Urgent question on PERM/ETA 9089 - please advise

S

shankhajit

New Member
Hi,

thank you for taking a look into my post. I'd greatly appreciate if you could advise me on the following issue.

1)Currently my labor application ( EB2)/ ETA 9089 is being prepared for filing.

# The attorney is going to file for the job title- "Software Engineer".

# Prevailing wage is $77,522(acquired from Computer Software Engineers, Applications/skill level - II) and offered wage is $78,000.

# I'm in the 6th year of my H1B ( 3 years with a different employer and then with the current employer).

# I also have a US masters in Computer Science.

#The Job title advertised by my company( consulting) attorney required-> US Masters and 1 year experience.
--------------------------------------------------
*** The issue -> on the ETA 9089: there is a question: ***

" Number 12: Are the job opportunity's requirements normal for this occupation"?

[ Yes/ No. If the answer to this question is No, the employer must be prepared to provide documentation demonstrating that the job requirements are supported by business necessity.]

*** The company attorney has selected the answer " No". A couple of my friends said this could be problematic or might cause an audit. Their approved labor applications had the answer - " Yes" for this question.

Could you please let me know if selecting " No" for the above mentioned question might be a problem? or is it nothing unusual? ***

Thanking you in anticipation.
 
The answer to question depends on what your employer's hiring practices are. If in the previous your employer has hired anybody with masters plus 1 year of experience for software engineer he can select yes. Again if you see the standards set by DOL for Software engineer (Job zone 4 and svp range 7-8) any employer who sets minimum job requirements more than Bachelors plus 2 years of experience OR masters plus 0 years experience can run risk of business necessity requirement. I think your attorney might have selected NO based on DOL's minimum job requirements.
 
Thank you for replying.

Based on your answer and reference I'm assuming that it is not unusual/might be OK and not necessarily going to cause an audit.

Best regards,

Shankhajit
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top