Do you find e-verify to be working well for you? We tried it some years back and felt it was too unwieldy to deal with. If you find it working well for you we might try it again. Our problem with it was that we didn't use it frequently enough (we are only hiring new hires during a limited period of time each year) and the passwords always expired and it was a hassle to get re-enrolled.I almost excluded e-Verify from my statement. And didn't because LdiJ didn't mention it in her post. She was specific with New Hire and SSA.
Thanks for the info.We don't use it. I couldn't for the longest time because they didn't understand the co-employment relationship we have with our clients.
The new HR/Payroll software we are going to be switching to around the first of the year as direct access so we will probably start then.
What I have a problem with is how you handle your responses to definitive answers. When I think that an answer has been make too definitive my response is generally that I have a slight or small disagreement with the answer and then outline why I think that.I agree that details matters.
Very few legal questions can be answered definitively. There are almost always exceptions.
It is well known by most on this forum that I have a real problem with definitive answers, especially on a forum where we never have access to all of the facts.
David Dennison?I am glad you found the responses helpful.
As one additional note: Although you might find employment/legal documents under the real names of Emmanuel Radnitzky, Malcolm Little, Earvin Johnson, Lawrence Peter Berra or Choo Yeang Keat (and others like them), it would not be surprising to find their resumes might have used their better-known nicknames/pseudonyms. Many people in many different fields are better known and recognized by their "false" names than their real names.
Now I am off to find a few buddies, some beer and a campfire to discuss some hypothetical something or other.