The news is abuzz about Meg Whitman's former undocumented housekeeper Nicandra "Nicky" Diaz-Santillan. Whitman running on a gubernatorial campaign that "supports tough, common-sense immigration reform that will strengthen border security" has been fighting allegations that she knew about Mrs. Diaz legal status long before she terminated Mrs. Diaz employment in June 2009.
Nicandra Diaz Santillan was hired by Meg Whitman in 2000 through Town & Country Resources a household staffing agency. Mrs. Diaz used her sisters papers to provide a Social Security Card and drivers licence. In June 2009, Mrs. Diaz revealed to Whitman that she was living in the country illegally and was fired nine days later.
Gloria Allred, liberal pariah and Mrs. Diaz legal council, claims that Whitman and her husband knew about Diaz legal status as early as 2003. Allred released a letter from the Social Security Administration that informed Whitman that Diaz Social Security number did not match the name on file. The letter contains a note allegedly written by Dr. Griffith Harsh, Whitman's husband, asking "Nicky" to investigate the matter. Whitman claims never to have received the letter adding that one of Mrs. Diaz duties included sorting the mail.
The Whitman Housekeeper case is a example of the problem with employment verification system. The system to check legal status is skewed to protect the employer.
Whitman hiring of an undocumented worker is a result of Diaz's criminal behavior and not the failure of Town & Country Resources and the federal government to verify Mrs. Diaz legal status. Whitman and Dr. Harsh claim to have inspected Mrs. Diaz documentation, but would they have the expertise needed to verify their authenticity. The alleged letter from the Social Security Administration is implied to have been kept from Whitman due to Diaz actions.
Whitman's narrative of the events follow that of many other employers. Whitman did everything right on her end and it was Diaz who is ultimately at fault. The broken employment verification system makes it more difficult to find employers willfully hiring undocumented workers, because they can claim like Whitman they did not realize their employee had provided doctored papers.
When Whitman claimed to have first learned about Diaz legal status she decided to terminate her employment, which was her only choice of action that fit her rhetoric on immigration. However, in that choice she may have alienated the Latino vote. Whitman like many other employers decided to cast off the employee who provided nearly a decade of service.
Whitman claims to have asked her attorney, when she learned about Diaz legal status if anything could be done. Her attorney told her "no" and Whitman left it at that. Whitman has given $119 million of her own personal money to her campaign. Would it have been too expensive for Whitman to hire a immigration lawyer to help Diaz, even if it was a lost cause?
Whitman is a clear example of the problem with illegal immigration. Diaz was able to "fool" the system about her legal status. Once, Diaz's legal status came to light Whitman cast her aside because it was easier.
