• Refining job descriptions and/or developing clear verticals for specific positions

• Timing LC filings to maximize cost savings for the employer

• Learning to identify a "PERM" (i.e. labor certification) process as opposed to a "non-PERM" related process

• Potential lawsuit challenging employers' responsibility to pay for the labor certification process [by the American Immigration Lawyers Foundation (AILF), which has expressed an interest in finding employers / plaintiffs for this purpose]

While its long-term effect on employers and employees is, as yet, not entirely clear, the Murthy Law Firm will take a proactive approach, addressing matters that have been identified as real and/or potential problems. Further, we will offer practical advice for overcoming those problems, to protect the long-term interests of both employees and the employers who seek to hire and retain highly-skilled workers, to increase the profitability of their businesses.
©MurthyDotCom
Instructions for Registering for this Teleconference
©MurthyDotCom
To participate in this FREE teleconference you must be an employer, HR manager, or similar agent in a company. Please eMail the following information to response@murthy.com. Date and time, as well as other details regarding the teleconference will be eMailed to interested company representatives.

Name
Title / Position in the Company
Company Name
Contact Telephone Number
Company WebSite URL

Please feel free to share this announcement with your company representative. Announcements of future teleconferences on a wide variety of topics will be announced in the MurthyBulletin. We intend to address many of the concerns shared by our readers.
©MurthyDotCom
Copyright © 2007, MURTHY LAW FIRM. All Rights Reserved

. . . . . . . . . . . . . .

2. BEC on LC Cases after Sep 30, 2007
©MurthyDotCom
The U.S. Department of Labor (DOL) held a teleconference on September 6, 2007, updating listeners on their processing of labor certifications (LCs) at the Backlog Elimination Centers (BECs, sometimes also referred to as the "Backlog Processing Centers" or BPCs). On May 5, 2006, our article, DOL Backlog Processing Centers - April 2006 Update reported that the DOL established a deadline of September 30, 2007 for eliminating the backlog of LC cases pending with the BECs. The recent teleconference provided clarification on DOL procedures for the remaining LC cases that will not be completed by September 30, 2007.
©MurthyDotCom
Statistics and Processing of Cases Pending at BECs
©MurthyDotCom
While the word from the BEC is that they have completed the processing of about 97 percent of their LC cases, there are cases that will not be completed by the September 30, 2007 deadline. In fact, our concern was expressed to MurthyDotCom and MurthyBulletin readers in our May 6, 2006 article. Because of the large volume of cases and the level of review required for processing those cases, we pointed out, the BECs may have difficulty meeting the September 30th deadline. The DOL indicated that, as of September 6, 2007, the BECs had processed 351,000 labor certification cases. There are 11,000 cases remaining that still need to be adjudicated. According to the DOL, they have requested action from the petitioners in half of those cases; a Notice of Finding (NOF) has been issued for 3,000 more cases; and some 1,500 cases are in their final stages of adjudication.
©MurthyDotCom
BEC Procedures for Pending LCs after Sep 30, 2007
©MurthyDotCom
It is anticipated that many of the pending cases will not be resolved until after September 30, 2007. Because some of the cases awaiting responses from employers have response deadline times that fall after September 30th, the BECs will stay open to complete the pending cases. The DOL, therefore, has not been able to indicate any specific date for closing their doors. The agency indicated, however, that this process will be gradual - the number of staff declining over time. The eMail accounts for gaining information will remain active until further notice from the DOL.
©MurthyDotCom
BALCA Appeal Cases
©MurthyDotCom
If the Board of Alien Labor Certification Appeals (BALCA) hears a case on appeal, and decides to return it for adjudication, the case will continue at a BEC until the BECs are closed. BALCA will send such cases to a PERM National Processing Center once the BECs are closed. The procedure outlining how to initiate the appeal process after the BECs are closed will be published by the DOL in the Federal Register at a later date.
©MurthyDotCom
Timeline to Obtain Certifications after a Decision
©MurthyDotCom
Employers should expect to receive any BEC labor cases that are certified by September 30, 2007 in the mail within 30 days following the actual certification.
©MurthyDotCom
Cases Improperly Closed by BECs
©MurthyDotCom
If cases have been improperly closed, the petitioner / employer should submit to the appropriate BEC a motion to reopen. If the BEC finds that any individual case has been closed in error, the case will be reopened and the online Public Disclosure System will be updated to show the status as "in process." If it is determined that the case was appropriately closed, there will not be any further correspondence and the online status will be not be changed. This is certainly not helpful to employers who will have no way of knowing if a case is still pending for review and decision at the BEC, or if it simply has been denied.
©MurthyDotCom
Conclusion
©MurthyDotCom
The most important message conveyed by the DOL at the September 6, 2007 teleconference was that the BECs will remain open beyond the previously-announced deadline of September 30, 2007. Employers and all other interested parties should follow normal business procedures until further notice from the DOL, which should be published in the Federal Register. Regarding the adjudication of labor certifications that had been delayed for years, it is also useful to know how very close the BECs came to completing this enormous task on time. While the replacement process, PERM, is not perfect, and there are differences in processing times between the two PERM centers, the discrepancies are measured in months, rather than in years, as had been the case for decades in the past. Hopefully, even while the DOL's focus is on protecting American workers, the LC system will continue to improve. The concern of U.S. employers is to obtain and keep the best labor force that will allow them to operate efficiently and effectively, encouraging a strong American economy.
©MurthyDotCom
Copyright © 2007, MURTHY LAW FIRM. All Rights Reserved

. . . . . . . . . . . . . .

3. Governors Push Congress for More H1B and Immigrant Visas
©MurthyDotCom
On September 11, 2007, the governors of 13 states jointly sent a letter to the leadership in both the Senate and the House of Representatives, urging the U.S. Congress to increase availability of H1B temporary worker cap numbers and permanent resident visa numbers ("green cards"). The governors are the top-level officials from the states of: Arizona, California, Colorado, Indiana, Kansas, Massachusetts, Minnesota, Nevada, New York, Texas, Washington, Wisconsin, and Wyoming. In the letter, the governors address the critical workforce "shortage of highly skilled professionals in math and science" recognizing "that foreign talent has a role to play in our ability to keep companies located in our state and country." The letter emphasizes that, in order to fill this void, Congress must mandate more H1B and immigrant visa numbers than are currently available.
©MurthyDotCom
The Problem of Prolonged Inaction
©MurthyDotCom
While government officials and the general public, alike, seem to agree that the immigration system in the United States is in serious need of reform, and that this should happen soon, there are varying sides to the different arguments that do not agree as to what exactly constitutes a good fix for the broken system. The letter from these thirteen governors, including those from states that typically have significant problems with undocumented workers due to their proximity to the southern border, is a positive indicator that more and more government officials at leadership levels realize that employment-based, legal immigration directly benefits U.S. businesses and international competitiveness. It shows that they are able to clearly distinguish between legal immigration and the controversy over undocumented workers. They ask that, even if Congress cannot immediately resolve all of our immigration issues, they provide more opportunities for skilled professionals - temporarily and permanently.
©MurthyDotCom
Copyright © 2007, MURTHY LAW FIRM. All Rights Reserved

. . . . . . . . . . . . . .

4. No-Match Letter Regulation is on Hold
©MurthyDotCom
A U.S. district court in Northern California issued a temporary restraining order on August 31, 2007, in the case of AFL-CIO et al v. Michael Chertoff et al, which is a lawsuit against the controversial "no-match" letter regulation issued by the U.S. Department of Homeland Security (DHS). A temporary restraining order prevents the DHS from implementing the regulation, pending a hearing on the matter.
©MurthyDotCom
The U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) issued an updated regulation on August 15, 2007, as part of the stepped-up worksite enforcement initiative. As MurthyDotCom and MurthyBulletin readers were informed in our August 17, 2007 article, Liability for Employers who Receive No-Match Letters, this was to go into effect on September 14, 2007.
©MurthyDotCom
Court Stops Regulation Temporarily, Hearing to be Held
©MurthyDotCom
The plaintiffs in this case are the American Federation of Labor and Congress of Industrial Organizations (AFL-CIO) together with other professional organizations. The defendants are DHS, the Social Security Administration (SSA), and their agents. The federal court determined that the plaintiffs "raised serious questions as to whether the new Department of Homeland Security rule is inconsistent with statute and beyond the statutory authority of the Department of Homeland Security and the Social Security Administration." Therefore, the court issued an order, temporarily preventing the defendants from implementing the regulation. The court further ordered them to appear at a hearing scheduled for October 1, 2007, to explain their position in favor of the regulation. It is expected that the defendants will vigorously support their position.
©MurthyDotCom
"No-Match" Regulation
©MurthyDotCom
The "no-match" regulation describes the legal obligations of an employer who receives a no-match letter from the SSA, or a letter from the DHS, indicating that there is a discrepancy between the agency's records and I-9 employment eligibility documents. Such a discrepancy, or no-match, in records could be caused by the use of a false identity for employment authorization documents. There are other possible reasons, however, that information may not match and the generation of a letter could be prompted. The regulation also provides "safe harbor" procedures for an employer to follow in order to avoid various civil and criminal penalties in cases where the employer is deemed to have constructive knowledge that its employees are not authorized to work. See our MurthyBulletin article, Liability for Employers who Receive No-Match Letters, for more detail on the safe harbor provision.
©MurthyDotCom
Conclusion
©MurthyDotCom
This lawsuit will delay or modify the implementation of the no-match letter regulation, but it could ultimately still go into effect in some fashion. The SSA is concerned that a delay in implementation of this regulation will cause millions of dollars to be lost and delay SSA payments to eligible beneficiaries. Employers and their HR managers and other representatives are encouraged to educate themselves and prepare for these and other worksite enforcement actions, in anticipation of these regulations, if and when they are put into effect.
©MurthyDotCom
Copyright © 2007, MURTHY LAW FIRM. All Rights Reserved

. . . . . . . . . . . . . .

5. MurthyDotCom : Did You Know about MurthyToGo?
©MurthyDotCom
If you prefer your news on the go, the Murthy Law Firm provides two means of accessing the latest topics in U.S. immigration news. Mobile on MurthyDotCom is available to anyone using a cellular phone with a built-in web browser or PDA with wireless capability, like the Treo from PalmOne or Windows Mobile devices. For those who have PDAs without wireless, we have created a channel on AvantGo. This service enables subscribers to download weekly headlines and brief synopses of our MurthyBulletin articles for FREE with a simple HotSync to your desktop PC. Use MurthyToGo so that you are never out of touch!
©MurthyDotCom
The next session of the MurthyChat will be Monday, Sep 24, 2007, 9:00pm Eastern Time (U.S.). Please check the chat page for any necessary changes to the schedule. Meanwhile, search the chat transcripts for answers to your questions. 
©MurthyDotCom
MurthyForum : Consider joining those who have discovered the value of this service. Our message / discussion board is visited daily by one of our attorneys.
©MurthyDotCom
MurthyDotCom - MurthyBulletin - MurthyChat - and MurthyForum - Your ultimate U.S. immigration resources on the Internet all start with MURTHY!

Copyright © 2007, MURTHY LAW FIRM. All Rights Reserved

. . . . . . . . . . . . . .

6. Important Processing Times and Dates
©MurthyDotCom
Processing Times : For links to processing times for the USCIS Service Centers, district (or local) processing times, the Administrative Appeals Office, Department of State visa bulletin, and Department of Labor dates for the processing of labor certification applications.
©MurthyDotCom
Copyright © 2007, MURTHY LAW FIRM. All Rights Reserved