennard, who has recently retired from the court.

The plaintiff, Vincente Salas, sued his former employer in San Joaquin County in 2007. The company filed a motion for summary judgment to dismiss the case on the grounds that Salas fraudulently used another person's Social Security number to get hired by the firm when he first joined it.

The trial court rejected that request from Sierra Chemical, but an appeals court decided in favor of the company.

In its opinion, the San Francisco-based Supreme Court sent the case back to the trial court and found Salas could seek lost wages for the period between when he was not re-hired for seasonal work and when the employer learned he had used a false Social Security Number.

It ruled he could not make a claim related to the time period after the employer discovered his use of another person's social security number.

(Reporting by Alex Dobuzinskis; Editing by Eric Beech and Sandra Maler)

These idiots all have to be liberals to rule this way!!
Sure give the ffing criminal back pay too!!! And ignore his fraud using other person's ID and social security number while punishing the employer.
And these same type liberal asshats are dead set against requiring voter ID BUT SANCTION this non-citizen breaking current law by fraudulently using another person's Social Security number.
It is ffing insanity from the land of fruits and nuts. So typical of liberal pieces of fiing scum..
They all need to be removed from an vestige of power IMHO..

The bastards just legalized fraud!!!!!!!!!!! -Tyr

[fj1200]

The bastards just legalized fraud!!!!!!!!!!! -Tyr

Appears not.

It ruled he could not make a claim related to the time period after the employer discovered his use of another person's social security number.

[Tyr-Ziu Saxnot]

Appears not.

It ok'ed the use before the employer found out!
How did you miss the fact it did not allow the illegal alien 's crime to be an overriding factor in his dismissal? Thus denying him any back pay or compensation whatsoever!???-Tyr

[fj1200]

It ok'ed the use before the employer found out!
How did you miss the fact it did not allow the illegal alien 's crime to be an overriding factor in his dismissal? Thus denying him any back pay or compensation whatsoever!???-Tyr

I didn't miss anything. I especially didn't miss that your statement was incorrect. The overriding point to be determined at trial was did the company retaliate against the plaintiff, his "crime" was discovered after the fact. The court specifically stated that he couldn't make a claim for the period after his fraud was discovered hence fraud was not legalized; it's pretty straight forward when you read it accurately. Are you suggesting that the company be able to ignore the laws of California?

[Abbey Marie]

I could support an argument that his fraudulent method of obtaining work should void all wages/benefits, regardless of when the employer discovered the fraud. If he had stolen from the employer, should he be allowed to keep the property he stole before the employer discovered it?

[Tyr-Ziu Saxnot]

I could support an argument that his fraudulent method of obtaining work should void all wages/benefits, regardless of when the employer discovered the fraud. If he had stolen from the employer, should he be allowed to keep the property he stole before the employer discovered it?

Methinks our friend fj conveniently overlooked such "trivial matters" as that you now point out.
I guess if a man breaks in his home, steals his property then no punishment unless the culprit gets caught in the act right then and there.. Next day the criminal is Scot free and should not have any such previous behavior ever be used in present or future judgments about him..
That's quite a damn large pass fj seems to think is ok.-Tyr

[red state]

So thinks the twisted liberal mind......very dim witted bunch who has a soap box (ONLY BECAUSE WE HAVE ALLOWED AND FALLEN VICTIM TO PC THINKING) says I, but THEY are willing to give a pass to any and all destructive behavior as long as it is destructive to REAL Americans and our dear Constitution. I am not (still am not) familiar with all the details but one never has to be familiar with any topic when liberal agendas are involved.... it is repetitively clear of what THEY do and why on any given topic or action. "THIS IS INSANITY" is the correct title and describes the liberal mind-set accurately. We have all fallen victim to the insanity of taking from one to give to another and to outright ignore our laws, borders and history.

[fj1200]

I could support an argument that his fraudulent method of obtaining work should void all wages/benefits, regardless of when the employer discovered the fraud. If he had stolen from the employer, should he be allowed to keep the property he stole before the employer discovered it?

Then you would be ignoring the allegations and the law in question:

LOS ANGELES (Reuters) - A California law that protects workers from discrimination regardless of immigration status could be used by a migrant to sue his employer even though he used another man's Social Security number, the state Supreme Court ruled on Thursday.

The 5-2 decision by the court came in the case of a man who sued his former employer, Sierra Chemical Co., contending he was not brought back for seasonal work in retaliation for filing a worker's compensation claim.

He didn't steal from the employer, you might argue he stole the unnamed person's identity but that is secondary to his claim. Let's pretend that the company knew/strongly suspected the illegal's true status and proceeded to allow him to work and as a convenient time they "discovered" his status and proceeded to take back all wages/benefits that were stolen; should that be legal?

Methinks our friend fj conveniently overlooked such "trivial matters" as that you now point out.
I guess if a man breaks in his home, steals his property then no punishment unless the culprit gets caught in the act right then and there.. Next day the criminal is Scot free and should not have any such previous behavior ever be used in present or future judgments about him..
That's quite a damn large pass fj seems to think is ok.-Tyr

Since you've now taken to creating a strawman argument, are no longer defending your initial statement, and are ignoring a direct question... well, hopefully you can figure it out.

[fj1200]

I am not (still am not) familiar with all the details...

[red state]

just like a liberal to take only what they want out of anything and remain ignorant of truth and the truth behind a statement. The facts remain in what this particular liberal would rather NOT acknowledge. So, my statement stands...THEY are extremely predictable and are not worth the time as they always run the same garbage. Whether you were simply trying to be funny or not.....I don't care, liberalism is my enemy and the enemy of this Great Nation because everything you/THEY stand for is against America and I don't find ANYTHING funny about that.

[fj1200]

just like a liberal to take only what they want out of anything and remain ignorant of truth and the truth behind a statement.

A liberal??? Where??? Nevertheless this is rather comical, you post that you are ignorant of the details and then proclaim someone else is ignorant. You just can't make this stuff up.

[red state]

Yet again, a liberal tries to put words in others mouths (making them liars as usual) just to support their unsupportable claims and arrogance. I never (EVER) stated that I was ignorant on this subject/topic....merely less versed due to the norm of the liberals ignorance and unlawfulness. In fact, I believe I missed a member here who had earned their spot on the insignificance corner.....it is fixed now. Tell jafart and the few others hell O. And good riddance.....

[red state]

Are you sure you want to add this member to your ignore list?



Redirecting...

This member has now been successfully added to your ignore list. You will now be returned to where you were.






Great tool...

[fj1200]

I never (EVER) stated that I was ignorant on this subject/topic....merely less versed... And good riddance.....

"Not familiar/less versed." AKA ignorant; lacking knowledge, information, or awareness. The only shame in ignorance is willful ignorance; "still am not."

And yes, good riddance as debate won't be forthcoming from you, run along now.

[fj1200]

Great tool... for remaining perpetually ignorant.