Immigration Reform and Control Act of 1986 - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
The Immigration Reform and Control Act had many negative effects on Hispanic Americans. Due to the requirements of the IRCA and fines for illegal employment many employers began to discriminate against Hispanic workers. To reduce the risk of breaking IRCA’s sanctions employers would not hire anyone who appeared Hispanic.[2] If hired, wages were lower to compensate employers for the perceived risk of hiring foreigners.[3]
The hiring process also changed as employers turned to indirect hiring through subcontractors. “Under a subcontracting agreement, a U.S. citizen or resident alien contractually agrees with an employer to provide a specific number of workers for a certain period of time to undertake a defined task at a fixed rate of pay per worker”.[3] By using a subcontractor the firm is not held liable since the workers are not employees. The use of a subcontractor decreases a worker’s wages since a portion is kept by the subcontractor. This indirect hiring is imposed on everyone regardless of legality.[3]
Thus, the IRCA’s employer sanctions restructured the market for unskilled labor in the U.S., increased discrimination on the basis of legal status, increased discrimination on the basis of ethnicity, and contributed to subcontracting becoming the principal hiring method. Legal Hispanics are now working for lower wages and in bad working conditions “in return of the opportunity to work.”[3]
This is passed off as unchallenged fact needing no further editing or amplification in Wikipedia.


My kids are being told to reference this site for homework. Scary stuff. YOu are the first that I have read coming out and displaying how it can be pure rubbish.
Okay, that really is a problem. It’s one thing for (supposedly) educated adults to read Wikipedia and then “evaluate” its probable accuracy in the light of other knowledge, and quite another to have impressionable schoolchildren told to use it for their homework, thus giving it the imprimatur of accuracy right up front. What seventh grader is going to question a reference source recommended by his teacher?
On most subjects, Wikipedia has been shown to be no less reliable than Britannica or any other popular reference. If you find something you think factually wrong, you can fix it. I haven’t followed those footnotes, but presumably they point to sources that state these things as fact. Is there any source that says these things didn’t happen? If so, put it in.
Really? By who?
Have you ever looked into the guts of that study?
You might be quite surprised.