Caveat Emptor

Not a funny thing, but wanted to express a concern.

Just had one of our managers send me information she received on CD from some conference she attended regarding employment law - a quick-and-dirty guide to understanding the basics. Written by an attorney, endorsed by a major flag chain.

In his little checklist of things that should be in a personnel file, he notes that a "completed I-9" should be IN THE FILE!

And a copy of the "completed W-2 Withholding form!"

And a copy of the employee's military discharge!


I was appalled! Guess it just goes to show that a JD behind your name doesn't necessarily equal common sense.


Comments

  • 28 Comments sorted by Votes Date Added
  • What....? No insurance enrollment forms or health care claims (EOB's), or etc, etc, etc?
    Sounds like the "JD" was attempting to drum up more business.
    To paraphrase Tommy Lee Jones, "We work a lot better we don't have so much.....aaaa help."
    Have a great day,
    Dutch2
  • >In his little checklist of things that should be
    >in a personnel file, he notes that a "completed
    >I-9" should be IN THE FILE!
    >
    >And a copy of the "completed W-2 Withholding
    >form!"
    >
    >And a copy of the employee's military discharge!
    >
    >
    >I was appalled!

    I'm not appalled. There's nothing illegal or inherently ill-advised about any of the three. Those are documents typically found in a personnel file in companies (Hundreds of thousands of them) which have not gone through a particularly anal analysis of what to segregate out of which file into which other file. A copy of the military discharge is typically an attachment to an application just like a resume is. An I-9 is no more required to be 'apart from' the personnel file than it is required to be 'contained In' the file. It's optional. When you say W-2, I assume you mean W-4.

    There are good reasons to segregate all these forms out of the accessible personnel file; but, they by no means are universally excluded.

    The guy who was going to Pago Pago is appalled?


  • Precisely. He mentioned "W-2" when he clearly meant "W-4."

    And I have never in my career met an attorney (or another HR practitioner) who advocates maintaining the I-9 in the employee's personnel file. While it may not be inherently illegal, it's not among "best practices" either. Would you advocate asking applicants their age? That's not inherently illegal, but it's certainly not advisable.

    I think the thing that concerned me is that this information was widely distributed to all franchisees who attended this conference and it doesn't represent the best advice out there.


  • No. Bad point. It is illegal to require an I-9 form on a person in the applicant stage. You cannot obtain an I-9 form and use the information in your decision making process (such as using the age, as you cite, to reach a conclusion).

    Attorneys have no market on the opinion as to where you should maintain the I-9 form. Although, I have heard many say it makes no practical difference. I am, as you say, an 'HR Practitioner' and have been for 35 years, so you have now met one who advocates maintaining the I-9 in the personnel file! This is not a hot-button 'best practices' issue as it is not even remotely possible that you will ever, ever in your life undergo an investigation of I-9 files that may compromise your filing system. But, ultimately, it is entirely employer's option.

    And to your other point, if the attorney mentioned W-2 when you knew he meant W-4, why didn't you simply ask him for clarification instead of criticizing him on the Forum. Anybody can make a simple mistake in a presentation.
  • Is anyone else shaking their head in disbelief right now?
  • Once again my point is proven.
  • To you or to him? Or to both of you simultaneously?
  • To whomever understands. You clearly don't.
  • [font size="1" color="#FF0000"]LAST EDITED ON 09-03-04 AT 09:45PM (CST)[/font][br][br]I will leave this one to the dunces.
  • You continue to attack people yet when it comes back to you, you whine. I clearly asked you what your problem was when you jumped all over my post about the OSHA training materials. That is my problem with you. My other problem with you is your response to Parabeagle. It was ridiculous. When YOU back off, I'll back off.
  • I did! I worked for a short time (through a temp agency) for Autotote Corp. Their I-9 files were investigated. By the INS.


    Isn't that how Wal-Mart got into trouble for hiring illegal aliens?
  • Looks to me like a lot of this post was taken out of context and twisted. Possible?

    I didn't see Para mention getting an I-9 from an applicant; I think even HR Practitioners with decades of experience would know that was wrong.

    Also, I don't think he could have corrected the lawyer on the W2 / W4 slipup. Sounds like it was written in the software incorrectly, something he was just pointing out.

    Para, I agree that just about anybody can give a seminar and publish software, right or wrong. I've spent some time at seminars like that myself.

    Maybe we should think about what type of seminars we could get paid to do . . . it may be better than HR!

    How about - "Learning the difference between Ignorant People and Arrogant People." Sometimes there's a fine line.

    Any other suggestions?
  • [font size="1" color="#FF0000"]LAST EDITED ON 09-03-04 AT 09:47PM (CST)[/font][br][br]Apparently several people on this thread are into their longnecks on a friday night. Sorry for intruding. Carry on.
  • [font size="1" color="#FF0000"]LAST EDITED ON 09-03-04 AT 09:41PM (CST)[/font][br][br]You completely captured your response to Parabeagle. Your analysis of yourself is amazing. Reread your post and see if it is not arguing only to appear intelligent. Have a wonderful weekend.

    Your post also has some childish backbiting and inuendo.
  • Did I miss something? Drats. Quick-draw-McGraw on the edit button.


  • No it was just me. I don't allow steel or aluminum boy over on Frday night. They always drink all my beer. It's a shame you deleted your response. I can understand why you did it though. I'll save a cold one for you.
  • Hey Mace! Were you PMSing on Friday?

    I think you attack Don D because he outed you and the metal boys. Chill out.
  • I've done no "attacking" until Don's posts about my OSHA spanish training materials. IMHO, his response was out of line and I tried to deal with it there. He would not respond. Then he pulls the same crap in Para, so in I jump, right or wrong.

    I get called a dunce and other names that were later edited out and I get blamed for attacking. How interesting. The only edits I made to my posts were to add information not take it out. That can't be said of other posters.

    For the record, even though I insinuate otherwise, I'm not the metal boys!

  • Now I'm curious. Which post was the lie? How can I differentiate when you are "insinuating" or when you are pulling my leg or when you are joking?

    How does one recognize when you are really, truly, honestly sincere and truthful? Is that when Titanium Man appears?
  • [font size="1" color="#FF0000"]LAST EDITED ON 09-07-04 AT 06:40PM (CST)[/font][br][br]Can't tell you all how glad I am I wasn't in town Friday to witness all the carnage resulting from some simple observations I made. My ears were burning a lot - but I figured that was just the hazardous chemicals I was working with. x;-)

    Not sure how the idea that I suggested collecting I-9s from applicants came about, but that is not what I said. Anyone who has spent more than a minute or two in the HR biz surely knows better, so I guess I was being upbraided for something that never occurred.

    As the original post states, the attorney who wrote the checklist was advocating placing the completed I-9 in the EMPLOYEE'S personnel file. A prospect about which I am still shaking my head in disbelief.

    Oh well, it's been fun to watch. Keep your guard up, no hitting below the belt and points will be deducted for excessive contact. x;-)

    EDIT: "This is not a hot-button 'best practices' issue as it is not even remotely possible that you will ever, ever in your life undergo an investigation of I-9 files that may compromise your filing system."

    Wish I'd known I had nothing to worry about when the I-9s at our Nevada property were audited by the feds a couple of years ago. If I'd known I didn't have to worry, I wouldn't have slept much better. x;-)
  • Mace, were my questions too difficult? I think it's time, once again, to assume another personality. This way you can start fresh. Make this one's temperment cordial, clever and jovial.
  • Don has me all figured out. Just ask him. I'm done wasting my time with you. Please don't start cursing me and analyzing what you think I am through the private email. I will not respond. I've wasted enough time there also.
  • Dear, you must have me confused with someone else. I have NEVER emailed you nor do I intend to start now. Also, cursing is not my in my bag of tricks. Get a hold of yourself.
  • That's great. Thanks, sweetie pie.
Sign In or Register to comment.