BALCA Decision – INTERCONTINENTAL ENTERPRISES

BALCA Case No.: 2011-PER-02756

ETA Case No.: A-11118-74205

In the Matter of: INTERCONTINENTAL ENTERPRISES, INC., Employer

on behalf of SREENIVASAN, URMILA THATTAPARAMBIL, Alien.

Certifying Officer: William Carlson Atlanta Processing Center

Appearances: Suku Nair

President, Intercontinental Enterprises, Inc.

For the Employer

Before: Johnson, Purcell and Vittone

Administrative Law Judges

DECISION AND ORDER

AFFIRMING DENIAL OF CERTIFICATION

PER CURIAM. This matter arises under Section 212(a)(5)(A) of the Immigration and Nationality Act, 8 U.S.C. §1182(a)(5)(A), and the “PERM” regulations found at 20 C.F.R. Part 656.

BACKGROUND

The Employer filed a Form 9089 Application for Permanent Employment Certification for the position of “Senior Food Technologist.” (AF 12-40).

This is a professional position requiring a Master’s degree in Medical and Research Technology, two years of training in Nutrition Research, and two years of experience in the job offered. (AF 26-27).

The work site was listed as Tortilleria Pacificio Company in Hyattsville, Maryland. (AF 26). The Employer reported on the Form 9089 that it ran two Sunday newspaper advertisements in The Washington Examiner. (AF 29-30).

The Certifying Officer (“CO”) denied certification, finding that The Washington Examiner was not the newspaper of general circulation “most appropriate to the occupation and the workers likely to apply for the job opportunity.” (AF 8-10).

The CO focused on the fact that the job is located in the Washington, DC area and stated that the expectation is that workers will choose newspapers with a substantial classified section because of the greater probability of finding a potential job opportunity.

The CO stated: “A newspaper with a classified section with advertisements for a large number of job opportunities, and one that includes both professional and non-professional positions as well as positions in various skill levels, industries and companies in a given field will be of greater interest to an individual seeking a job opportunity than a newspaper with a more limited classified section.” (AF 9).

The Employer requested reconsideration of the denial. (AF 1-7).

The Employer argued that The Washington Examiner “does in fact contain advertisements for similar, if not the same, job opportunities for which employment is being sought” and “in fact has a substantial classified section because of the greater probability of finding a potential job opportunity.” (AF 1).

The Employer argued that The Washington Examiner “has a classified section with advertisements for a large number of job opportunities that includes both professional and non-professional positions as well as positions in various skill levels, industries and companies in a given field.” (AF 1).

The Employer attached a printout of a Wikipedia article about The Washington Examiner, (AF 4-6) and argued that because of the size of the circulation noted in that article, it was in fact the newspaper most appropriate to the occupation and workers. (AF 1).

DISCUSSION

Under the basic recruitment process, if the application is for a professional occupation the employer must, among other recruitment steps, place two print advertisements.

Newspaper advertisements must be “in the newspaper of general circulation in the area of intended employment most appropriate to the occupation and the workers likely to apply for the job opportunity and most likely to bring responses from able, willing, qualified, and available U.S. workers.” 20 C.F.R. § 656.17(e)(1)(i)(B)(1) (emphasis added). When this regulation was being promulgated, the Employment and Training Administration explained in the proposed rule:

Under the current system [i.e., the pre-PERM regulations], the employer may advertise, when a newspaper of general circulation is designated as the appropriate advertising medium, in any newspaper of general circulation.

However, our experience has shown that some employers routinely place newspaper advertisements in those newspapers with the lowest circulation and that these publications are often the least likely to be read by qualified U.S. workers.

Therefore, in order for the employer’s job opening to receive appropriate exposure, the proposed regulation requires that the mandatory advertisements appear in the newspaper of general circulation most appropriate to the occupation and the workers most likely to apply for the job opportunity in the area of intended employment.

For example, in a relatively large metropolitan area such as Philadelphia, Pennsylvania or Washington, DC, it would not be appropriate to place an advertisement for a computer professional in a suburban newspaper of general circulation since workers interested in professional jobs consult the metropolitan newspapers in the area of intended employment with the largest circulation rather than the suburban newspapers of general circulation.

On the other hand, it would be appropriate to advertise in a suburban newspaper of general circulation for nonprofessional occupations, such as jewelers, houseworkers or drivers.

ETA, Proposed Rule, Implementation of New System, Labor Certification Process for the

Permanent Employment of Aliens in the United States [“PERM”], 20 C.F.R. Part 656, 67

Fed. Reg. 30466, 30471 (May 6, 2002).

In the instant case, the Employer placed its mandatory print advertisements in The Washington Examiner.

The Employer’s argument and the Wikipedia article only show that The Washington Examiner has a reasonably large circulation and has “help wanted” classifieds.

It does not establish that it was the best choice for the job at issue.

As the Wikipedia article produced by the Employer states, this newspaper “is printed in a ‘compact’ format, also known as a tabloid format.”

The Wikipedia article does not discuss the classified section of this newspaper.

Although The Washington Examiner possibly has a wider circulation than a limited suburban newspaper, the Employer has not proved that it is the newspaper in the Washington, D.C. area most appropriate to the occupation in question and the workers likely to apply for the job opportunity and most likely to bring responses from able, willing, qualified, and available U.S. workers.

Although the CO did not expressly identify which newspaper in the Washington, D.C. area he considered to have a more substantial classified section than The Washington Examiner, we note that The Washington Post, for example, is recognized as one of the United States’ major newspapers.

Moreover, it has been recognized by the District of Columbia Court of Appeals as the major circulation newspaper in the Washington, D.C. area.

Thus, we find that the Employer’s position that The Washington Examiner was the most appropriate newspaper in which to place an advertisement for a professional position is untenable.

See Carlos Uy III, 1997-INA-304 (Mar, 3, 1999)(en banc), slip op. at 13 and n.21 (adjudicator may consider inherent implausibility of proponent’s position).

ORDER

Based on the foregoing, IT IS ORDERED that the Certifying Officer’s denial of certification is AFFIRMED.

Entered at the direction of the panel by:

Todd R. Smyth

Secretary to the Board of Alien Labor

Certification Appeals

NOTICE OF OPPORTUNITY TO PETITION FOR REVIEW: This Decision and Order will become the final decision of the Secretary unless within twenty days from the date of service a party petitions for review by the full Board. Such review is not favored and ordinarily will not be granted except (1) when full Board consideration is necessary to secure or maintain uniformity of its decisions, or (2) when the proceeding involves a question of exceptional importance. Petitions must be filed with:

Chief Docket Clerk

Office of Administrative Law Judges

Board of Alien Labor Certification Appeals

800 K Street, NW Suite 400

Washington, DC 20001-8002

Client Reviews

I've had the pleasure of conducting business with this law firm for the last 10 years. They have been nothing but the best for every aspect of immigration need I had. From F1 all the way to citizenship. They're probably the most affordable, knowledgeable, and most efficient immigration law firm out there. Plus, they always provide responses to questions in a very timely manner. Trust me, other immigration law firms will cost you an arm and a leg for the same or less of a service compared to this law firm. Give them a call, check out their website. You will not regret it.
Andy Glasgow
Andy Glasgow
17:26 27 Mar 17
Because of John and his team my wife and I were able to travel back to the states, get married and have a Green Card without any headaches. John’s efforts were amazing and it shows because my wife and I didn’t have to go to the Green card interview. We had a strong enough case to receive the Green card in the mail. If you’re seeking a Lawyer that will be impartial, he’s your guy.
T M
T M
19:18 23 Feb 17
Me & husband went through immigration process which thankfully was made easy with the help and services of Marc Tyler Inc. Our direct contact was John which i want to personally say Thank You ! The service provided was efficient, fast, affordable prompt answers in a timely fashion. I would recommend Marc Tyler Inc to anyone who need immigration done fast, easy, friendly & with no hidden charges.
Aleksandra Stoycheva
Aleksandra Stoycheva
15:27 26 Jan 17
I could not have asked for better service. I will definitely be coming back to get the green card process done. The fees are extremely reasonable and they stick with their clients the entire way. I had so many questions during this process, and each one of them were answered very quickly and with out most professionalism. This firm is a pleasure to work with and I highly recommend them to anyone.
bryan mowrey
bryan mowrey
06:41 25 Nov 16
Marc and John Dorer worked on our case to file for AOS after our L1A was approved.Marc and John are professionals and extremely reasonable-priced. The reason they are able to cut the price is because they don't spend time consulting you or guiding you and will never get on call.All communications are email only, so if you know precisely what you want they will do all the paper-work, follow the trail and get the job done. If you are confused and need advice and consulting, they may not be the right lawyers.But since we were doing our AOS, it worked out perfectly well and they did their job extremely professionally.Would recommend them every time to get the work done.
hardik parikh
hardik parikh
01:58 08 Feb 17
At first I thought I could have very well gone through the green card application process on my own and saved all lawyer fees. Its funny how some lawyers can charge in excess of 2K for this. However at Taylor and Associates the price seemed more reasonable and felt it made sense to go with one at that price. There were some doubts that arose in our mind which they cleared in a timely manner and seemed very knowledgeable in this area. Its for moments like these when having a professional around helps. While we can get busy with our lives and with laws constantly changing, I would definitely recommend them - a small price to pay for peace of mind.
Callistus Pereira
Callistus Pereira
17:51 06 Jun 17
I am US citizen. We hired Marc's firm for my wife's Green Card process, We are extremely happy with their services.They are one of the best service providers in the country. Price is very affordable. John is awesome. He responded to our queries on time with very useful information. We highly recommend this firm to anybody looking for affordable and the best immigration services. it was an awesome experience working with this team.
Narsimha M
Narsimha M
13:57 04 Aug 17

Read More Client Reviews