Uh, I hire a lot of remote people, and have been remote for a long time. That is absolutely not fucking normal. I'm not going to say racism/poor/or anything, but I will say asshole behavior and huge red flag.

It sure sounds like racism and poorphobia to me. HR trying to make sure her surroundings don't look like what a "typical poor person" would have (clutter, children, signs of disability, "drugs", etc.) It's not super common, but it's common enough that I hear about it every so often.

I can't offer any kind of legal advice, but it sounds like this job will be potentially problematic and HR will definitely be one to watch out for.

ETA: There's a lot of paranoia in the US right now about "laptop farms". Remote jobs are paranoid about people getting remote work to send money back to North Korea. It's completely ridiculous, and it's causing issues for a lot of people, mostly marginalized people. I think it's useful context to know why this kind of thing is happening more lately.

"Sorry, this is a shared office and my partner is working under NDA"

Huge, HUGE red flag. Even without it being I9 stuff.

I have worked remotely for 8+ years at this point. Sometimes I don't even turn my camera on for meetings. It depends on a lot of factors. If my employer cared about any of that, they probably wouldn't be a good employer for remote work.

There was just a news article about US corporations hiring North Koreans for remote work unintentionally, and the north Koreans then did a sabotage and stole secrets... Strikes me as HR is freaking out across the board and they were looking to confirm you aren't actually based in a foreign country. It is very easy to hide where you are(phone numbers can be forwarded, addresses can be false). If it's a 1 time thing, not racism, if they consistently single her out, is there anyone else of her race being singled out? Did HR maybe get a derogatory report from someone that doesn't like her and they wanted to see if she was sober? That's happened to me.

It seems like you are getting more knee jerk than actual answers here. There is no evidence of any discrimination in asking to deblur the camera by itself. It also has nothing to do with an I9 validation. The I9 validation is checking for employment eligibility and citizenship status and that's it. See below for the remote procedures. The employer's obligation is to be consistent in the procedure and not discriminatory with the procedure based on race, gender, etc. I just think that HR drone is a dumbass.

Lastly, I think based on your other response to another poster she should take the job and just be keenly aware if anyone else in HR asks other funny stuff. There can always be dumbasses in every department and that's not a reflection of their ability to be lawful or a bad company. I also think it's worth reporting the person if they keep doing funny stuff.

From USCIS: Remote Examination of Documents Procedures: Examine copies (front and back, if the document is two-sided) of Form I-9 documents or an acceptable receipt to ensure that the documentation presented reasonably appears to be genuine and relates to the employee; Conduct a live video interaction with the individual presenting the document(s) to ensure that the documentation reasonably appears to be genuine and relates to the individual. The employee must first transmit a copy of the document(s) to the employer (per Step 1 above) and then present the same document(s) during the live video interaction; and Retain a clear and legible copy of the documentation (front and back if the documentation is two-sided).

Link https://www.uscis.gov/i-9-central/remote-examination-of-documents

You really shouldn’t hire a wife, that seems wrong

I’m not sure what was going on, but a clear background can tell you a lot about a person. I’ve had a few interviewees that applied for US work with no sponsorship turn out to be not already in the US. Pretty sure they were trying to fake it long enough to get us to agree to sponsorship, or overlook the fact they weren’t in the US. The interviewees were both caught because of details in the background during the interview process. Weather and time of day outside the windows not matching where they claimed to live was one, the other was architecture that would be very atypical in a US home.

AHRAB

I was a little bent when she told me he had asked her to remove her blur filter "to have a look at her working environment, make sure it's not cluttered" (something along those lines).

Creepy.

Post pandemic, this kind of ID "verification" is SUPER bogus, but it's quite common unfortunately, and, tbh, I can't think of a better way to handle it that isn't either in person or via snail mail.

Not great for sure, but most likely not racist, or at least not purposefully so (not that that matters).

Is this the US? Because iirc there's some workplace injury stuff in some EU countries, where the company might be liable and so they might need to advise you to do certain things to prevent injury if you work remotely.

Not trying to take the wind out of your sails, just making ppl aware.

Why does she think it's a racism thing?

I've put a shoji screen behind my workspace for these kind of situations. One client was really paranoid like that.

My I-9 verification is birth certificate, so no photo. Not sure how unblurring would help? I've never done it remotely though. Wanting to see work environment isn't so great. I set up for a video interview a while back by carefully positioning the camera so there was nothing interesting around or behind me. I had trouble getting the video working though, so we did a voice-only phone interview instead, which was much better anyway.

Long before Covid, the company I worked for started trialing work from home for some call center agents. They had a whole list of requirements for an acceptable work from home space: dedicated work area with a desk, locking file drawer (why??? I don't know), first aid kit, fire extinguisher, etc. Someone would actually go out to physically inspect the space to make sure every box was checked.

My guess is someone from legal wrote up the requirements from a workplace safety standpoint. They probably could have just had the employee sign a statement agreeing that they met all of the requirements, but someone in the middle got overzealous about their role. During Covid, everyone got sent home permanently without any regard to any of those rules, so clearly they weren't that important in the first place.

Hmm, so, policy in our office is a clean desk. Before you jump to conclusions, it's because our secured area and office occasionally has people come through that should absolutely not see what information we have on our desks. This requirement is a compliance issue for our continued contracts and certifications.

Our work from home policy hasn't addressed this issue, but it sounds like it's a clear gap. Your neighbour coming around for a cup of tea absolutely should not be able to see any work related information.

My assumption is that someone has considered this kind of aspect and had a check to confirm that they've done diligence by asking you to reveal your working space. A space the companies sensitive information would be visible. Actually you too should maybe not be looking at your wife's screen nor materials on her work desk. Depending on the situation.

Either way, policy comes first so perhaps her employment agreement or employee handbook would reveal more.

I wouldn’t call that kosher, personally.