<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: E-Verify: Will it die or become mandatory under Obama?</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.hrrecruitingalert.com/e-verify-will-it-die-or-become-mandatory-under-obama/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.hrrecruitingalert.com/e-verify-will-it-die-or-become-mandatory-under-obama/</link>
	<description>Headlines and advice for the practicing recruiter</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Mon, 20 Jun 2011 04:03:43 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=abc</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: Ed</title>
		<link>http://www.hrrecruitingalert.com/e-verify-will-it-die-or-become-mandatory-under-obama/comment-page-1/#comment-8987</link>
		<dc:creator>Ed</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 22 May 2009 17:51:48 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.hrrecruitingalert.com/?p=391#comment-8987</guid>
		<description>E-verify is simple and quick.  It is better to put the onus on the government than it is to put it on your business.

As a staffing firm we run hundreds of these a week - and just posting the E-verify posters helps cut down the applicants with bad IDs.

I doubt the Dems will keep this going - a big base of their electorate (the illegal aliens) would start finding it difficult to get to work.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>E-verify is simple and quick.  It is better to put the onus on the government than it is to put it on your business.</p>
<p>As a staffing firm we run hundreds of these a week &#8211; and just posting the E-verify posters helps cut down the applicants with bad IDs.</p>
<p>I doubt the Dems will keep this going &#8211; a big base of their electorate (the illegal aliens) would start finding it difficult to get to work.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Sue</title>
		<link>http://www.hrrecruitingalert.com/e-verify-will-it-die-or-become-mandatory-under-obama/comment-page-1/#comment-5143</link>
		<dc:creator>Sue</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 06 Feb 2009 21:20:55 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.hrrecruitingalert.com/?p=391#comment-5143</guid>
		<description>I agree with Pam.  It&#039;s easy &amp; more accurate than our current paper system</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I agree with Pam.  It&#8217;s easy &amp; more accurate than our current paper system</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Pam D</title>
		<link>http://www.hrrecruitingalert.com/e-verify-will-it-die-or-become-mandatory-under-obama/comment-page-1/#comment-5133</link>
		<dc:creator>Pam D</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 06 Feb 2009 16:58:13 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.hrrecruitingalert.com/?p=391#comment-5133</guid>
		<description>I use E-Verify now and I like the fact you don&#039;t have to guess it wouldn&#039;t be a bad thing if it were mandatory. I like using it very much, yes vote here.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I use E-Verify now and I like the fact you don&#8217;t have to guess it wouldn&#8217;t be a bad thing if it were mandatory. I like using it very much, yes vote here.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Chris Miller</title>
		<link>http://www.hrrecruitingalert.com/e-verify-will-it-die-or-become-mandatory-under-obama/comment-page-1/#comment-4886</link>
		<dc:creator>Chris Miller</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 30 Jan 2009 13:40:47 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.hrrecruitingalert.com/?p=391#comment-4886</guid>
		<description>Sam,
This was posted in today&#039;s (1/30/09) Federal Register:

SUMMARY: The Department of Defense, General Services Administration, and National Aeronautics and Space Administration have agreed to delay the applicability date of FAR Case 2007-013, Employment Eligibility Verification (E-Verify for Federal Contractors), to May 21, 2009.

Contracting officers shall not include the new clause at 52.222-54, Employment Eligibility Verification, in any solicitation or contract prior to the applicability date of May 21, 2009.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Sam,<br />
This was posted in today&#8217;s (1/30/09) Federal Register:</p>
<p>SUMMARY: The Department of Defense, General Services Administration, and National Aeronautics and Space Administration have agreed to delay the applicability date of FAR Case 2007-013, Employment Eligibility Verification (E-Verify for Federal Contractors), to May 21, 2009.</p>
<p>Contracting officers shall not include the new clause at 52.222-54, Employment Eligibility Verification, in any solicitation or contract prior to the applicability date of May 21, 2009.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

