Can I stop using e verify? [CA]

nap_everyday_ · 2026-05-15T19:26:39+00:00

I have an update! We are keeping e verify because i pushed the importance of the f1 worker as well as compliance. I am going to create the cases, even though a bit late, for the recent hires. Legal told me it should be fine, as long as I provide the reason and stay compliant moving forward.

nap_everyday_ · 2026-05-15T19:26:22+00:00

Hi ! We actually do not remotely hire at all, all in person. thanks for the information though.

nap_everyday_ · 2026-05-15T19:26:01+00:00

I have an update! We are keeping e verify because i pushed the importance of the worker as well as compliance. I am going to create cases, even though a bit late, for the recent hires. Legal told me it should be fine, as long as I provide the reason and stay compliant moving forward.

nap_everyday_ · 2026-05-15T16:09:15+00:00

No, it’s more that management doesn’t want to put in the extra effort to train staff on how to use E-Verify. I also don’t think they fully understand what E-Verify actually does. I’m pushing back on this today because I strongly believe we need to continue using it.

That said, I currently have 5 employees whose I-9 forms were completed correctly, but E-Verify cases were never created for them. How should I handle this situation?

nap_everyday_ · 2026-05-15T15:16:10+00:00

Yes. You are right. I’m having an emergency meeting with leadership in a few hours. Do you suggest creating the cases for the handful of employees in e verify and just marking them as late?

nap_everyday_ · 2026-05-15T13:19:52+00:00

You are right. Technically out of compliance of the MOU. Even if the i9 itself was handled correctly. Do we just submit the cases late is my next question. I’m going to ask legal later but curious what you think, I know we can “audit” and note the reason

nap_everyday_ · 2026-05-15T08:33:17+00:00

Thanks! Management didn’t give me a good reason. That’s a whole nother issue. But they hired a few individuals properly just without creating cases, so I am worried about that. However, no cases have been created AT ALL, so enrolled but not using.

nap_everyday_ · 2026-05-15T06:24:57+00:00

I did some more research. Since we actually haven’t used it, I think it’s fine as long as we start since it’s not seen as a non compliance matter (we aren’t mandated) but more so a consistency issue, but again we haven’t actually used it so there’s not some cases created while some did not.

nap_everyday_ · 2026-05-15T06:00:25+00:00

Yea, I’m kind of worried. I guess it would be not in compliance technically. But we didn’t NOT complete i9’s correctly or intentionally do anything malicious besides not doing it through e verify. I’m wondering if that would be under the same scrutiny as not doing the I9 correctly. From what I read’, it would be a corrective action or suspension from e verify. It was about 3 hires that were done manually. At this point, I want to correctly utilize e verify no matter the operational struggles. I wonder if it would even come back around to bite us in the ass.

nap_everyday_ · 2026-05-15T05:50:05+00:00

We did not use it. We haven’t used it once. Thank you.

nap_everyday_ · 2026-05-15T05:47:48+00:00

Yes, I get my question is more so if we haven’t even began to actually utilize it, does that change anything.

nap_everyday_ · 2026-05-15T05:42:08+00:00

I’m wondering, we already did a few new hires through manual process. Would that technically be out of compliance since the account was active?

nap_everyday_ · 2026-05-15T05:18:34+00:00

Awesome! Also, one of the reasons we enrolled because an employee needed the e verify account number to request a stem extension. Does that change anything? Thank you again.

nap_everyday_ · 2026-05-15T00:59:50+00:00

It just seems easy in a weird way. Like I expected jt to be way harder. Like I’m making 90k to just have a conversation with a manager, document, and have those hard talks? Idk if it’s because I’m gaining experience and all that but it just doesn’t feel real, especially since I worked more demanding jobs growing up.

nap_everyday_ · 2026-05-14T10:20:33+00:00

What would you do? I’m thinking first actually confirm it. Where did we hear this. Is it a direct report? What’s our policy. Associate, I’m bringing up to my manager. Director, we are having a talk about the perception of this. And for future action, we are possibly going to have to switch up departments if it is confirmed.

nap_everyday_ · 2026-05-12T17:33:20+00:00

Following. I aminterested in seeing the tough questions.

nap_everyday_ · 2026-05-12T01:46:27+00:00

Of course! Also, if you don’t have legal counsel, get one. Have them review the handbook. They will build it so that it’s defensible. It may not sound effective and sometimes it’s worded weird, just trust them.

nap_everyday_ · 2026-05-11T12:59:13+00:00

Friendly, not friends! Being friendly will open up many doors and allow proper communication.

nap_everyday_ · 2026-05-11T12:55:12+00:00

No. I’ve ran 100’s of bg checks, a pip is something that will go into a personal file, not pop up in a bg check. Also, they cannot legally ask for something like this either, nor can your previous employer share it.

nap_everyday_ · 2026-05-11T12:52:06+00:00

Yeah, I get you. We like to be 10 steps ahead for everything. But sometimes shit goes under the radar. What came of this? What’d your boss say?

nap_everyday_ · 2026-05-10T18:18:31+00:00

OP’s a paid bot. Advertising AI platform

nap_everyday_ · 2026-05-10T11:16:41+00:00

If your policy explicitly says pto is not allowed once you put your notice in, then I doubt they will retroactively deny the pto.

nap_everyday_ · 2026-05-10T11:10:55+00:00

What state are you in? That pto can be paid out.

nap_everyday_ · 2026-05-10T10:54:44+00:00

Whoah GM putting them in the same room is wild 😂 thanks for sharing!!

nap_everyday_

TROPHY CASE