The Board of Alien Labor Certification Appeals (BALCA) recently affirmed the final determination of a Certifying Officer (CO) denying labor certification for an alien worker for the position of “Software Engineer, Applications.”
An Audit Notification was issued by the CO requesting evidence of the Employer’s recruitment efforts. In the response to the audit submitted, the Employer included copies of Form ETA 9089 with original signatures, a statement of business necessity, a copy of the internal Job Posting, and other recruitment documents. The application was denied by the CO on the grounds that the Employer only completed 2 of the required 3 recruitment efforts for professional occupations. A request for review was submitted by the Employer who cited that in the CO’s “Reason for Denial” letter the wrong case number was used. A revised “Reason for Denial” letter was submitted by the CO with the correct case number included and it provided the reason for denial was the fact that the Employer did not submit its recruitment report. In another Request for Review, the Employer argued that the original response to the audit did include the recruitment documentation and recruitment report. The case was then forwarded to BALCA after the CO found the Employer did not overcome the original deficiencies in review of the case.
PERM regulation 20 C.F.R. § 656.17(g) controls and it provides that all employers must prepare a recruitment report, and in the event the CO notifies the employer that its application is to be audited, the employer must submit the report prior to a final determination. This report must also be signed by the employer or the employer’s representative and that individual must be the person who normally interviews or considers, on behalf of the employer, applicants for job opportunities.
In the instant case, the Employer failed to submit a recruitment report in response to the CO’s Audit Notification, the Employer’s response only included the statement, “There were no qualified U.S. workers who applied for this job opening.” Additionally, the statement was only signed by the Employer’s attorney, not the Employer. As a result of the Employer’s failure to sign the report, he did not attest to the results of its recruitment efforts.
Accordingly, the Board affirmed the decision of the CO in denying labor certification.