31–40 of 122 posts
The title is crafted so salaciously as to make victims of the real criminals: SMB owners deliberately hiring illegal immigrants because they are easily exploitable. Some of the franchisees were literally stealing money from their hires. I don’t see why we should be lamenting people who abuse and prey on others because of their immigration status.
I think there is a deeper issue here with immigration labor. The only one's applying to work at 7-11 or a lot of these minimum wage jobs are people who are not dependable or are immigrants without the proper paper work. So if you hire the non dependable worker you are going to be going through the hiring process every 3 months. Most people you'd like to hire often say "Why would I come work for you when Uber pays me…
I know there are folks on here who will roll their eyes, but this kind of display is emblematic of a fascist government. Fascism is the bonding of state and corporate power, driven by nationalism, authoritarianism, and a (usually) charismatic leader. For the record, I'm not a radical. I'm not even particularly partisan. I'm an average, middle-class American. But I've read enough history to know which way the wind is…
> but this kind of display is emblematic of a fascist government Enforcing immigration law passed by a democratically elected congress is fascist? Really?
I'm not even interested in this fake debate that was stirred up about immigration. Of course we have to have enforced borders. Of course we need immigration laws that will be enforced.
What concerns me is the collaboration between corporations and state power, all taking place in an atmosphere of acute nationalism.
I think there is a deeper issue here with immigration labor. The only one's applying to work at 7-11 or a lot of these minimum wage jobs are people who are not dependable or are immigrants without the proper paper work. So if you hire the non dependable worker you are going to be going through the hiring process every 3 months. Most people you'd like to hire often say "Why would I come work for you when Uber pays me…
If a business wants to sell widgets, and they can't afford to pay for the materials to make the widgets, then it raises prices for the widgets, or it finds that consumers don't find enough value in the widgets to justify the higher price and the business shuts down. Why should it be any different for a convenient store?
The title is crafted so salaciously as to make victims of the real criminals: SMB owners deliberately hiring illegal immigrants because they are easily exploitable. Some of the franchisees were literally stealing money from their hires. I don’t see why we should be lamenting people who abuse and prey on others because of their immigration status.
That's not primarily what the article is investigating. The article is pointing out 7-Eleven's alleged use of ICE and Homeland Security to target those franchisees who criticized or filed lawsuits against the corporation.
Are these claims below true? I was under the impression that a in a franchisor - franchisee relationship, the franchisee owns the business, and they are paying the franchisor to use the brand according to whatever standards are agreed upon. But I've never heard of a franchisor being able to "take over" a business, or do payroll for a franchisee. I've only ever heard of a a franchisee having to stop using the franchis…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Yes this is very common. I know McDonalds and Chick-fil-a both have clauses that if their operators refuse to comply they can shut down and replace them. Usually the building/land the stores are located on are owned by HQ as well so they have options on that end to revoke leases if need be. I wouldn't be surprised if 7-11 has the same setup.
I always assumed franchised businesses weren't owned by the brand that was franchising. Sounds like a terrible deal for the franchisee if all they're doing is renting a license to operate a business and not gaining any equity. I thought the whole point was so that the could work and gain a bit of equity in their business while using the marketing and quality assurance of the brand they franchise.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The US was founded on immigration. > Can't let everyone in. Why not?
Because it breaks your economy and social fabric (super simplified for the sake of fitting a decent reply into one short HN comment). We're at the lowest level of unemployment in decades, and wages are barely moving up. Bringing in large amounts of unskilled workers (remember, skilled workers get in on merit) would only delay wages rising (or those unskilled workers are going to be working under the table in jobs lik…
At least in the US, claiming that immigrants hold "our values" in lower regard than citizens is not at all obvious.
Why wouldn't workers have recourse? Only illegal immigrants are excluded from protection under law. Unless your claim is that no low-skilled laborer are, which undermines your claim about "our values".
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The US was founded on immigration. > Can't let everyone in. Why not?
Because it breaks your economy and social fabric (super simplified for the sake of fitting a decent reply into one short HN comment). We're at the lowest level of unemployment in decades, and wages are barely moving up. Bringing in large amounts of unskilled workers (remember, skilled workers get in on merit) would only delay wages rising (or those unskilled workers are going to be working under the table in jobs lik…
It's not unique to the US at all, I'm in the UK and you know how that's working out.
If the same barrier existed between the north and south of England, if I needed a visa to travel/study/work, I wouldn't be on here commenting, and tons of people would be stuck in crap conditions in the expensive south east because moving north would be visa-gated.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Because it breaks your economy and social fabric (super simplified for the sake of fitting a decent reply into one short HN comment). We're at the lowest level of unemployment in decades, and wages are barely moving up. Bringing in large amounts of unskilled workers (remember, skilled workers get in on merit) would only delay wages rising (or those unskilled workers are going to be working under the table in jobs lik…
Immigrants aren't only laborers. They are also consumers, increasing demand for economic activity. At least in the US, claiming that immigrants hold "our values" in lower regard than citizens is not at all obvious. Why wouldn't workers have recourse? Only illegal immigrants are excluded from protection under law. Unless your claim is that no low-skilled laborer are, which undermines your claim about "our values".
Legal immigrants would of course have employment law recourse. The vast majority of illegal immigrants currently do not (but should!), and that is what I was referring to. Those dangerous jobs I mention haven't been automated away yet solely because illegal, unskilled labor exists to perform them (see: dairy farms in Wisconsin that cannot exist without that labor [1]) (or the business cannot exist paying legal wages). Illegal immigration subsidizes business owners through the suffering of those immigrants. Legalizing those immigrants (and therefore, pushing their wages into what legal workers command) would eliminate those jobs. Catch-22.
[1] https://madison.com/ct/news/local/under-trump-wisconsin-dair... (Under Trump, Wisconsin dairies struggle to keep immigrant workers)