(CNSNews.com) - The Department of Homeland Security has re-issued a rule that labor unions and some business groups oppose. The "no-match" rule is intended to stop employers from hiring illegal aliens, but critics say it will have unintended consequences.

The rule re-issued last week is the same one blocked by a federal district court in San Francisco last October.

The Homeland Security Department (DHS) said the newly issued "supplemental" rule addresses all three concerns raised by the court on Oct. 10, 2007.

The "supplemental" rule is essentially the same as the one issued in August. In the supplemental, DHS is simply offering "a more detailed analysis of how DHS developed the No-Match policy." DHS said the new, supplemental rule "will help responsible employers ensure that they are not employing unauthorized workers."

Employers send the Social Security Administration millions of earnings reports every year in which employees' names and Social Security Numbers do not match Social Security Administration records. In many cases, the Social Security Administration sends a "no-match" letter to the employer.

According to Homeland Security Secretary Michael Chertoff, the no-match rule is "an important tool for cracking down on illegal hiring practices while providing honest employers with the guidance they need. "

Chertoff said the rule does not create any new legal obligations for businesses. "It simply outlines clear steps an employer may take in response to receiving a letter from the Social Security Administration indicating that an employee's name does not match the Social Security Number on file."

If a company follows DHS guidelines (as outlined in the no-match rule) and tries to resolve the discrepancy within 90 days of receiving a letter, the DHS will consider the company compliant and won't use the no-match letter against the company, it said.

Labor unions say most Social Security Number discrepancies involve legal workers.

DHS admits "there can be many causes for a mismatch, including clerical error and name changes." But it say a no-match may also flag an alien who is not authorized to work in the United States -- and who may be using a fraudulent SSN.

In its supplemental rule, DHS notes that the Social Security Administration does not send no-match letters in all cases. "Rather, these letters are only sent to employers whose wage reports reveal at least 11 workers with no-matches and where the total number of no-matches represents more than 0.5 % of the employer's total (W-2 forms)."

"Employers with stray mistakes or (minor) inaccuracies in their records do not receive employer no-match letters," DHS said.

"As a result, DHS finds that employers who receive no-match letters cannot reasonably assume the problems with their payrolls are merely trivial clerical errors, and therefore cannot reasonably simply ignore those letters."

Not again

Leaders from worker, civil rights and immigrant advocacy organizations are blasting the Homeland Security Department for reissuing the same no-match rule that was blocked by a federal court in October. They plan to comment in a conference call with reporters on Thursday.

"The no-match rule issued by the DHS was already struck down by a court because of serious concerns that its full impact on workers and employers hadn't been fully explored, and the reissued no-match rule only includes minor cosmetic changes that do not begin to address the court's concerns," a union group, Change to Win, said in a news release.

Change to Win insists that "all undocumented workers should have the same labor, employment, and civil rights protections that U.S. citizens enjoy," and it says all workers in this country illegally "should have the right to organize into a union."

Labor unions, immigrant rights' groups and business groups filed suit against the no-match rule last year, saying it would burden employers and cause many authorized workers to lose their jobs, simply because of Social Security database errors.

U.S. District Court Judge Charles R. Breyer agreed and issued a preliminary injuction in October. He said the no-match rule "would result in irreparable harm to innocent workers and employers." He also said the letters would affect more than 8 million workers and "result in the termination of employment to lawfully employed workers."

Labor unions argue that "no-match" letters would be used by employers to get rid of pro-union employees and defeat worker organizing.

The U.S. Chamber of Commerce also opposed the No-Match Rule, saying DHS failed to "adequately consider the costs" it would impose on small businesses -- including the cost of discrimination lawsuits filed by fired "no-match" workers.

The Chamber argued that since failure to comply with the rule would subject employers to the threat of civil and criminal liability, the rule therefore amounted to a "new, onerous" mandate.

The Chamber considers the no-match rule an attempt to "regulate immigration on a piecemeal basis." Instead, it favors comprehensive immigration reform.

In addition to re-issuing its no-match rule, the DHS is appealing the federal court order blocking the rule. According to Secretary Chertoff, the DHS is "pursuing these two paths simultaneously to get a resolution as quickly as possible."