gotcha!! EAD rejected

G

GCDayDreamer

Registered Users (C)
Hi,
I am on H1-B and filed I-485 on 07/02/2007 (of course JULY fiasco).
I wanted to invoke AC21 portability.
But I got an e-mail from the stupid employer today (06/18/2008)stating that my application for the job was rejected 'just because of EAD'.

Any one know who can we complain about this ?
thanks.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
I think OP means that he rejected because he did have EAD and, I imagine, because of its expiration date. It doesn't seem fair, but if the employer can show a justification why they cannot (or do not want to) hire you because of the expiration of your EAD, they have every right to do so. I have seen many companies reject EADs with few months left on them mainly because they need certainty that you will not have problems extending your EAD when it is due for renewal.

This is one of the unfortunate consequences of 1-year EADs.

Best-
 
Last edited by a moderator:
That is illegal in most cases. The form I-9 even says so.

Next time, don't say anything more than you are a legal resident authorized to work. Leave the showing of the EAD until after you're already hired.
 
EAD is sucks but better than H1/J1/TN

Jackolantern said:
That is illegal in most cases. The form I-9 even says so.

Next time, don't say anything more than you are a legal resident authorized to work. Leave the showing of the EAD until after you're already hired.
Click to expand...

That is not easy, if you say kind of "I am legal resident authorized to work" the second questions would be "Do you have the green card ? What is your eligibility to work ?" .... That is it, you have to explain what EAD means after that.

Some of the employers think that EAD employee may require sponsorship in a future. OPT students have EAD too saying that "They are fully authorized to work in US".

They do not care what I-9 says at the top. Some of the employers in "Non High Tech" states/areas do not even know what green card means.
 
sfmars said:
That is not easy, if you say kind of "I am legal resident authorized to work" the second questions would be "Do you have the green card ? What is your eligibility to work ?"
Click to expand...

Any HR staff with even half a clue knows better than to ask such questions - that's a great way to get sued.

If someone got rejected based on having an EAD and the employer was stupid enough to mention that in any form of recorded communication, get in touch with EEOC and let them tear the employer a new one.
 
sfmars said:
That is not easy, if you say kind of "I am legal resident authorized to work" the second questions would be "Do you have the green card ? What is your eligibility to work ?" .... That is it, you have to explain what EAD means after that.
Click to expand...
Just say "all my papers are in order, I am a legal resident, and I do not need sponsorship to work. I will be able to produce all the relevant papers if hired."

If they push further, say "I have a pending green card application which is in the final stages of processing, and have been given authorization to stay and work until I receive the green card."
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Jackolantern said:
Just say "all my papers are in order, I am a legal resident, and I do not need sponsorship to work. I will be able to produce all the relevant papers if hired."

If they push further, say "I have a pending green card application which is in the final stages of processing, and have been given authorization to stay and work until I receive the green card."
Click to expand...

They would say: "very good..., welcome when you get the green card".
I know that based on the EAD experience of my wife when some of the employers (even recruiters) did not say that they do not understand what EAD means but they "meant it" even with the best explanations.

I am saying not all of them but some of them.
 
And in the case of the OP, use that email as evidence to sue them. Or at least get a lawyer to send them a letter explaining why they aren't supposed to reject you for that reason, and ask them to reconsider you for the job.
 
That's right. I spoke to my lawyer and he was shocked too.
He is pursuing the matter. I will post the developments as well.
 
Jackolantern said:
Then you say "by law you cannot refuse to hire me on the basis of my current work-authorized status. Do you plan to break the law?"
Click to expand...

Then they can say that you are professionally do not match or you do not have right attitude, or they have already found better individual ("without EAD")..... There are thousand of reasons not to hire someone if you do not want to. But the real reason would be EAD with expiration date.
 
sfmars said:
Then they can say that you are professionally do not match or you do not have right attitude, or they have already found better individual ("without EAD")..... There are thousand of reasons not to hire someone if you do not want to. But the real reason would be EAD with expiration date.
Click to expand...
Yes, there could be any number of other reasons ... but the fact that they pointed out the EAD issue in the email is a smoking gun against them. Merely asking about specific status details (beyond whether you are work-authorized or not) before making an offer is also a no-no, unless it is a government-related job that legitimately requires citizenship.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top