A blog about U.S. immigration matters by Paul Szeto, a former INS attorney and an experienced immigration attorney and counsel. Contact Info: 732-632-9888, http://www.1visa1.com/ (All information is not legal advice and is subject to change without prior notice.)

Wednesday, April 4, 2012

BALCA Upholds Denial of Labor Certification Where Travel Requirements/Various Job Locations Not in Ads

"Employer has violated 20 C.F.R. § 656.17(f)(3) by not specifically  apprising U.S. workers of the job opportunity.    Employer’s ETA Form 9089 included 'various unanticipated Deloitte locations and client sites nationally,' while the advertisement in The Philadelphia Inquirer did not contain what the CO termed 'travel requirements.'  Employer argues this language did not indicate travel requirements, but rather meant the position could be available in multiple geographic locations nationwide.  Regardless of whether the language indicated travel requirements or geographic locations,  Section 656.17(f)(3) was violated.  U.S. workers viewed  a different job description than  that listed on the ETA Form 9089.   Thus, the advertisement was not specific enough to apprise the U.S. worker of the job offered to the foreign worker.  If Employer had informed U.S. workers of the same job description which was provided to the foreign worker, more U.S. workers may very well have applied.    Some qualified potential U.S. applicants may have been interested in a company which could place them in different geographic locations, if that is what the language intended to convey.  Therefore, it was appropriate for the CO to deny certification of the application."  (Matter of Deloitte FAS, 3/29/12)

No comments:

Post a Comment