SEE THE FULL ARTICLE BY GOING TO THIS LINK:
http://www.ilw.com/articles/2005,1103-dalton.shtm
PERM Erroneous Rejections – "What A Travesty "
by Vivien Dalton
In these uncertain times in the world of "PERM" we would like to share our experiences with other PERM practitioners on a national basis, who may be going through the same experiences as our group of attorney's located here in Las Vegas and Southern California. We refer to applications that were mailed in or, electronically filed. We refer to applications that were "perfectly developed" but were denied based specifically upon, "selections were not made at..." (See denial reasons stated below). We refer to "Erroneous Rejections" Where DOL have denied the application based upon the following:
Denial Reason(s)
A selection was not made for Section A-1, Previously submitted application and the application is incomplete. Therefore, per 656.17(a), this application is denied
Their list goes on…. DOL listed nine (9) selections that they stated were incomplete. We immediately pulled the file to check. How could we have missed nine (9) selections. We have been preparing and filing Labor Certifications 1979. Personally, I pride myself on being very detail oriented. How could this have happened? We analyzed the ETA 9089 Form and found that all nine (9) selections had been completed and appropriately entered!
We immediately began to prepare the "Request for Review". It's pretty simple to do because DOL have the original copy of the Form 9089 FORM. All they have to do is pull the form and have the Certifying Officer, (not the input clerk) take a second look. Obviously the computer cannot read boxes on the 9089 form. The computer reads these spaces as blanks even though selections were properly completed. For sure a computer glitch at DOL's end.
Now! Try explaining why the application was denied to your client's. They cannot believe the system is so flawed. We made a call to DOL to ask approximately how long it takes for them to respond to a "Request for Review". We were told, "We cannot tell
http://www.ilw.com/articles/2005,1103-dalton.shtm
PERM Erroneous Rejections – "What A Travesty "
by Vivien Dalton
In these uncertain times in the world of "PERM" we would like to share our experiences with other PERM practitioners on a national basis, who may be going through the same experiences as our group of attorney's located here in Las Vegas and Southern California. We refer to applications that were mailed in or, electronically filed. We refer to applications that were "perfectly developed" but were denied based specifically upon, "selections were not made at..." (See denial reasons stated below). We refer to "Erroneous Rejections" Where DOL have denied the application based upon the following:
Denial Reason(s)
A selection was not made for Section A-1, Previously submitted application and the application is incomplete. Therefore, per 656.17(a), this application is denied
Their list goes on…. DOL listed nine (9) selections that they stated were incomplete. We immediately pulled the file to check. How could we have missed nine (9) selections. We have been preparing and filing Labor Certifications 1979. Personally, I pride myself on being very detail oriented. How could this have happened? We analyzed the ETA 9089 Form and found that all nine (9) selections had been completed and appropriately entered!
We immediately began to prepare the "Request for Review". It's pretty simple to do because DOL have the original copy of the Form 9089 FORM. All they have to do is pull the form and have the Certifying Officer, (not the input clerk) take a second look. Obviously the computer cannot read boxes on the 9089 form. The computer reads these spaces as blanks even though selections were properly completed. For sure a computer glitch at DOL's end.
Now! Try explaining why the application was denied to your client's. They cannot believe the system is so flawed. We made a call to DOL to ask approximately how long it takes for them to respond to a "Request for Review". We were told, "We cannot tell