There’s new hope in the restaurant industry that comprehensive immigration reform is on the horizon as federal policymakers on both sides of the aisle step up to address the highly contentious issue.
Industry experts cited such political activity as the recent introduction of a bipartisan blueprint for comprehensive reform by eight U.S. senators, President Barack Obama’s vow to make immigration a priority in his second term and several as-yet unseen plans currently being hammered out in the U.S. House of Representatives.
All of the activity around immigration — after years of dormancy at the national level — is good news for the restaurant industry, which is estimated to employ some 1.4 million of the approximately 11 million illegal immigrants believed to reside in the United States, according to the Bureau of Labor Statistics. The industry — one of several that has been the target of stepped-up raids by U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement in recent years — has long called for reasonable reform that allows a commonsense path to citizenship and an improved system of verifying worker eligibility.
“We strongly support the outline for immigration reform by the eight senators,” said Steve Caldeira, chief executive of the International Franchise Association. “We’re also pleased to see the president has weighed in on [the issue]. It’s a positive step.”
Others agree.
“I’m very optimistic — I think this is a generational opportunity,” said Joe Kefauver, managing partner and principal of Parquet Public Affairs, an Orlando, Fla.-based consulting and public affairs firm that works with restaurants. “I think we have a real shot at it.”
But while there appears to be a fresh resolve in Washington, D.C., to come to grips with the long-standing illegal-immigration dilemma, observers also caution that “the devil is in the details.”
“Everybody seems to be in agreement on the talking points,” said Angelo Amador, vice president of the National Restaurant Association. “But there’s been agreement on general points like enforcement and pathways to citizenship since the [President George W.] Bush years. The problem is, once they try to draft the details, everybody seems to disagree.”
Nevertheless, Amador added, “The one thing that seems different is that it’s easier [for elected officials] to talk about it and not get killed in the primaries.”
Help wanted
Many in the restaurant industry have long supported immigration reform, pointing to the industry’s growing need for workers and numerous obstacles stemming from the existing patchwork of state and local laws. The NRA expects restaurants to add 1.3 million new positions in the next decade, growing industry employment from 13.1 million in 2013 to 14.4 million people by 2023.
The IFA’s Caldeira noted that the number of service-sector jobs is projected to grow 1.5 times faster than that of non-service-sector jobs over the next decade. For that reason, a workable solution allowing legal immigrant workers into the country must be developed so the “industry can meet the need for lower-skilled workers where franchised businesses are concentrated, such as restaurants, hotels and service-related businesses,” he said.
“In our business, immigration is an important source of team members,” said Jim Greco, chief executive of the Melville, N.Y.-based Sbarro quick-service chain. “The foodservice industry has many positions at the entry level where people can come with little skills and be taught a business. They can stay and rise through the ranks, or they can move on, having gained more familiarity with the language and business skills.”
Greco added that immigration “is healthy for a country. If you look at the history of the United States, you can see immediately that a vibrant, constant flow of immigrants has helped to fuel its growth. It’s a mistake to choke it off.”
Robert Barry Jr., chief executive of the 35-unit The Greene Turtle casual-dining chain in Edgewater, Md., said government and business need to work together toward a solution, and, increasingly, it looks as if lawmakers are indeed listening to what business operators have to say about immigration. The blueprint crafted by the eight senators — four Democrats and four Republicans — provides for four key objectives that would benefit restaurants and other businesses:
• Developing a “tough but fair” path to citizenship for undocumented immigrants that is conditional upon securing the U.S. borders;
• Allowing businesses to hire lower-skilled immigrant workers when it can be proven that Americans were given the first opportunity but were unavailable or unwilling to fill those jobs;
• Creating an effective verification system that would prevent identity theft and curtail the hiring of illegal workers;
• Reforming the legal immigration system to better recognize accomplishments that will help strengthen the economy. This includes awarding green cards to immigrants who have received a Ph.D. or master’s degree in science, technology, engineering or math from an American university.
Known as the “Gang of 8,” the Senate group includes Democrats Charles Schumer of New York, Dick Durbin of Illinois, Robert Menendez of New Jersey and Michael Bennet of Colorado, and Republicans John McCain of Arizona, Lindsey Graham of South Carolina, Marco Rubio of Florida and Jeff Flake of Arizona.
Meanwhile, it is believed that at least three separate groups in the House are working quietly on their own — and allegedly bipartisan — immigration proposals, although it’s not known when any of the participants intend to go public with their plans.
At the same time, President Obama has threatened to toss his own bill into the ring if Congress does not address the issue quickly.
A new stage
The renewed action in Washington marks a shift from the past several years, during which time state legislators, frustrated by prolonged inaction on the part of Congress, took it upon themselves to address immigration reform — notably the enforcement component.
Beginning in 2005, the number of immigration-related bills and resolutions introduced in statehouses around the country began to climb, according to the National Conference of State Legislatures. In 2005, 300 bills on immigration were introduced at the state level, a figure that peaked at 1,607 in 2011.
However, that number dropped sharply — by 39 percent — in 2012, a year when 983 bills and resolutions were introduced in 46 state legislatures, the District of Columbia and Puerto Rico. While the NCSL attributed that decline to a new focus on pressing budget deficits, redistricting and the then-pending litigation in the U.S. Supreme Court on Arizona’s immigration law, observers also pointed to the federal government stepping back into the picture as a key element in the decision process.
“More states are taking a wait-and-see attitude toward whatever action the federal government takes on immigration,” the NRA’s Amador said. In the case of Arizona, the Supreme Court basically ruled that states cannot supersede federal dominance.
Meanwhile, certain states have chosen to enact legislation favoring their own employment-eligibility verification systems over the federal government’s E-Verify system, which has made it particularly difficult for multistate chain operators who must learn to work with the various programs. Kefauver estimated that as many as 10 states have their own systems in place.
The NRA has thrown its support behind the “Legal Workforce Act,” or H.R. 2164, introduced earlier by House Judiciary Committee chairman Lamar Smith, R-Texas. The measure seeks to improve the federal E-Verify system and would make it mandatory for all U.S. employers, pre-empting state regulations.
Amador said E-Verify is popular with many NRA members.
“About 80 percent of those who use it say they would recommend it,” he said. The NRA, however, opposes enacting stricter regulations governing the E-Verify system, which it said might overburden operators.
“Our goal is to have an overall, federal, easy-to-use system that allows small-business owners to identify employees as legal workers and not to be held liable as long as they follow the steps,” said Jay Perron, the IFA’s vice president of government relations and public policy.
Operators who depend upon sales from international tourists also harbor concerns about the possible passage of stricter regulations associated with the border-enforcement component of immigration reform. For example, some lawmakers would like to see further restrictions enacted on the visa waiver program, which allows citizens of certain countries like Great Britain, France, Germany, Japan and Australia to visit the United States without a visa.
“They want [travelers from] more countries to be required to get visas,” Amador said. “We think it will hurt tourism.”
Some have even suggested levying a fee that each international tourist would have to pay when coming into the country. The fee would then be returned when they leave.
In the meantime the industry is gearing up to engage lawmakers over the issue in the hope of making its position known. Rob Green, president of the National Council of Chain Restaurants, said he has not yet seen any “legislative language. The table is not yet set for moving forward. But we’re cautiously optimistic. I think there is a unique opportunity here. I’m glad to see there is engagement here by the administration and Congress, and recognition that the issue should be dealt with in a comprehensive manner.”
The IFA’s Caldeira sounded much the same note.
“It’s true that the devil is in the details,” he said. “But I choose to look forward and not backward. The time is right to advance legislation that both sides of the aisle have agreed to in a framework that will work. I have a strong belief that there is a real desire on the part of the president and both sides of the aisle to get something done.”
Sbarro’s Greco agreed.
“We need a sane approach to immigration,” he said. “We need to change the laws so more people can come here and build their own American dreams and contribute to the growth of this country.”
Contact Paul Frumkin at [email protected].
Follow him on Twitter: @NRNPaul.
