While the Arizona laws continue to wind their way through the federal court system, other states continue to ponder immigration legislation. Texas and Illinois legislatures both had new bills introduced that would require each state’s employers to use the E-Verify employment eligibility system in addition to federally mandated Form I-9 Employment Eligibility Verification completion. Indiana and Tennessee were added to the list of states considering an “Arizona SB 1070-type” law. However, Colorado’s legislation defeated a bill patterned after SB 1070, reducing the chances any such provision will be enacted in the state. Employers must continue to monitor developments, particularly those relating to E-Verify, to determine when and where the usually voluntary program is mandatory. In the January 2011 issue of the Immigration eAuthority, we reported on two states going in opposite directions on the E-Verify issue. Florida mandated the use of E-Verify by state agencies and also will require companies executing certain state contracts to use E-Verify, while Rhode Island repealed similar requirements that had been implemented by its former governor.
Effective April 13, 2012, visa processing fees at U.S. consular posts for several types of nonimmigrant and immigrant visa applications have changed. The fees for most nonimmigrant visa applications have increased, while those for all immigrant visa applications and “Treaty Investor” and “Treaty Trader” (E) nonimmigrant visa applications have decreased.
With the national elections resulting in a continuation of divided government in Washington, will the new Congress remain mired in the gridlock that has been the hallmark of recent years? What are the chances for labor and employment legislation running the gauntlet between the Republican House, the Democratic Senate, and…..
The Early Bird Catches the Worm: Delaying Motion to Compel Arbitration Can Waive Right to Arbitration in California
On June 16, 2016, a California Court of Appeal, in an unpublished decision, issued yet another ruling applying the doctrine of waiver to arbitration agreements in the employment litigation context. In Ogannesian v. ICC Collision Centers, Inc., a defendant waited eight months after responding to a complaint before bringing its motion to compel arbitration. During those eight months, the court-determined trial date had been set and the defendant had participated in the discovery process by serving and responding to written discovery.