Employee

Licensing of Foreign Persons Employed by a U.S. Person

When is a foreign person considered an employee? If residing overseas, is the foreign person employee considered a broker? Should current authorizations be replaced or amended to be consistent with current guidance? Can multiple employees be covered under one authorization? How is an employee providing marketing services overseas identified in a license application? What if the foreign person’s place of birth is different from the country he/she now resides in and holds citizenship from? What value should be entered on the license application? How should the foreign person employee of a U.S. person be identified in the TAA or MLA? Who should sign the DSP-83 for the transfer of U.S. classified information?

When is a foreign person considered an employee?

Unless the context shows otherwise, all answers here were provided by Rajiv and were compiled and reported by our editorial team from comments and blog on immigration.com

Add new comment

Office of Special Counsel for Immigration Related Unfair Employment Practices

The Office of Special Counsel for Immigration-Related Unfair Employment Practices (OSC) enforces the anti-discrimination provision (§ 274B) of the Immigration and Nationality Act (INA), 8 U.S.C. § 1324b.

This federal law prohibits:

Profession/Occupation: 
Agency: 

Government Shutdown – Impact on Immigration Matters

1. Our employees are deployed at government sites. Are we still obliged to pay the H-1 wage? 2. Can we ask such employees to use their paid leave?

A1. Yes. In my view, that obligation continues unabated.

Unless the context shows otherwise, all answers here were provided by Rajiv and were compiled and reported by our editorial team from comments and blog on immigration.com

Add new comment

Ability to Pay

1. Is submitting consolidated returns and audited financial statements for a parent company and its wholly owned subsidiaries sufficient to meet the burden of proof for establishing the company’s ability to pay by a preponderance of the evidence? 2. Where an employee who is the beneficiary of an approved I-140 and is eligible for AC-21 portability ports to a new employer in the same or similar occupation, must the new employer demonstrate the ability to pay the proffered wage from the date of portability? 3. When adjudicating I-485 applications for portability-eligible individuals where the petitioning employer is no longer in business, does USCIS require the subsequent employer to satisfy both the ability-to-pay requirement and the bona fide offer of employment requirement from the date of the employee’s subsequent hire through the approval of adjustment of status? 4. Why are prorated net assets not sufficient evidence to support ability to pay? 5. Why is the Yates Memo not applied if a beneficiary’s W-2 indicates that the actual wage paid to him/her is at least as much as the beneficiary’s proffered wage for the prorated period?

1. USCIS says that it evaluates each consolidated financial statement on a caseby-case basis under the preponderance of evidence standard to determine whether the petitioner has the ability to pay the proffered wage.

2. USCIS says that, in this situation, the new employer is not obligated to demonstrate the ability to pay from the date of portability.

Unless the context shows otherwise, all answers here were provided by Rajiv and were compiled and reported by our editorial team from comments and blog on immigration.com

Add new comment

Validation Instrument For Business Enterprises (VIBE) – USCIS Initiates New and Free Streamlined Process

Introduction:

VIBE is a web-based adjudication tool used by USCIS to validate basic information about companies petitioning to employ alien workers. VIBE uses commercially available data from an independent information provider (IIP) to validate basic information about companies petitioning to employ certain alien workers. Dun and Bradstreet (D&B) is the current IIP for this program.

Profession/Occupation: 
Nonimmigrant Visas: 

Pages

Subscribe to Employee