Justice Dept. released a flyer, “How Employers Can Avoid Discrimination in the Form I-9 and E-Verify Processes,” which provides guidance in completing Form I-9 and E-Verify processes.
Please check attached document for information.
A Continuing Legal Education seminar delivered by Rajiv S. Khanna. This information is relevant for lawyers and business/HR management professionals. This seminar was presented for American Law Institute/American Bar Association and Lawline.
Here is an excerpt from a press release from USDOL. I have said this many times before, - government investigations are NOT the same as litigation or practicing transactional immigration or corporate law. This is an entirely different area of practice. We as counsel need to know the law, compliance as well as litigation. We must approach all investigations in the spirit of good faith compliance, yet protect our clients from unnecessary liability. The investigators are not only investigators, but in effect also prosecution and judge.
I have received e-mails from folks about my 2009 articles on immigration law compliance and end-client letter issues in H-1B cases published by American Law Institute - American Bar Association. Here is the link:
http://www.immigration.com/articles-rajiv-s-khanna
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.
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.
Q1. What is FDNS?
Q2. What is the function of FDNS?
A1. U.S.
These videos are a part of series of Continuing Legal Educaion seminars delivered by Rajiv to various lawyers' groups. These provide an overview of how immigration law affects lawyers, business owners, HR and others in the work environment. If you would like us to provide informational conversation to your group, please contact us.
In the Matter of Tanaka, 2010-PER-01060 (BALCA)