WORKPLACE IMMIGRATION ISSUES August 10, 2010 © 2010 The Rudnick Spector Firm
<ul><li>Presented by: </li></ul><ul><li>Stacey Leigh Spector, Esq. </li></ul><ul><li>[email_address] </li></ul><ul><li>Tel...
Agenda <ul><li>Workplace Immigration Issues </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Recent Trends </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Everyday Hypoth...
Workplace Immigration Issues <ul><li>Recent Trends </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Huge delays on permanent side of family-based/emp...
Workplace Immigration Issues <ul><li>Everyday Hypotheticals of What Can Go Wrong </li></ul><ul><ul><li>B-1 Business Visito...
Workplace Immigration Issues <ul><li>Everyday Hypotheticals of What Can Go Wrong </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Employee Returns Ho...
Workplace Immigration Issues <ul><li>Everyday Hypotheticals of What Can Go Wrong (con’t) </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Employee Re...
I-9 & E-Verify    <ul><li>Role of Immigration Practitioner </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Create corporate I-9 & E-Verify   polic...
I-9 & E-Verify    <ul><li>Recent Trends </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Worksite enforcement </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>2009: I...
I-9 & E-Verify    <ul><li>E-Verify  </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Free internet-based system that employers use to confirm legal...
I-9 & E-Verify    States and Municipalities Requiring E-Verify 
Immigration & Labor/Employment Law Intersection <ul><li>Hiring </li></ul><ul><ul><li>What can be asked, how/when can it be...
Immigration & Labor/Employment Law Intersection <ul><li>Termination </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Withdrawing DHS petitions and DO...
Immigration & Labor/Employment Law Intersection <ul><li>Leave of Absence (H-1B) </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Voluntary:  Employer...
The Rudnick Spector Firm <ul><li>The Rudnick Spector Firm is recognized as one of the leading Immigration Law Firms in the...
Stacey Leigh Spector, Esq. <ul><li>Stacey Leigh Spector, a Founding Partner of The Rudnick Spector Firm,  is among the cou...
Jill K. Soubel, Esq. <ul><li>Ms. Soubel is an Associate at The Rudnick Spector Firm , having served in this capacity with ...
Upcoming SlideShare
Loading in …5
×

Immigration & Employment Law

1,678 views

Published on

Published in: Education
1 Comment
2 Likes
Statistics
Notes
No Downloads
Views
Total views
1,678
On SlideShare
0
From Embeds
0
Number of Embeds
54
Actions
Shares
0
Downloads
0
Comments
1
Likes
2
Embeds 0
No embeds

No notes for slide
  • 10/19/11
  • 10/19/11
  • 10/19/11
  • Recent Trends Huge delays on permanent side of family-based/employment immigration (i.e., green cards) particularly for certain nationalities (Chinese, Indian, Mexican, Philippine), and for employment green cards based on Bachelor’s degree as minimum requirement. EB3: All countries is 6/1/2004, China is 9/22/03, India is 1/1/02 EB2: All Countries current, China/India 3/1/06 Losing our well-educated immigrant population to Australia, Canada, China, India. Bill Gates’ comment about every foreign PhD who graduates in US should get automatic green card. Little chance of comprehensive immigration reform until after mid-term elections, and even then, low probability. Despite delays, upturn in companies’ localizing foreign nationals and obtaining green cards—potentially less expensive than sending employee back; benefits for family/business medical/pharma services, universities, hospitals and technology companies 2. Different story on temporary (nonimmigrant) side of US immigration : Only 27,300 H-1B petitions were submitted to DHS out of 65,000 Regular Caps/20,000 under Advance Degree Exemption In past year (2009), quota remained open until 12/21/09; prior year quota reached on 4/8/08 (eight days after it became open). 3. Outbound Immigration of U.S. employees Long gone are days of traditional expatriation to US—too expensive seeing upturn in temporary transfer of U.S. employees to work in other countries 4. Increased DHS scrutiny at airports and border (Canadian/Mexican) Difficulty of retaining green card when employee transferred back Reentry permit; need to continue to file U.S. tax returns; intent issues; increased scrutiny where no reentry permit obtained.
  • B-1 Business Visitor : Problem is application of law versus reality: frequent U.S. business trips, while completely legitimate and permitted by law, may lead to increased inspection, delays, hassles, and worse. Need to prep FN before travel; review what they are carrying with them; possibly provide entry letter.
  • Security Checks : All nonimmigrants subject to criminal checks (fingerprint) when applying for U.S. visa stamp May also be subject to security checks which can lead to substantial delays, and possible job loss Security checks mandated for T-7 countries (Cuba, Iran, Iraq, Libya, North Korea, Sudan and Syria) and 26 other countries (Afghanistan, Algeria, Bahrain, Djibouti, Egypt, Eritrea, Indonesia, Iran, Iraq, Jordan, Kuwait, Lebanon, Libya, Malaysia, Morocco, Oman, Pakistan, Qatar, Saudi Arabia, Somalia, Sudan, Syria, Tunisia, Turkey, the United Arab Emirates, and Yemen). Additional security checks based on proposed U.S. work, and whether FN’s work will involve critical field on “Technology Alert List” (TAL). The TAL includes such fields as advanced computers/microelectronic technology, engineering, materials technology, information security, chemicals, biotechnology, and biomed engineering. Based on dual use, need to be proactive prior to encounter with US Consul to demonstrate no sensitive national security interest nor any military, nuclear energy or arms applications
  • Because of increased sharing of criminal databases, FNs being detained or denied entry because of convictions that occurred many years ago. Specifically, in 2008, Canadian Mounties and U.S. FBI shared criminal databases leading to increased scrutiny at border, even where FN may not have had an issue in the past Recent examples include shoplifting, DUIs, assault resulting from a rugby bar room brawl, admitted drug use in the course of an AOS medical examination that because of the worldwide sharing of security and criminal checks The 212(d)(3) waiver is available for most criminal inadmissibilities for a nonimmigrant visa application and is relatively straightforward to obtain Higher bar of proof for waivers of inadmissibility for immigrant visas.
  • In this era of increasing DHS scrutiny and public out-cry concerning undocumented workers, we provide our clients with the necessary information and tools to ensure compliance with all immigration-related regulations. Pre-emptive I-9 compliance, and if applicable E-Verify, is really the first line of defense. We: Draft corporate I-9 and E-Verify policies; Offer comprehensive training in I-9 completion and the E-Verify system; Provide support for questions that arise; Conduct I-9 compliance audits, which is particularly important before employer signs up for E-verify or IMAGE Provide relevant I-9 E-Verify requirement updates (form revisions, documentation changes) Perform E-Verify registration Partner with our case management system provider to provide online I-9 and E-Verify system called GUARDIAN.
  • Some Recent Trends in this area: In 2009, ICE began implementing a new strategy to reduce illegal employment through employer audits. We are seeing increasing employer participation in the IMAGE program (ICE Mutual Agreement between Government and Employers), which has existed since 2007. We do not recommend that our clients participate in this program because it requires employers to undergo an ICE I-9 audit without any safe-harbor against discovered violations. So, why the increase in employer participation? We speculate that employers choose to participate to increase favorable public opinion – “Look! We don’t hire illegals!” At end of July, DHS finally, officially approved the electronic completion and storage of I-9s, which is essentially a codification of existing employer practice. DHS is conducting another sort of employer audit, H-1B site visits, wherein a DHS agent visits the employer to ensure that H-1B employees are actually working at the employer site and being paid the wage stated in the H-1B petition. Last but not least, E-Verify is becoming more prevalent.
  • We expect to see a continued trend toward requiring employers to E-Verify There is some talk that Obama administration will use mandatory e-verify for all employers as a bargaining chip to engender conservative buy-in for comprehensive immigration reform. Currently, Federal contractors and sub-contractors, as indicated here, are required to E-Verify. Increasingly, states and municipalities are requiring employers to E-Verify. Employers tend to take a whole-hog approach to E-Verify, registering the entire company for E-Verify when forced to do so by the State or municipality of a certain branch or office. How bad is EVerify? Really, clients do not experience too many problems with the system. No more than when a foreign national employee goes to apply for a SSN. The main complaint is having one more thing to do during the on-boarding process, training, etc.
  • Hiring What can you ask? Inquiry can be made orally or on employment application Key point is that same inquiry be made of all applicants for employment Information not used to discriminate on basis of national origin or citizenship status. Applicant answers yes/no to questions regarding employment eligibility. Recruiter/HR cannot seek additional information until hiring (I-9 process). Applicant answers “no/yes” or “yes/yes” on application. Recruiter/HR can ask applicant if she/he requires sponsorship. Employer/ Recruiter can inquire about Applicant’s specific status or examine actual documentation, but should not specify which documents. If based on a review of documents, and consultation with outside immigration counsel, Employer/Recruiter determines to proceed with sponsorship, then and only then should offer be extended. If, alternatively, Applicant falsely answers Employment Application stating he/she has necessary work authorization, Employer can revoke job offer that has been extended. US payroll – All H-1B petition, green card applications Foreign payroll – can be accommodated for most other nonimmigrant petitions. Termination Withdraw L-1, O-1, E-1/2 petitions immediately (not required under law). While no DHS sanction for failing to notify DHS of termination, under DOL regs, only way to end continuing wage obligation. Contact immigration counsel to file appropriate withdrawal request Reasonable costs of return transportation: If terminate an H-1B or O-1 prior to expiration of the petition, Employer must pay for the reasonable cost of one-way return transportation for the ex-employee only to home country or country of last residence. Approved PERM applications and I-140 approval w/o I-485 filing or if I-485 not pending more than 180 days: withdrawing these may cause ex-employee to have to leave the U.S. immediately. Common to leave these pending even after termination. Grace Period Myth H-1Bs : Universal but incorrect notion that FN can remain lawfully in the U.S. for up to 60 days after employment termination, expiration of validity date, or DHS denial. All that exists is 10 day period before visa issuance/after expiration, but FN cannot work during 10 days. J-1s : 30 day grace period for packing up/preparing for departure, but not for working. F-1 students : 60 day grace period for preparing for departure, but not for employment. Leave of Absence Concern mostly arises with an H-1B employee and impact on wage obligations Involuntary: If employee benched for business purposes, employer must continue to pay H-1B wage. Voluntary: (FMLA leave, non-compete periods between jobs, extended travel). Employer is not required to continue to pay H-1B wage. Documentation of Voluntary leave: Letter in personnel file, signed by employee stating that requesting a personal leave of absence, stating the specific reason and intended length of absence.
  • Hiring What can you ask? Inquiry can be made orally or on employment application Key point is that same inquiry be made of all applicants for employment Information not used to discriminate on basis of national origin or citizenship status. Applicant answers yes/no to questions regarding employment eligibility. Recruiter/HR cannot seek additional information until hiring (I-9 process). Applicant answers “no/yes” or “yes/yes” on application. Recruiter/HR can ask applicant if she/he requires sponsorship. Employer/ Recruiter can inquire about Applicant’s specific status or examine actual documentation, but should not specify which documents. If based on a review of documents, and consultation with outside immigration counsel, Employer/Recruiter determines to proceed with sponsorship, then and only then should offer be extended. If, alternatively, Applicant falsely answers Employment Application stating he/she has necessary work authorization, Employer can revoke job offer that has been extended. US payroll – All H-1B petition, green card applications Foreign payroll – can be accommodated for most other nonimmigrant petitions. Termination Withdraw L-1, O-1, E-1/2 petitions immediately (not required under law). While no DHS sanction for failing to notify DHS of termination, under DOL regs, only way to end continuing wage obligation. Contact immigration counsel to file appropriate withdrawal request Reasonable costs of return transportation: If terminate an H-1B or O-1 prior to expiration of the petition, Employer must pay for the reasonable cost of one-way return transportation for the ex-employee only to home country or country of last residence. Approved PERM applications and I-140 approval w/o I-485 filing or if I-485 not pending more than 180 days: withdrawing these may cause ex-employee to have to leave the U.S. immediately. Common to leave these pending even after termination. Grace Period Myth H-1Bs : Universal but incorrect notion that FN can remain lawfully in the U.S. for up to 60 days after employment termination, expiration of validity date, or DHS denial. All that exists is 10 day period before visa issuance/after expiration, but FN cannot work during 10 days. J-1s : 30 day grace period for packing up/preparing for departure, but not for working. F-1 students : 60 day grace period for preparing for departure, but not for employment. Leave of Absence Concern mostly arises with an H-1B employee and impact on wage obligations Involuntary: If employee benched for business purposes, employer must continue to pay H-1B wage. Voluntary: (FMLA leave, non-compete periods between jobs, extended travel). Employer is not required to continue to pay H-1B wage. Documentation of Voluntary leave: Letter in personnel file, signed by employee stating that requesting a personal leave of absence, stating the specific reason and intended length of absence.
  • Corporate Restructuring Employer changes corporate structure (merger, acquisition, spin-off, or other such action)—very broadly defined. H-1B context: No need to file new petitions/LCA for employees transferred to new employing entity if new employing entity succeeds to interests and obligations of first employer (enough that first employer succeeds to immigration related obligations). Changes in Employment The employer will be required to file a new petition for nonimmigrant if changes in employment are material/substantial. Changes that might require a new DHS filing or LCA: Lateral move, promotion, change in title, relocation of employment, material change in duties, a reduction in pay. Reduction in Workforce Lay-offs or other workforce reduction tactics may affect an employers attestations in H-1B filings or PERM applications. Consult with outside immigration counsel if a lay-off or other reduction activity takes place to ensure appropriate measures are taken.
  • Immigration & Employment Law

    1. 1. WORKPLACE IMMIGRATION ISSUES August 10, 2010 © 2010 The Rudnick Spector Firm
    2. 2. <ul><li>Presented by: </li></ul><ul><li>Stacey Leigh Spector, Esq. </li></ul><ul><li>[email_address] </li></ul><ul><li>Tel: (215) 546-0880 </li></ul><ul><li>Fax: (215) 600-2743 </li></ul><ul><li>Jill K. Soubel, Esq. </li></ul><ul><li>[email_address] </li></ul><ul><li>Tel: (215) 690-5090 </li></ul><ul><li>Fax: (215) 600-2743 </li></ul><ul><li>1608 Walnut St., Ste. 1700 </li></ul><ul><li>Philadelphia, PA 19103 </li></ul><ul><li>http://www.rudnickspector.com </li></ul>© 2010 The Rudnick Spector Firm
    3. 3. Agenda <ul><li>Workplace Immigration Issues </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Recent Trends </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Everyday Hypotheticals of What Can Go Wrong </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>The B-1 Business Visitor </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>Consular Security Checks </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>Criminal Issues </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><li>I-9 & E-Verify  </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Recent Trends </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>E-Verify  </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Role of Immigration Practitioner </li></ul></ul><ul><li>Immigration & Labor/Employment Law Intersection </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Hiring </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Termination </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Leave of Absence </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Corporate Restructuring </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Changes in Employment </li></ul></ul>© 2010 The Rudnick Spector Firm
    4. 4. Workplace Immigration Issues <ul><li>Recent Trends </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Huge delays on permanent side of family-based/employment immigration </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Different story on temporary (nonimmigrant) side of U.S. immigration </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Outbound immigration of U.S. employees </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Increased DHS scrutiny at airports and border </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>Worldwide sharing of criminal databases </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>Green Card retention for Foreign Nationals who leave the U.S. </li></ul></ul></ul>© 2010 The Rudnick Spector Firm
    5. 5. Workplace Immigration Issues <ul><li>Everyday Hypotheticals of What Can Go Wrong </li></ul><ul><ul><li>B-1 Business Visitor Coming to “Work” in the U.S. </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Mr. Thompson, UK National and SAP Expert, travels extensively between Europe and the U.S. on behalf of his UK employer. On his last U.S. trip, DHS questioned him extensively regarding nature of his frequent U.S. trips. Unfortunately, Mr. Thompson stated that he was coming to the U.S. to do some SAP implementation work. DHS detained and interrogated him, and determined that he was traveling without proper travel documents (i.e., no work permission), offering him choice of withdrawing his admission or possibly being subject to expedited removal procedures with five year bar. </li></ul></ul>© 2010 The Rudnick Spector Firm
    6. 6. Workplace Immigration Issues <ul><li>Everyday Hypotheticals of What Can Go Wrong </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Employee Returns Home for Vacation and Stuck at US Consul Due to Security Checks </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Moroccan National, with U.S. Master’s in CS, employed at large U.S. technology firm as Programmer Analyst. He returns home to visit his family, and needs to apply at U.S. Consul in Casablanca for work visa to return to U.S. He is stuck in Morocco for several months pending Consul’s resolution of security checks based on: 1) Morocco being on list of countries where there is increased security checks; and 2) his proposed U.S. work in “advanced computers” triggers additional check on Technology Alert List. </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>Security checks mandated for T-7 countries (Cuba, Iran, Iraq, Libya, North Korea, Sudan and Syria) and 26 other countries (Afghanistan, Algeria, Bahrain, Djibouti, Egypt, Eritrea, Indonesia, Iran, Iraq, Jordan, Kuwait, Lebanon, Libya, Malaysia, Morocco, Oman, Pakistan, Qatar, Saudi Arabia, Somalia, Sudan, Syria, Tunisia, Turkey, the United Arab Emirates, and Yemen). </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>Additional security checks based on proposed U.S. work, and whether foreign national’s work will involve critical field on “Technology Alert List” (TAL). The TAL includes such fields as advanced computers/microelectronic technology, engineering, materials technology, information security, chemicals, biotechnology, and biomed engineering. </li></ul></ul></ul>© 2010 The Rudnick Spector Firm
    7. 7. Workplace Immigration Issues <ul><li>Everyday Hypotheticals of What Can Go Wrong (con’t) </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Employee Refused Entry Because of Criminal Indiscretion Thirty Years Ago </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Husband of Canadian National for whom we are processing green card stopped at Canadian border and refused entry because of prior conviction for indecent assault on a female (received suspended sentence) when he was 20 years old. Husband barred from entering as both a nonimmigrant and an immigrant. Situation embarrassing to him and to his family, and causes seven month separation while waivers are processed. </li></ul></ul>© 2010 The Rudnick Spector Firm
    8. 8. I-9 & E-Verify  <ul><li>Role of Immigration Practitioner </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Create corporate I-9 & E-Verify  policies </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>Form completion </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>Form maintenance </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Train and educate employer on compliance </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Conduct I-9 compliance audit at employer’s request and recommend corrective action </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Serve as resource for employer questions </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Provide updates on relevant developments in I-9 & E-Verify  requirements and enforcement </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Perform E-Verify registration </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>GUARDIAN  Electronic E-Verify & I-9 system </li></ul></ul>© 2010 The Rudnick Spector Firm
    9. 9. I-9 & E-Verify  <ul><li>Recent Trends </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Worksite enforcement </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>2009: ICE implements new strategy to reduce demand for illegal employment. ICE claims that I-9 audits and other enforcement efforts are not random, but arise from “various sources of information”. </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>March 2, 2010: 180 NOI to employers in MS, LA, AL, and AR for inspection of I-9 records </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>July 20, 2010: 8 employees sentenced for unlawfully harboring, transporting, and employing illegal aliens. </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>IMAGE (ICE Mutual Agreement between Government and Employers). Employers seeking to participate in IMAGE must agree to: </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>Complete self-assessment questionnaire; </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>Enroll in E-Verify; </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>Enroll in Social Security Number Verification Service; </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>Adhere to IMAGE Best Employment Practices; </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>Undergo I-9 audit conducted by ICE; and </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>Review and sign official IMAGE partnership agreement with ICE. </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>I-9 electronic completion and storage rule finalized by DHS </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>DHS H-1B site visits – Not ICE I-9 audit </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>E-Verify  </li></ul></ul>© 2010 The Rudnick Spector Firm
    10. 10. I-9 & E-Verify  <ul><li>E-Verify  </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Free internet-based system that employers use to confirm legal status of newly hired employees. </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>System compares SSN data and DHS immigration databases to information entered on Form I-9 to confirm employee matches. </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>MOU </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>STEM OPT F-1 students </li></ul></ul><ul><li>Federal Contractor E-Verify  Rule </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Federal contractors who are awarded contract on or after 9/8/09 are subject to E-Verify  , if contract: </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>Has performance period of more than 120 days, </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>Value exceeds $100,000, and, </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>At least some portion of work under contract is performed in U.S. </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Subcontractors must also E-Verify  if working on federal contract and contract is for at least $3,000 in services or construction </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Must E-Verify within 30 days after contract is awarded and begin to use within 90 days </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Must verify all new hires and existing employees assigned to affected contract </li></ul></ul>© 2010 The Rudnick Spector Firm
    11. 11. I-9 & E-Verify  States and Municipalities Requiring E-Verify 
    12. 12. Immigration & Labor/Employment Law Intersection <ul><li>Hiring </li></ul><ul><ul><li>What can be asked, how/when can it be asked: </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>Suggestion of Office of Special Counsel (OSC): Are you legally authorized to work in the U.S.? </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>Will you now or in the future require sponsorship for employment visa status? </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>Alternative Suggestion: To be legally authorized to work in the U.S., you must be a U.S. citizen, U.S. permanent resident, temporary lawful resident, refugee or asylee. Are you currently eligible to work permanently in the U.S.? </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>No obligation for employer to sponsor foreign national </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>U.S. payroll v. foreign affiliate payroll </li></ul></ul>© 2010 The Rudnick Spector Firm
    13. 13. Immigration & Labor/Employment Law Intersection <ul><li>Termination </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Withdrawing DHS petitions and DOL applications: </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>No employer sanction for failing to notify DHS of termination </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>DOL regulation for ending continuing wage obligation tied to DHS notification </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Return transportation (H-1B, O-1 Petitions) </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>If Employer terminates prior to expiration of petition, must pay for reasonable cost of one-way return transportation for ex-employee to home country or to country of last residence </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>The Grace Period Myth </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>Myth that foreign national employee can remain lawfully in the U.S. after employment termination, expiration of validity date, or DHS denial </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>H-1Bs : 10 day period before visa issuance/after expiration, but foreign national cannot work during 10 days. </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>J-1s : 30 day grace period for packing up/preparing for departure, but not for working. </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>F-1 students : 60 day grace period for preparing for departure, but not for employment. </li></ul></ul></ul>© 2010 The Rudnick Spector Firm
    14. 14. Immigration & Labor/Employment Law Intersection <ul><li>Leave of Absence (H-1B) </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Voluntary: Employer not required to pay wage if period of” nonproductive status” due to conditions unrelated to employment </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Involuntary: Employer cannot stop paying wage because of economic downturn </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Documenting permissible leave of absence </li></ul></ul><ul><li>Corporate Restructuring </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Changes in ownership structure of U.S. employer must be carefully reviewed </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Different analysis depending on nonimmigrant work category </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Providing for nonimmigrant workers in restructuring agreement </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Refiling DHS petitions versus executing affidavit prior to transaction close </li></ul></ul><ul><li>Changes in Employment </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Changes to present position (location, title, duties) </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Promotions and lateral moves </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Reduction in pay </li></ul></ul>© 2010 The Rudnick Spector Firm
    15. 15. The Rudnick Spector Firm <ul><li>The Rudnick Spector Firm is recognized as one of the leading Immigration Law Firms in the country.  We have built a nationwide practice devoted exclusively to immigration law.  We provide top-tier immigration services to Fortune 500 multinational companies, as well as to mid-size and smaller firms and institutions, universities, hospitals, and individuals.  Our clients are engaged in a broad spectrum of businesses ranging from leading edge scientific developments and technologies to traditional retailing and manufacturing. We pride ourselves on developing creative solutions to difficult immigration problems for our business clients. </li></ul><ul><li>Rudnick Spector handles a full range of litigation before administrative agencies and the federal courts, including employer sanctions cases, removal proceedings, and asylum applications. We develop effective I-9 compliance programs for our clients, as well as conduct on site I-9 and LCA audits. The Firm is actively involved in providing guidance on the E-Verify program, and on I-9 compliance software with E-Verify integration. In addition, we handle outbound immigration matters for U.S.- based employees to obtain work and travel permits and visas abroad. </li></ul><ul><li>Rudnick Spector prides itself on providing personalized service to our clients. Our clients have direct access to our attorneys on an as needed basis. Our professional staff is trained to return phone calls and emails within the same business day. We do everything possible to avoid emergencies by advanced planning. Our fees are extremely competitive and billed out on a flat fee basis with no additional charge for copying or long distance phone calls. </li></ul>© 2010 The Rudnick Spector Firm
    16. 16. Stacey Leigh Spector, Esq. <ul><li>Stacey Leigh Spector, a Founding Partner of The Rudnick Spector Firm, is among the country’s leading immigration lawyers. She has been practicing immigration law for over 25 years, and is a founding partner of The Rudnick Spector Firm. Ms. Spector’s practice encompasses a full spectrum of business immigration including multinational corporations, technology companies, academic and research institutions, and entertainers and artists. Ms. Spector has particular expertise in advising employers on the immigration implications of corporate changes, including mergers and acquisitions, downsizing, and reductions in work force. She has successfully developed I-9 Compliance Training Programs for HR personnel, and has managed I-9 and H-1B audits for her clients. </li></ul><ul><li>Prior to establishing the Rudnick Spector Firm, Ms. Spector served for ten years as Of Counsel to the predecessor firm of Steel, Rudnick & Ruben. Ms. Spector also served as Immigration Counsel to the former Rhône-Poulenc Group based in Collegeville, Pennsylvania, from 1992 to 2000. Ms. Spector was based in Paris, France, from 1990 to 1992, where she established an immigration practice and published “The Immigration Chronicle.” From 1987 to 1990, Ms. Spector headed the immigration practice at Pavia & Harcourt in New York, New York. She served as an Associate at Patterson, Belknap Webb & Tyler, also in New York City, from 1982 to 1984.    </li></ul><ul><li>                                                                                          </li></ul><ul><li>Education:                                                                                   </li></ul><ul><li>New York University School of Law, 1982, J.D.                                      </li></ul><ul><li>Brown University, 1979, Magna Cum Laude, Phi Beta Kappa </li></ul>© 2010 The Rudnick Spector Firm
    17. 17. Jill K. Soubel, Esq. <ul><li>Ms. Soubel is an Associate at The Rudnick Spector Firm , having served in this capacity with its predecessor firm beginning in 2007. Ms. Soubel was selected as a 2010 Top Young Attorney Rising Star by Pennsylvania Super Lawyers . </li></ul><ul><li>Ms. Soubel counsels clients on U.S. and global immigration matters. She concentrates in all aspects of U.S. corporate immigration, including nonimmigrant visas and permanent residence for intracompany transferees, professionals, and extraordinary ability individuals. She also assists clients with global immigration needs by preparing outbound business-related visas. She advises on and crafts corporate strategies for clients to ensure U.S. immigration law compliance. </li></ul><ul><li>Prior to practicing exclusively in immigration law, Ms. Soubel gained several years of employment litigation experience representing employers and their insurance providers in Workers’ Compensation matters. </li></ul><ul><li>Throughout her career, Ms. Soubel has been actively involved with international affairs and the immigrant community. In 2003, she interned as a Law Clerk in Tokyo, Japan, at Sakura Kyodo Law Offices in the International Law Department, where she advised on matters of U.S. immigration, corporate, and antitrust law, and gained experience in Japan’s immigration system. She served as a member of the Temple International and Comparative Law Journal , while pursuing her legal studies at Temple University. Prior to practicing law, Ms. Soubel also served as an EFL Instructor. </li></ul><ul><li>Education:   </li></ul><ul><li>James E. Beasley School of Law at Temple University, 2004, J.D.             </li></ul><ul><li>University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, 2000, BA with Honors. </li></ul>© 2010 The Rudnick Spector Firm

    ×