Students at at UNNJ lose their visa!

ICE cancels F-1 Student visas

On April 4 and 5, 2016, the Student and Exchange Visitor Program (SEVP) terminated the visa of nonimmigrant students who had enrolled at the University of Northern New Jersey (UNNJ), and the visas of nonimmigrant students who had transferred from UNNJ.

Why?

The students were found to have knowingly participated in visa fraud because they enrolled at UNNJ to obtain an illegal to maintain their F-1 nonimmigrant status.

UNNJ is a school operated by Homeland Security Investigations (HSI) Newark. It was created as a part of an enforcement action that targeted SEVP-certified schools and officials who sought to fraudulently utilize SEVP and the Student and Exchange Visitor Information System (SEVIS) to commit various violations of federal law.

There are approximately 60 students who are affected and who will receive notification of cancellation of their visa.

Students who are terminated because they were currently  or  enrolled before at UNNJ and choose not to file for reinstatement or have applied to USCIS for reinstatement and whose application is denied, must depart the country immediately.

Not Eligible for Transfer

These students are not eligible for to transfer to another SEVP-certified school unless U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) approves the student for reinstatement following the student’s termination. Students who transferred to another school from UNNJ will also be terminated and their new school will be notified of the cancellation of their visa.

What to do now?

Call SEVP Response Center at 703-603-3400. This number is staffed from 8 a.m. to 6 p.m. (ET), Monday through Friday, except holidays. The SEVP Response Center is closed every Wednesday from 12:45 to 1:30 p.m. ET for system maintenance and testing.

Provide the following information when calling:

  • First and last name
  • SEVIS ID number
  • Address
  • Telephone number where you can be reached
  • E-mail address
  • Current SEVP-certified school

Nalini Mahadevan JD, MBA

Attorney at Law

314-932-7111 office

nsm@mlolaw.us

website: Mlolaw.us

Disclaimer:  Not meant as legal advice. NOT meant to create an attorney client relationship.  Please call an attorney to obtain advice pertaining to your legal situation.

Post Footer automatically generated by Add Post Footer Plugin for wordpress.

Social Share Toolbar
Facebooktwittergoogle_pluslinkedinrssyoutubeby feather

Alternatives to H1B visas

The H1B visa season is upon us, the filing date was on April 1, 2014, and like last year is expected to be oversubscribed. What visas can a company consider once the H1B visas are exhausted for the season?

This year, let us consider non-H1B countries, where alternative visas are available for skilled workers.

For Mexicans and Canadians

The TN visa under the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA). Until this time, only Canadians could apply directly to the consulate or embassy or enter through the Canadian/US border with the proper credentials.

On February 10th, 2014, the US Department of State published a final rule that Mexicans applying for a TN visa could apply at the consulate or embassy in the US without first seeking approval from USCIS, or before applying for a TN visa at the US embassy or consulate in Mexico.

This is a giant leap forward for immigration, according similar trusted status for citizens south of the border.

Of course, applicants must be sponsored by an employer with a genuine job offer, and job duties must conform to the NAFTA guidelines.

While TN visas require non-immigrant intent—which means the applicant cannot apply for a green card from a TN visa status—the visa allows renewal in the US, and under tax treaties, allows the worker to accumulate the equivalent of Social Security in their country of origin.

There used to be a ceiling on admissions of TN, but that is not the case anymore.

See you in my next blog.

Nalini S Mahadevan, JD, MBA
Immigration Attorney St. Louis, Missouri

logo

The information is not meant to create a client-attorney relationship. This blog is for informational purposes only, and is not a substitute for legal advice. Situations may differ based on the facts.

Tara Mahadevan
Copyright 2014. All rights reserved.

Post Footer automatically generated by Add Post Footer Plugin for wordpress.

Social Share Toolbar
Facebooktwittergoogle_pluslinkedinrssyoutubeby feather

CBP Allows Domestic Partnerships and Blended Families to File a Single Customs Declaration

On 12/13/2013, the US Customs and Border Protection (CBP) broadened the definition of “members of a family residing in one household” to include long-term same-sex couples and other domestic relationships, a departure from the usual practice of a ‘family’ file multiple forms for each member, creating extra paperwork and a waste of processing time on entry to the US.

The rule will become effective on January 17th, 2014 after the holidays. The rule applies to both returning US citizens, US residents and international visitors who can now file a joint customs declaration for items purchased or brought from overseas.

CBP expects this process streamlining to save up to $2.8 million annually in personnel time.

New Definition of Domestic Relationships

“Domestic relationship” would be defined to include:

  • Foster children, stepchildren, half-siblings, legal wards, other dependents, and individuals with an in loco parentis or guardianship relationship with the children.
  • Two adults who are in a committed relationship including, but not limited to, long-term companions and couples in civil unions or domestic partnerships where the partners are financially interdependent, and are not married to, or a partner of, anyone else.

“Domestic relationship” excludes roommates or other cohabitants who do not meet the above definition.

“Members of a family residing in one household” will continue to include relationships of blood, adoption and marriage.

What This Change Will Mean to Travelers

For US Citizens and Residents

  • Under the new definition of domestic relationship, one combined family declaration can be presented to the CBP officer upon arrival.
  • For returning U.S. residents to be considered members of a family and group their exemption from customs duty and internal revenue tax, individuals must have lived in one household at their last permanent residence and intend to live together in one household in the U.S.
  • As with any joint declaration, verbal or written, the person making and/or signing the declaration will be held accountable for its validity.
  • If family members are U.S. residents, regulations allow them a personal duty exemption of up to $800 per individual and up to $1,600 per family.

For International Visitors

  • Under the new definition of domestic relationship, one combined family declaration can be presented to the CBP officer upon arrival.
  • For visitors to the U.S., regulations allow them certain exemptions (gifts, tobacco, personal effects, etc,), and they will be able to file a single family declaration, but they do not have the same personal duty exemption of $800 (individual) and $1,600 (members of a family) allowed to returning U.S. residents. As with any joint declaration, verbal or written, the person making and/or signing the declaration will be held accountable for its validity.

The Takeaway

Families are now redefined to include domestic partnerships, civil unions, unmarried persons living together, couples in same sex relationships and their biological, adopted and foster children. Families must reside together and continue to reside in the same home after they return to the US. There must be a financial relationship between the couple, which could mean a joint tax return or other means of sharing the financial burden of their home.

See also:
DOMA Issues After the Passage of “US v. Windsor”
USCIS releases FAQ on Immigration Benefits for Same Sex Marriages

See you in my next blog.

Nalini S Mahadevan, JD, MBA
Immigration Attorney
St. Louis, Missouri

The information is not meant to create a client-attorney relationship. This blog is for informational purposes only, and is not a substitute for legal advice. Situations may differ based on the facts.

Tara Mahadevan

Copyright 2013. All rights reserved.

Post Footer automatically generated by Add Post Footer Plugin for wordpress.

Social Share Toolbar
Facebooktwittergoogle_pluslinkedinrssyoutubeby feather

Comprehensive Immigration Reform’s Proposed Points System

A new element of the immigration reform Senate Bill 744, “The Border Security, Economic Opportunity, and Immigration Modernization Act” is coming into play, namely a proposed merit-based points system, similar to ones found in Canada, the UK, Australia and New Zealand. The points system — an immigration-management tool that will be used to decide who is suitable to enter the US — would allocate new immigrant visas to foreign-born people who meet certain criteria. Each year, the new system would allow between 120,000-250,000 immigrants to obtain immigrant visas through an accumulation of points based on skill, employment history and education. This points-based system is intended to replace the current Diversity Visa Lottery.

The “Desired Immigrant”

This points system shows that the US government does indeed favor a particular type of immigrant, a “desired immigrant”. The system would be more beneficial to certain immigrants over others, like those seeking employment-based immigration. Many immigrants would be at a disadvantage, including women, middle aged and older adults, and those from developing nations. The points system would be divided into characteristics that the US considers beneficial in a visa candidate, such as education, occupation, work experience, English language proficiency and age.

The Two Tiers

PointsFig1PointsFig2

During the fifth fiscal year after the immigration reform bill is passed and the points system is introduced, DHS would assign merit-based visas in two “tiers”, and would give 50% of the visas to applicants with the highest number of points in tier 1, and the other 50% to applicants with the highest number of points in tier 2. Tier 1 is for high-skilled workers and tier 2 is for lower-skilled workers.

The points system favors employment and educational categories over the others; and desires immigrants who are educated, experienced, fluent in English, and young. The system seems to be heavily influenced by economics, placing large value in immigrants’ ability to generate economic worth.

Disadvantaged Immigrants

Moreover, the system is biased against women. Women in other countries frequently have less education and work experience opportunities, allowing the points system to naturally favor men. Though Tier 2 acknowledges women by creating a separate caregiver characteristic, it only grants 10 points, which doesn’t count for much when compared to the employment background characteristic, which totals 40 points.

Family-based immigration is also minimized in the system. Similar to the caregiver characteristic, the siblings or adult sons/daughters of US citizens characteristic only receives 10 points, which, again, doesn’t account for a lot. The system also emphasizes age discrimination and nationality bias, by preferring young immigrants who come from countries with low US migration.

See you in my next blog.

Nalini S Mahadevan, JD, MBA
Immigration Attorney
Lowenbaum Partnership, LLC
St. Louis, Missouri

The information is not meant to create a client-attorney relationship. This blog is for informational purposes only, and is not a substitute for legal advice. Situations may differ based on the facts.

Tara Mahadevan

Copyright 2013. All rights reserved.

Post Footer automatically generated by Add Post Footer Plugin for wordpress.

Social Share Toolbar
Facebooktwittergoogle_pluslinkedinrssyoutubeby feather

CBP Announces Electronic Form I-94 Arrival/Departure Record

Form I-94 is the main way in which persons who are not US citizens, and who are not legal permanent residents, demonstrate their legal entry into the US. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) have announced the digital automation of Form I-94 Arrival/Departure, which will standardize travelers’ arrival and inspection processes, and ultimately lower costs and travelers’ wait time. Currently, CBP does not have a fail-safe method of keeping track of non-immigrant departures — an electronic I-94 could eliminate this loophole.

In late March, CBP published an interim final rule to the Federal Register, which redefines the definition of Form I-94 to include the electronic format and will be effective on April 26, 2013. Non-immigrants, who enter the US by air or sea will not have to submit paper Forms I-94.  But those who are subject to secondary inspection and asylees, refugees and parolees, will be required have to submit a paper form given to them by a Customs and Border Patrol officer. Travelers who enter through land border ports of entry will receive paper versions of Form I-94.

CBP will maintain I-94 records for all travelers who require one, but all records will instead be entered into the system in an electronic format and not given to the traveler. CBP will scan the traveler’s passport, creating an electronic arrival record for that person. Travelers will receive a CBP admission stamp on their travel documents, which detail the date and class of admission, and the admitted-until date. Departures will also be recorded electronically — if the traveler has a paper I-94, then he/she must surrender it upon leaving the US.

Some agencies will require a paper copy of Form I-94. USCIS will ask applicants to fill out paper copies when requesting particular benefits; and the State Department of Motor Vehicles (DMVs) will ask for paper copy submissions. In addition, non-immigrants with work authorization can present paper copies of Form I-94 to their employers during the Form I-9 process. If a traveler needs a paper copy of Form I-94, it will be available at www.cbp.gov/I94.

The Takeaway

Since this program is very new, we can expect confusion from all corners for a while, and differences in enforcement and paper documentation requirements from agencies. If you are a non-citizen, who is not a permanent resident, you will not receive a paper I-94 form from CBP as you enter the US, if you come by air or by sea. You will continue to receive a paper I-94 if you come by land from Canada or Mexico, if you require a secondary inspection, or you are a refugee or asylee. The problem is that USCIS and individual state-run agencies, such as drivers licence bureaus, will continue to require the now defunct I-94 form. In addition, it will become important to log onto the CBP website to ascertain that all your details on the electronic record are correct, and to print out a copy for your non-immigrant record. The electronic record will be erased from the system on departure from the US — maintaining a paper copy to prove departure may be useful under these new circumstances.

See you in my next blog.

Nalini S Mahadevan, JD, MBA
Immigration Attorney
Lowenbaum Partnership, LLC
St. Louis, Missouri

The information is not meant to create a client-attorney relationship. This blog is for informational purposes only, and is not a substitute for legal advice. Situations may differ based on the facts.

Tara Mahadevan

Copyright 2013. All rights reserved.

Post Footer automatically generated by Add Post Footer Plugin for wordpress.

Social Share Toolbar
Facebooktwittergoogle_pluslinkedinrssyoutubeby feather

DHS Grants Same-Sex Couples a Reprieve

US immigration allows US citizens, who are ‘married’ to citizens of other countries, to apply for permanent residency based on marriage. In other words, the foreign spouse can qualify for permanent residency based on their marital relationship with the US citizen. The US government is now seeking to expand the scope of the marital relationship to include same-sex couples in long-term relationships.

To achieve this, in June 2011 the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) and US Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) issued a policy called, “Exercising Prosecutorial Discretion Consistent with Civil Immigration Enforcement Priorities of the Agency for the Apprehension, Detention, and Removal of Aliens”, or the Prosecutorial Discretion Memorandum. This policy outlined the guidelines that enforcement officers are to follow when finding and removing illegal aliens from the US. This memo was issued to explain the position that DHS and ICE would take on treatment of young immigrants who are in long-term, same-sex relationships with American citizens.

In a written statement in September, DHS further clarified the Prosecutorial Discretion Memorandum by specifically stating that young immigrants, with American same-sex partners, will remain eligible for deferral, which means that no action would be taken to remove foreign-born, same-sex couples from the US.

Prosecutorial Discretion Policy

Prosecutorial discretion is the act of an agency or officer deciding how to bring charges upon a person and how to handle a case.

When deciding how to pursue a case, enforcement officers follow the guidelines of the Prosecutorial Discretion Memorandum. As the guidelines state, officers must asses an individual’s “ties and contributions to the community, including family relationships.” As it was made clear by DHS Secretary Janet Napolitano this September 2012, these ‘family relationships’ also include “committed, long-term, same-sex partners.” Instead of centering efforts on cases that do not pose a threat to US security, the Obama administration is focusing enforcement resources on deporting immigrants who are potential risks to public safety and national security.

Policy Ambiguities

Though guidelines for same-sex couples were outlined in the Prosecutorial Discretion Memorandum, many thought the memo was vague. In July, over 80 Democrats from the House of Representatives wrote to Secretary Napolitano, “it would be beyond senseless to see L.G.B.T. persons with family ties here in the United States deported” because officers might be uninformed about the guidelines on gay partners (NYT, “Same-Sex Couples Granted Protection in Deportations”, 28 Sept 2012).

Thousands of deportation cases have been closed since DHS’s clarification. While immigrants-in-question can remain in the US, they still will not be granted legal status.

DHS’s clarification does not affect the issue of gay immigrants, who are married to American citizens, being able to acquire permanent resident visas. According to current law, same-sex immigrant spouses are not eligible for green cards and can be deported.

DHS may not deport same-sex couples, and will give these couples reprieve. However, deferral is not a path for citizenship. We will wait until November to see if these policies will be continued.

See you in my next blog.

Nalini S Mahadevan, JD, MBA
Immigration Attorney
Lowenbaum Partnership, LLC
St. Louis, Missouri

The information is not meant to create a client-attorney relationship. This blog is for informational purposes only, and is not a substitute for legal advice. Situations may differ based on the facts.

Tara Mahadevan

Copyright 2012. All rights reserved.

Post Footer automatically generated by Add Post Footer Plugin for wordpress.

Social Share Toolbar
Facebooktwittergoogle_pluslinkedinrssyoutubeby feather

The Plan for More Visas for STEM Grads

Earlier this September, Sen. Charles Schumer introduced the Benefits to Research and American Innovation through Nationality Statutes (BRAINS) Act to the Senate. BRAINS proposes to make 55,000 more green cards available for STEM (Science, Technology, Engineering and Mathematics) graduates, over a two-year period.

STEM graduates are foreign-born students who have obtained graduate degrees from American universities in science, technology, engineering or math. In order to receive a green card, the graduate must have a US job offer in one of these four fields.

Texas Rep. Lamar Smith also proposed a similar bill to the House. Unlike Schumer’s BRAINS Act, Smith’s bill recommends an elimination of diversity visas, the US’s lottery program for receiving a US Permanent Resident Card. The diversity visa program makes 55,000 visas available to people with certain eligibilities, and who have emigrated from countries with low US immigration rates.

The House bill did not pass. Democrats were against Smith’s bill, which they believe will reduce legal immigration. Both parties want to make more green cards available for STEM graduates, but have not agreed on a plan of action. Schumer’s bill will go through the Senate before November elections.

Microsoft’s Proposal

Microsoft is also lobbying Congress to boost the number of H1b visas that companies use by 20,000. Currently, Microsoft has 6,000 job openings, more than half of which necessitate expertise in the fields of technology and science. However, there is a gap between available jobs and job seekers’ ability levels – Microsoft’s petition targets this issue.

In Microsoft’s petition, the company recommends increasing H1B visa fees to $10,000 in order to create a STEM adaptation of the Race to the Top federal grant program that stimulates school education improvements. The program would be called Race to the Future, which would pay to hire STEM teachers and include computer science classes in schools.

Microsoft proposes giving STEM employees access to 20,000 green cards, an action that would begin to undertake the large build up of green cards, while also allowing skilled workers to remain in the US and contribute to our economy.

The problem with Microsoft’s proposal is that the scheme shuts out smaller employers who already pay substantial amounts in immigration and other fees to increase their workforce by sponsoring H1B visa holders. The scheme will create a two tier system of petitioners for visas.

Effect on the US Economy

Call and write your Senator about supporting increased visas for STEM graduates so that we keep their valuable knowledge in the US and prevent reverse ‘brain drain’. These graduates create jobs in other ‘support’ fields, promote innovation and contribute to the tax base.

See you in my next blog.

Nalini S Mahadevan, JD, MBA
Immigration Attorney
Lowenbaum Partnership, LLC
St. Louis, Missouri

Tara Mahadevan

Copyright 2012. All rights reserved.

Post Footer automatically generated by Add Post Footer Plugin for wordpress.

Social Share Toolbar
Facebooktwittergoogle_pluslinkedinrssyoutubeby feather

Health Law Limitations for Young Immigrants

In June, President Obama was pleased to announce the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (DACA) Memorandum – but with some ineligibilities. The Obama Administration has ruled that young immigrants, who can apply to DACA, will not qualify for health insurance under Obama’s health care renovations.

Young Immigrants Ineligible for Health Law

Normally, immigrants would fall under the definition of “lawfully present” residents, which qualifies them for government subsidies to purchase private insurance, a major facet of the new health care law. However in August, the administration declared that young immigrants will be barred from the definition of “lawfully present”.

Obama’s administration also announced that young immigrants will not be eligible for Medicaid or the Children’s Health Insurance Program – the areas of immigration and health care coverage are separate issues.

Immigration and Health Laws are Unrelated

The administration further justified their decision by stating that the immigration initiative is “an exercise of prosecutorial discretion,” that has been enacted so law enforcement officers can differentiate between immigrants who will cause a threat to national security or public safety.

According to the new federal health law, only citizens and “lawfully present” low-income immigrants are eligible for insurance subsidies. This group still includes green card holders and people granted asylum.

Immigrants who are employed, and qualify for DACA, will still be able to receive health insurance from employers; however, those who are not covered by employers will struggle to gain coverage.

(NYTimes, “Limits Placed on Immigrants in Health Law”, 18 Sept 2012)

See you in my next blog.

Nalini S Mahadevan, JD, MBA
Immigration Attorney
Lowenbaum Partnership, LLC
St. Louis, Missouri

Tara Mahadevan

Copyright 2012. All rights reserved.

Post Footer automatically generated by Add Post Footer Plugin for wordpress.

Social Share Toolbar
Facebooktwittergoogle_pluslinkedinrssyoutubeby feather

What An Employer Should Do Now that H-1B Visas are Over

As of December 1, 2011, the US Consulate General in Chennai will process all Blanket L Visas. The New Delhi US Embassy and Mumbai, Kolkata and Hyderabad US Consulates no longer process petitions for Blanket L Visas. Visas for dependent spouse and children (L-2) and individual visas (L-1A and L-1B) can still be processed at the Chennai, Hyderabad, Kolkata, Mumbai and New Delhi posts.

What is a Blanket L Visa?

A Blanket L visa is available to employees whose employers hold such a designation to file L visas under a Blanket L permit, issued by the Department of State. To be eligible, an employer must be in business in the US for more than one year; have three or more domestic or foreign, subsidiaries or affiliates; and be engaged in commercial trade or services. The employer must also have annual US sales of $25 million; a US workforce of 1,000 employees; or the employer should have received at least 10 L petitions in the last 12 months. An employer may be in danger of losing their Blanket L permit if they file fewer than 10 petitions in the prior year. Only commercial employers can be approved for a Blanket L permit; non-profits are not eligible.

Blanket L visas are for employees who have, in the three past years, been employed abroad for one year and will continue to be employed by the same company in the US. Employees can either be petitioned individually or under a blanket, and must meet the criteria of a “specialized knowledge” professional, executive or manager.

Three Major Issues

1. Will the L visa employee work at client sites?

If your answer is yes, then you must establish an employer-employee relationship during the time the employee is working at a third party worksite on behalf of the petitioner (employer). If the employee is to work in the office of the L visa employer, then that fact should be made very clear both in the documentation and at the interview. Consular officers are very concerned about L visas being misused by employers and being used when H-1B visas are no longer available.

At the US Consulate, the employee is often asked to go up to a window to answer questions. The interview is about 5 minutes, and very often consular officers may not have the time to read the entire petition. If the employee is to work on a particular project at a site other than the US employer’s offices, that fact should also be presented both at the interview and substantiated in the application.

L visa employees must be ready to answer any and all questions, and justify the reason for working at a end-client’s office instead of working at the L visa employer’s office.

2. Is the salary of an ordinary programmer or of a specialist in an L-1B visa category?

Salary earnings in India are indicative of the level of services an employee provides for his/her company; there is certainly a difference between IT workers who complete general services and those who have specialized knowledge. If the applicant is earning a sizeable salary, it is important to state the applicant’s salary in the support letter; salaries are often indicative of a specialist eligible for an L-1B visa instead of a programmer more suited to H-1B visa category status.

It is these distinctions that have caused a rise in the denial rate, 27%, of all filed L visa applications.

3. Is the applicant’s work in India not indicative of a specialized job?

The consular officers will most likely deduce that the applicant has no specialized knowledge if the applicant’s work in India is based in general services. This can include testing; enterprise recourse planning maintenance; or execution of Oracle, Microsoft or SAP software.

Experience

L-1B visa holders are supposed to be specialists; if the applicant has a three-year degree and one year of experience, then the consular officer is not likely to consider the applicant experienced enough to warrant an L-1B visa approval. The standard by which L visa applications are approved is “clearly approvable”. Hence, the burden of proving L visa eligibility lies with the employer. If the L visa has been approved by USCIS, the US Consulate may grant the L visa unless special circumstances exist, or the consulate determines more evidence is required.

We live in a climate where no USCIS application is sacrosanct, and where the Department of State often re-adjudicates USCIS approvals.

B-1 In Lieu of H-1B

The B-1 In Lieu of H-1B visa is a hybrid visa, a cross between a business visa and an employment visa in the US. The employee with H-1B visa qualifications comes to the US instead on a business visa (B-1), applies for the visa at the consulate and declares intent at the border. This employee cannot receive any remuneration in the US other than an expense allowance.

However, this visa is under attack. Employers should demonstrate that there are unexpected circumstances and an urgent need for the employee to obtain a B-1 Visa In Lieu of an H-1B. The controversy arises over the extent to which the B-1 visa is used or misused in lieu of an H-1B. Even if the consulate grants this visa, it is likely that the visa holder may encounter difficulty at the US port of entry.

True need for the visa must be well-planned to demonstrate the benefit of the short-term visit to the foreign employer, as opposed to the US client.

See you in my next blog.

Nalini S Mahadevan, JD, MBA
Immigration Attorney
Lowenbaum Partnership, LLC
St. Louis, Missouri

Tara Mahadevan

Copyright 2012. All rights reserved.

Post Footer automatically generated by Add Post Footer Plugin for wordpress.

Social Share Toolbar
Facebooktwittergoogle_pluslinkedinrssyoutubeby feather

How Employers can Reduce Audit in PERM Filings for Roving, Telecommuting and Traveling Employees

The tech industry is facing many challenges today, notably denials from the Department of Labor (DOL) based on very little understanding of how the industry works. Most large employers in the sector are not the ‘job shops’ that USCIS fears; and DOL is convinced the tech industry is engaged in fraud of some kind, or is somehow interested in recruiting foreign workers when willing and able US workers are available!

US employers in this sector pay a premium in governmental application costs and legal fees because they are unable to find a suitable worker in the advertised job. In fact, most recruiters I speak to would prefer to hire locally rather than internationally.

Both USCIS and DOL target employers who file for an employee with job duties involving roving, telecommuting or travelling; USCIS has recently issued guidance on roving employees placed at client worksites, in the H-1b visa context. DOL continues to audit and issue denials for roving, travelling or telecommuting positions. Current audits require employers to define employees’ positions as either national or regional roving without a residential requirement, or roving with a residential requirement. Additionally, DOL has expressed concern that these jobs may not be bona fide opportunities for the positions advertised at the intended place of hire; and, in the case of roving employees with no fixed ‘intended area of employment’, the location chosen to advertise the job opportunity and the wage may be artificial and misrepresented by the employer.

Where to Advertise for Roving Employees

In the past few years, DOL has audited and denied applications where the residential address of the employee does not match the location of employment. DOL decided that this position was for a telecommuting employee, a benefit the employer did not disclose in the advertisement for the position and therefore not disclosed to an eligible US applicant, but offered to the beneficiary as a benefit. A PERM application can also be denied based on job advertisements in the incorrect Metropolitan Statistical Area (MSA). The employer advertised the job where the client worksites were located, instead of the MSA where the employer’s headquarters was located.

In Paradigm Infotech, Inc (BALCA, June, 2007), the employer advertised the roving position in Erie, Pennsylvania where the client worksite was located, instead of the company headquarters. To reach the PERM denial, DOL conducted research on the employer. DOL ascertained that the employer’s headquarters was in Columbia, Maryland as confirmed by employer’s tax records and DOL interviews with employees. DOL also performed site visits to the Erie location of the employer’s branch to ascertain that sufficient office space existed, and parking space was available for the number of employees who were supposed to work there, in accordance with employer’s documentation filed with Board of Alien Labor Certification Appeals (BALCA). Based on short term contracts with client companies, inadequate office space at Erie, and payroll records that confirmed that employees worked at different locations, PERM labor certification was denied by DOL and the denial was upheld by BALCA. BALCA reasoned that the employer needed to test the labor market at the place where the alien was working, and since this was a roving employee and that geographical area of the labor market was unknown, the job market to be tested for PERM purposes was located at the employer’s headquarters.

Following Paradigm, employers with large business units away from company headquarters should also advertise at headquarters location. This is confirmed by the Barbara Farmers Memo: ETA Field Memorandum 48-94§10, published by DOL in 1994 and still followed by DOL.

Prevailing Wage Issues

Employers should also file to obtain prevailing wage determinations from DOL in all the intended areas of potential work sites for the foreign worker. Future locations can be determined from itineraries and statement of work signed with the end client.

Employers with International Locations

In August 2012, BALCA upheld that advertisements in the PERM context also include ‘travel requirements’. The employer in M-IL.L.C., filed a PERM for an employee who was required to travel to international locations as part of the job requirement. This fact was listed on the PERM application Form 9089 and the prevailing wage determination, but not listed on the advertisement for the job opening. 20 C.F.R. § 656.17(f)(4) states, “Advertisements placed in newspapers of general circulation or in professional journals before filing the Application for Permanent Employment Certification must… indicate the geographic area of employment with enough specificity to apprise applicants of any travel requirements and where applicants will likely have to reside to perform the job opportunity.” The employer’s advertisements did not include the travel requirement. Denial was based on the fact that travel requirements listed on the PERM application and the prevailing wage determination was not matched by the advertisement for the position.

Conclusion

While we cannot with certainty expect every PERM filing with travel requirements to be audited by DOL, we must certainly file like that is a very real possibility. Any filing with the DOL is subject to audit, even if in the past those very same requirements were certified by DOL. The safest course in our uncertain climate is to match information on the prevailing wage with the PERM form, and the employer’s advertisement requirements for the position advertised.

See you in my next blog.

Nalini S Mahadevan, JD, MBA
Immigration Attorney
Lowenbaum Partnership, LLC
St. Louis, Missouri

Tara Mahadevan

Copyright 2012. All rights reserved.

Post Footer automatically generated by Add Post Footer Plugin for wordpress.

Social Share Toolbar
Facebooktwittergoogle_pluslinkedinrssyoutubeby feather