Solution #1, Ban Labor Substitution

[GreenCardVirus]

There are supposedly 345,000 cased in Backlog Processing Centers in Dallas & Philadelphia alone.

Now how many employees still work for the same employer who filed for the labor??

Unless Substitution is banned, there is no way any fairness will be induced to the whole GC process.

All these labors in back log center if approved will be in open market for sale.

And one of these labors is applied on my behalf and I dont work for that company anymore. They laid me off.

Should they be allowed to substitute the labor?

 

[jllag1]

There are supposedly 345,000 cased in Backlog Processing Centers in Dallas & Philadelphia alone.

Now how employees still work for the same employer who filed for the labor??

Unless Substitution is banned, there is no way any fairness will be induced to the process.

All these labors if approved will be in open market for sale. And one of them is applied on my behalf and I dont work for that company anymore.

Agree. Maybe not as harsh as simply banning labor cert. But give a time frame. Like after 1 year of labor approval, it lapses. No substitution after 1 year or something like that. In this fast moving economy, the chance of an employer geniunely needing an employee after a year of labor cert seems to be remote.

Even if labor cert substitution is banned (thereby affecting the backlog of April 2001), as someone suggested, it can only benefit EB3 and to some extent EB2. EB1 are still out of luck.

 

[pralay]

Unless Substitution is banned, there is no way any fairness will be induced to the process.

Ironically when discontinuation of LC-subst memo was published all the immigration communities were against it.
The problem is not labor substitution, but DOL takes too much time to approved a LC. Recent PERM LC reduced this problem but still there are too much backlog for old LC applications.

All these labors if approved will be in open market for sale. And one of them is applied on my behalf and I dont work for that company anymore.

I think from employer's perspective it's fair game to look for suitable workers for their approved LCs - assuming there is no fraud involved (like as your said "open market for sale"). They spent money for it. So they deserve employees in those positions.
It's too bad that you left that company before utilizing your LC.
And it's good that another eligible and qualified immigrant worker will utilize that LC and able to get his/her GC.

 

[GreenCardVirus]

Ironically when discontinuation of LC-subst memo was published all the immigration communities were against it.
The problem is not labor substitution, but DOL takes too much time to approved a LC. Recent PERM LC reduced this problem but still there are too much backlog for old LC applications.
I think from employer's perspective it's fair game to look for suitable workers for their approved LCs - assuming there is no fraud involved (like as your said "open market for sale"). They spent money for it. So they deserve employees in those positions.
It's too bad that you left that company before utilizing your LC.
And it's good that another eligible and qualified immigrant worker will utilize that LC and able to get his/her GC.

People talk about spending lot of money on Labors. How much money does filing a labor certification cost. The Cost of adds in news papers is common to all employees and takes a couple of thousand max. Then cost of Attorney and filing Labor is probably 1500 per employee.

Compare this to an H1, it costs an employer almost 4000+$ just to do a Transfer.

Another point, lot of these people were laid off. You assumed that I left the company. Hell No. I got laid off because of bad market. So, theortically the job existed when they applied for labor and ceased to exist when when the employee was laid off. No employer should be allowed to use the existing labors in such circumstances.

 

[Jackolantern]

If labor substition will continue to be allowed, at least they should reset the priority date to the time when the new person got attached to it. That way they will become less profitable to sell and the new priority dates will make them less likely to cause retrogression.

 

[can_card]

Do

It should be scraped ASAP. No justification for LC sub is right. It is something similar in justifying the bribe. The reason for 350,000 LC at BEC is a result of possibility of LC sub and multiple filing. On average 2 or 3 LC may be pending for a same person at BEC. The unused ones creates black market. People are buying and selling without knowing it is illegal and it could result in legal action if INS finds. If one gets laid off or the present employer is not sponsering, one should find the right employer.

 

[nato]

This makes good sense

If labor substition will continue to be allowed, at least they should reset the priority date to the time when the new person got attached to it. That way they will become less profitable to sell and the new priority dates will make them less likely to cause retrogression.

 

[pralay]

Another point, lot of these people were laid off. You assumed that I left the company. Hell No. I got laid off because of bad market. So, theortically the job existed when they applied for labor and ceased to exist when when the employee was laid off. No employer should be allowed to use the existing labors in such circumstances.

If people were laid off, then probabaly that job postion does not exist anymore and the company should not use that LC. If company uses it, that will be fraud. But due to this reason banning a valid LC substitution (where person left, but job position still exists) is unfair.

 

[pralay]

People talk about spending lot of money on Labors. How much money does filing a labor certification cost. The Cost of adds in news papers is common to all employees and takes a couple of thousand max. Then cost of Attorney and filing Labor is probably 1500 per employee.

There are costs - like job advertisements, attorney fees etc. But the amount is not a factor. If a company spent a penny, then the company deserve to utilize that expense in valid way.

Compare this to an H1, it costs an employer almost 4000+$ just to do a Transfer.

First of all, I don't see why we have compare H1 with LC. Secondly, for most of the lawoffices I know they don't cost that much. In general it costs around $2000-$3000 including all the application fees.

 

[jambalakadi1]

they should ban labor substitution completely. This will solve many issues. any clauses or exceptions bring us to square one.

 

[jllag1]

they should ban labor substitution completely. This will solve many issues. any clauses or exceptions bring us to square one.

Your wish just might come true in the near future.

 

[GreenCardVirus]

If labor substition will continue to be allowed, at least they should reset the priority date to the time when the new person got attached to it. That way they will become less profitable to sell and the new priority dates will make them less likely to cause retrogression.

Yes, the rules say that when I-140 is applied on Substituted Labor, the Priority date should be set to the date of 140 application. But unfortunately, it is almost never followed.

 

[GreenCardVirus]

If people were laid off, then probabaly that job postion does not exist anymore and the company should not use that LC. If company uses it, that will be fraud. But due to this reason banning a valid LC substitution (where person left, but job position still exists) is unfair.

Yes, it is a fraud. And who is going to determine that it is fraud. Is there a way or means to find out if an employee is laid off or the employee quit? NO.

Coming to the cost of H1, please do your homework. The Transfer and First extension costs more thatn $2500 for fees alone. The second extension however comes pretty cheap with the fees less than 300$

Labor advertisements? We are not talking about posting job ads in NYTimes or Washingtonpost. Every employer puts these ads only in local newspapers. It costs like $300 per ad. And once your are certified to file in RIR, it covers all the employees.

Labor-Substitution is unquestionably becoming the biggest fraud of GC process.

 

[can_card]

But due to this reason banning a valid LC substitution (where person left, but job position still exists) is unfair.

This argument is also not correct. For example, person A left the job in the middle of GC process, and the employer subsitutes B and the job still exists. Now, how this employer finds the person B? Is it through open recruitment effort? Is that position open to all at the time A left? If so, there is no mechanisam to verify that by DOL or CIS. If it is a open recruitment, there may be a "qualified US worker" available to fill this position at the time A left or other foreign persons C or D, better qualified than B might have available to the employer to subsitute the A. I feel most of the labor subsitution is a scam.