Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie

Advocates of limited immigration accused of being racist.

Options
1234568

Comments

  • Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 101 ✭✭guyjohn


    Lol I have represented people at ORAC, the RAT the High Court and the Supreme Court, in Ireland in immigration cases, I have also acted in the First Tier tribunal immigration division in the UK. I know more about the law and the reality of immigration than most posters on this forum.

    So what's your first hand working experience in immigration.

    Nonsense I do not believe you evidence. What the heck are you doing on this tattered thread surely a hot shot like you has better things to do.


  • Registered Users Posts: 19,307 ✭✭✭✭alastair


    MrWard wrote: »
    Speaking of erroneous claims. You just claimed that it's up to the employee to ensure that they have permission to work in the state and that no responsibility lies with the employer to ensure their employees have valid work permission. You couldn't be more wrong.

    Can you point me to the official information regarding employers obligations in this area? Given that non-EEA students don't have, or need to provide any work permit, to get a job, how exactly is the employer supposed to differentiate one casual employee from another who may work more than 20 hours? How do they know that they're not working a second job, and therefore exceeding a 20 hour limit? Can you point to an instance where an employer in Ireland has been fined or imprisoned for employing a student?


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 6,087 ✭✭✭Pro Hoc Vice


    guyjohn wrote: »
    Nonsense I do not believe you evidence. What the heck are you doing on this tattered thread surely a hot shot like you has better things to do.

    It's the Easter vacation, and even hotshots have down time. Typical when the debate is lost try and attack the other person. Have I upset your world view, did I make your views look silly in front of the big boys.

    Again I ask your experience in immigration.


  • Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 101 ✭✭guyjohn


    alastair wrote: »
    Can you point me to the official information regarding employers obligations in this area? Given that non-EEA students don't have, or need to provide any work permit, to get a job, how exactly is the employer supposed to differentiate one casual employee from another who may work more than 20 hours? How do they know that they're not working a second job, and therefore exceeding a 20 hour limit? Can you point to an instance where an employer in Ireland has been fined or imprisoned for employing a student?

    I think this shows its open to abuse.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 6,087 ✭✭✭Pro Hoc Vice


    alastair wrote: »
    Can you point me to the official information regarding employers obligations in this area? Given that non-EEA students don't have, or need to provide any work permit, to get a job, how exactly is the employer supposed to differentiate one casual employee from another who may work more than 20 hours? How do they know that they're not working a second job, and therefore exceeding a 20 hour limit? Can you point to an instance where an employer in Ireland has been fined or imprisoned for employing a student?

    All non EEA persons have a permission entered into their passport a stamp 2 permission is what a student gets. It is a employers obligation to make sure an employee has the correct permissions.

    http://www.irishstatutebook.ie/2003/en/act/pub/0007/sec0002.html#sec2

    http://www.irishstatutebook.ie/2006/en/act/pub/0016/sec0001.html#sec1

    While a student does not get a work permit they do get a permission to work restricted hours it is incumbent on the employer to confirm all is in order.


  • Advertisement
  • Closed Accounts Posts: 12,468 ✭✭✭✭OldNotWIse


    I am an advocate of limiting the amount of inward migration from non-EU countries and I feel that the EU members should be able to limit the number of economic migrants entering the member state. I am not going to discuss why this is never going to happen because this is not what I want to discuss in this thread, but why some people find it right to call me a racist. Every time I debate the topic with people they say it is racist to limit immigration. What has happened to society, that everything is now so politically correct, and the definition of racism has blurred. Saying anything is now racist and frowned upon.
    What arguments do any of you have when talking to these people, to try and explain to them how it is not racist and that they are wrong?


    My non-EU, working and studying OH would love to meet you.

    I think you are a racist.

    I also think that anyone who wants to come to this sh1thole country needs their head examined.


  • Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 101 ✭✭guyjohn


    It's the Easter vacation, and even hotshots have down time. Typical when the debate is lost try and attack the other person. Have I upset your world view, did I make your views look silly in front of the big boys.

    Again I ask your experience in immigration.

    My ex wife was a failed Asylum Seeker, sought leave to remain ,got a PPS number and worked illegally at a local factory for 3 years . I married her she got an Irish Passport . In that time I heard all the scams as immigrants work together and pool information.

    The immigration system will always need reform to keep pace .In Ireland that pace is slow. You have an agenda to support immigrants and are well paid to do so.

    You are trying to debase, what big boys ?


  • Registered Users Posts: 74 ✭✭MrWard


    guyjohn wrote: »
    Nonsense I do not believe you evidence. What the heck are you doing on this tattered thread surely a hot shot like you has better things to do.

    Why would the poster lie about something so innocuous ? He seems well versed in immigration law so I would take him or her at his word.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 6,087 ✭✭✭Pro Hoc Vice


    guyjohn wrote: »
    My ex wife was a failed Asylum Seeker, sought leave to remain ,got a PPS number and worked illegally at a local factory for 3 years . I married her she got an Irish Passport . In that time I heard all the scams as immigrants work together and pool information.

    You are trying to debase, what big boys ?

    I remember you, the guy who's issues with immigration have a lot todo with his ex's total riding of the system and him as well. So you had a partner, a failed asylum seeker illegal who you knew worked illegal, did you inform on the partner or the employer. Nope I doubt you did. So you are part of the very scams you give out about, god your a peach.


  • Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 101 ✭✭guyjohn


    OldNotWIse wrote: »
    My non-EU, working and studying OH would love to meet you.

    I think you are a racist.

    I also think that anyone who wants to come to this sh1thole country needs their head examined.

    You have just said the magic word that proves the OP's first post Congratulations !!


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 19,307 ✭✭✭✭alastair


    All non EEA persons have a permission entered into their passport a stamp 2 permission is what a student gets. It is a employers obligation to make sure an employee has the correct permissions.

    http://www.irishstatutebook.ie/2003/en/act/pub/0007/sec0002.html#sec2

    http://www.irishstatutebook.ie/2006/en/act/pub/0016/sec0001.html#sec1

    While a student does not get a work permit they do get a permission to work restricted hours it is incumbent on the employer to confirm all is in order.

    Where is this requirement for the employer laid out? Because I've not seen any legislation that requires employers to check permission of residence stamps. As far as I'm aware, the onus resides, in effect, with the employee to ensure they adhere to their visa limitations.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 12,468 ✭✭✭✭OldNotWIse


    guyjohn wrote: »
    You have just said the magic word that proves the OP's first post Congratulations !!


    Oh no! (World implodes)

    Er...I saw the first post, and I STILL think OP is a racist.(oh my god she did it again!) People realise that pre-empting that someone will call you a racist has no bearing on whether or not you are one???


  • Registered Users Posts: 74 ✭✭MrWard


    OldNotWIse wrote: »
    I also think that anyone who wants to come to this sh1thole country needs their head examined.

    Ireland is one of the best places to life on the planet and is far from a 'sh1thole'.

    http://img861.imageshack.us/img861/8483/hdi.png

    Edit: I cant post images as a new user.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 6,087 ✭✭✭Pro Hoc Vice


    alastair wrote: »
    Where is this requirement for the employer laid out? Because I've not seen any legislation that requires employers to check permission of residence stamps. As far as I'm aware, the onus resides, in effect, with the employee to ensure they adhere to their visa limitations.


    (2) A person shall not employ a non-national in the State except in accordance with an employment permit.

    (3) A person who contravenes subsection (1) or (2) shall be guilty of an offence and shall be liable—

    (a) on summary conviction, to a fine not exceeding €3,000 or imprisonment for a term not exceeding 12 months or both, or

    (b) if the offence is an offence consisting of a contravention of subsection (2), on conviction on indictment, to a fine not exceeding €250,000 or imprisonment for a term not exceeding 10 years or both.

    (4) It shall be a defence for a person charged with an offence under subsection (3) consisting of a contravention of subsection (2) to show that he or she took all such steps as were reasonably open to him or her to ensure compliance with subsection (2).

    I have acted for employers and employes in such situations, an employee does not have a statutory defence, but the employer does, in that "It shall be a defence for a person charged with an offence under subsection (3) consisting of a contravention of subsection (2) to show that he or she took all such steps as were reasonably open to him or her to ensure compliance with subsection (2)."

    So if a employer employees a person with no permission he commits an offence. Of course a 20 hours a week permission would make it harder to get a conviction. But a student working full time is working illegally and the employer should have got a work permit.


  • Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 101 ✭✭guyjohn


    OldNotWIse wrote: »
    Oh no! (World implodes)

    Er...I saw the first post, and I STILL think OP is a racist.(oh my god she did it again!) People realise that pre-empting that someone will call you a racist has no bearing on whether or not you are one???

    Go on call him a troll as well .


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 12,468 ✭✭✭✭OldNotWIse


    MrWard wrote: »
    Ireland is one of the best places to life on the planet and is far from a 'sh1thole'.

    http://img861.imageshack.us/img861/8483/hdi.png

    Edit: I cant post images as a new user.

    Sh1thole is entirely subjective. I think its a sh1thole. You dont. Will that come between you and your sleep?


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 12,468 ✭✭✭✭OldNotWIse


    guyjohn wrote: »
    Go on call him a troll as well .

    Are you just hanging around in here chasing people off or something? Defender of the thread....drum roll ;)


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 6,087 ✭✭✭Pro Hoc Vice


    guyjohn wrote: »
    Go on call him a troll as well .

    Nope that's very much you. My old flower. Are you going out with another non national now.


  • Registered Users Posts: 19,307 ✭✭✭✭alastair


    MrWard wrote: »
    Ireland is the only country in the EU were entering into a sham marriage is not illegal.

    http://www.rte.ie/news/2010/0818/134594-marriage/


  • Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 101 ✭✭guyjohn


    OldNotWIse wrote: »
    Are you just hanging around in here chasing people off or something? Defender of the thread....drum roll ;)

    No I like you.:)


  • Advertisement
  • Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 101 ✭✭guyjohn


    Nope that's very much you. My old flower. Are you going out with another non national now.

    Do I detect a personal attack coming on.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 6,087 ✭✭✭Pro Hoc Vice


    guyjohn wrote: »
    Do I detect a personal attack coming on.

    I'll leave that to you don't worry. I think you have shown up your views for exactly what they are.


  • Registered Users Posts: 19,307 ✭✭✭✭alastair


    (2) A person shall not employ a non-national in the State except in accordance with an employment permit.

    (3) A person who contravenes subsection (1) or (2) shall be guilty of an offence and shall be liable—

    (a) on summary conviction, to a fine not exceeding €3,000 or imprisonment for a term not exceeding 12 months or both, or

    (b) if the offence is an offence consisting of a contravention of subsection (2), on conviction on indictment, to a fine not exceeding €250,000 or imprisonment for a term not exceeding 10 years or both.

    (4) It shall be a defence for a person charged with an offence under subsection (3) consisting of a contravention of subsection (2) to show that he or she took all such steps as were reasonably open to him or her to ensure compliance with subsection (2).

    I have acted for employers and employes in such situations, an employee does not have a statutory defence, but the employer does, in that "It shall be a defence for a person charged with an offence under subsection (3) consisting of a contravention of subsection (2) to show that he or she took all such steps as were reasonably open to him or her to ensure compliance with subsection (2)."

    So if a employer employees a person with no permission he commits an offence. Of course a 20 hours a week permission would make it harder to get a conviction. But a student working full time is working illegally and the employer should have got a work permit.
    Those students don't have/need an employment permit however - they only have a permission of residence - so how could section 2 apply to the employer?


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 12,468 ✭✭✭✭OldNotWIse


    alastair wrote: »
    Those students don't have/need an employment permit however - they only have a permission of residence - so how could section 2 apply to the employer?

    Can students not work 20 hours per week?


  • Registered Users Posts: 74 ✭✭MrWard


    They were arrested for fraud. 'Official seals used for creating false marriage documents'.
    It is not illegal in Ireland to arrange marriages for money

    http://www.irishexaminer.com/ireland/400-a-year-trafficked-for-sham-marriages-221367.html


  • Registered Users Posts: 19,307 ✭✭✭✭alastair


    OldNotWIse wrote: »
    Can students not work 20 hours per week?

    They can - and they don't need a work/employment permit to do so. They haven't got an employment permit for an employer to check.


  • Registered Users Posts: 74 ✭✭MrWard


    OldNotWIse wrote: »
    Sh1thole is entirely subjective. I think its a sh1thole. You dont. Will that come between you and your sleep?

    Absolutely not. Ireland scores extremely highly in human development and living standards. Hence why people want to move here. If you think it's a sh1thole, that's fine. Life is short and you can freely work, study and live in another 27 EU countries visa free. The obvious solution would be to leave this 'sh1thole' for somewhere more to your taste.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 6,087 ✭✭✭Pro Hoc Vice


    alastair wrote: »
    Those students don't have/need an employment permit however - they only have a permission of residence - so how could section 2 apply to the employer?

    The basic law is any non EEA must have a work permit. Its a criminal offence to employe without a work permit. So therefore the employer must confirm if the person has such a permit. A work permit permission is a stamp 1 which give a right to reside and to work if a work permit exists.

    If the Non EEA national produces a stamp 1 and work permit then no issue, if the person produces a stamp 2 that will clearly say allowed to work 20 hours so then no need for permit, if the person produces a stamp 3 that only gives a permission to reside, if the person produces a stamp 4 that stamp allows the person to reside, work or set up a business, so again totally legal to employee. There are a few other stamps but no need to go into them.

    Simply put if an employer does not check, and it turns out the person has no working permission he has committed an offence. If he does check and the person has a stamp 2 well then he is aware of the restrictions.


  • Registered Users Posts: 74 ✭✭MrWard


    alastair wrote: »
    They can - and they don't need a work/employment permit to do so. They haven't got an employment permit for an employer to check.

    They have a stamp 2 visa and a GNIB card that the employer needs to check.


  • Advertisement
  • Closed Accounts Posts: 6,087 ✭✭✭Pro Hoc Vice


    alastair wrote: »
    They can - and they don't need a work/employment permit to do so. They haven't got an employment permit for an employer to check.

    No but they have a stamp in their passport setting out the restrictions.


This discussion has been closed.
Advertisement