ILW.COM - the immigration portal Immigration Daily

Immigration Daily: the news source for legal professionals. Free! Join 35000+ readers

Home Page

Advanced search

Immigration Daily


RSS feed

Processing times

Immigration forms

Discussion board



Twitter feed

Immigrant Nation


CLE Workshops

Immigration books

Advertise on ILW

VIP Network


Chinese Immig. Daily


Connect to us

Make us Homepage



Immigration Daily


Chinese Immig. Daily

The leading
immigration law
publisher - over
50000 pages of free

Immigration LLC.

Immigration Daily: the news source for
legal professionals. Free! Join 35000+ readers
Enter your email address here:

< Back to current issue of Immigration Daily < Back to current issue of Immigrant's Weekly

Department of Labor Publishes Long-Awaited H-1B Regulations
by Greg Siskind

The US Department of Labor has issued a major series of regulations governing the H-1B visa. The regulations implement changes in the law from 1998 and the H-1B bill passed by Congress this past October. The regulations are also the new incarnation of rules originally proposed more than five years ago by the Labor Department which were struck down by the courts after the Labor Department was sued by the National Association of Manufacturers.

The regulations were issued with little warning and occupied more than 150 pages in the Federal Register. Below is our summary of the regulations. As the rules are extremely complicated, readers are advised to consult with their immigration lawyer in order to assure that they are in compliance. The firm of Siskind, Susser, Haas and Devine can be found at

General Information

- The regulations implement changes to the Immigration and Nationality Act implemented by Congress as part of the American Competitiveness and Workforce Improvement Act of 1998. A proposed rule was submitted almost two years ago.
- These regulations also incorporate rules that were originally proposed in 1995 but which never took effect because the Labor Department was sued for failing to go through the proper administrative process.
- The regulations also incorporate provisions of the American Competitiveness in the 21st Century Act of 2000.
- The regulations become effective on January 19, 2001.A few sections become immediately. Comments must be received by February 20, 2001 (except for comments relating to the new complaint form (these must be in by January 19, 2001).

A New Labor Condition Application Form

- H-1B "dependent” employers must file a new LCA if they wish to file petitions for new H-1Bs or seek extension of existing workers even if a previously filed LCA is still unexpired. The new LCAs have H-1B dependent employers and “willful violators” indicate their status and their agreement to additional attestation requirements. The Labor Department estimates that only 50 H-1B employers out of 50,000 H-1B employers will be affected by this rule.
- H-1B visas under previously certified LCAs remain valid and in effect, and the prevailing wage and other obligations under that LCA continue to apply to those visas. New LCAs are required only for H-1B dependent employers and willful violators filing new H-1B petitions or extensions of current visas.
- There is a new much longer ETA 9035 LCA form. The form has been amended to provide that every employer is required to indicate whether it is or is not H-1B-dependent or a willful violator. The DOL estimates that it will take an hour to properly complete the new four page LCA form.
- As has always been the case, employers must post a notice at the worksite stating that it has filed an LCA. One new requirement is that if the employer is H-1B dependent (explained below) and the worker covered by the LCA is not “exempt” (explained below), then the notice must set forth the nondisplacement and recruitment obligations outlined below. In these cases, a new statement must be included in the notice:
"Complaints alleging failure to offer employment to an equally or better qualified US worker, or an employer’s misrepresentation regarding such offer(s) or employment, may be filed with the Department of Justice, 10th Street & Constitution Avenue, NW, Washington, DC 20530."
- The new rules now allow the notice to employee to provide notice to employees electronically instead of through a hard copy posting of the notice. The employer must still provide the notice on or within 30 days before the LCA is filed. The regulation specifically refers to e-mail as being acceptable or via an employer’s home page if this is used to communicate job openings and promotion opportunities. Employees would have to have direct access to these resources. If the employee is working at a contract site, the contract client can also post the notice on its own intranet. If the notice is by e-mail, a one-time e-mail is fine. If it is via an intranet or home page, the notice must be posted for ten days.
- For both hard copy and electronic notifications must be provided to employees at any location where an H-1B worker is employed whether such place of employment is owned or operated by the H-1B worker’s employer or by some other person or entity. Basically, this means that contract workers must have notices posted at the places where they will be working and not just at their employer’s home office.
- One of the more controversial provisions of the proposed regulation from 1994 was a requirement that notices be posted at a new work site within an area of intended employment on or before the H-1B employee reports to that site. The new regulation reinstates that proposed rule.
- The LCA can be filed by fax to a new 800 telephone number or submitted by mail to the Philadelphia DOL regional office. Mailed in forms will be scanned into the existing faxback system. After January 19th, only the new form will be submitted. Individual regions will no longer process LCAs. The new form is available with a form filler program at the DOL web site at
- The DOL estimates that 637,000 LCAs will be submitted annually by 63,500 H-1B employers.
- Under the previous rules, a new LCA must be filed when an employer’s corporate identity changes and a new Employer Identification Number is obtained. However, a new LCA will now not be required merely because a corporate reorganization results in a change of corporate identity, regardless of whether there is a change in the Employer Identification Number and regardless of whether the IRS definition of a single employer is satisfied, provided that the successor entity, prior to the continued employment of the H-1B worker, agrees to assume the predecessor’s obligations and liabilities under the LC. The agreement to comply with the LCA for the future and to any liability of the predecessor under the LCA must be documented with a memorandum in the public access file. The memo must identify the affected LCAs and must state the Employer Identification Number of the new employer. The new employer’s wage system must also be described and a list of the name and job title of each H-1B worker transferred to the new employer must be provided. The DOL also believes that this new rule will make DOL’s handling of this issue consistent with the new law Congress passed for the INS regarding the need to file amended H-1B petitions when there is a major corporate change. It is important to note that traditional principals of successorship do not apply here. The key issue is whether the LCA obligations are assumed.
- The DOL has indicated in various points of the regulations that an LCA must be certified by the DOL in order to submit a non-immigrant visa application. This appears contrary to INS guidance and policy allowing for the submission of an I-129 without a certified LCA IF the LCA was submitted prior to the I-129 being submitted and the applicant is waiting on the DOL for approval. This will no doubt be a controversial point because the DOL has arguably overreached its authority in dictating the manner of submitting an I-129 petition. Many attorneys will likely look to the INS rather than the DOL.
- If an employer is employed outside an area of intended employment, the DOL has changed its rule on covering travel expenses for the employee. Under the previous rule, an employer needed to reimburse an employee’s travel expenses at a per diem rate no lower than that mandated for Federal employees. The new rule now says that the employer must pay these workers the actual cost of travel, lodging, meals and incidentals or miscellaneous expenses. Both workdays and non-workdays must be covered.

Calculating if an Employer is “H-1B Dependent”

- Employers must calculate the ration between its H-1B workers and the number of full-time employees in order to determine if an employer is “H-1B dependent.”
- Under ACWIA, if an employer is considered H-1B dependent, a number of additional requirements are imposed. These include making additional attestations on the LCA form, prohibitions on laying off employees in the period before and after filing the I-129 and documenting good faith efforts to recruit US workers.
- The new rules make it more difficult for companies to set up separate companies for the purpose of avoiding the H-1B dependent rules. ACWIA directs that any group treated as a single employer under the Internal Revenue Code’s Section 414 shall be treated as a single employer under the H-1B rules. The tax rule covers where separate businesses are considered one business for purposes of pension and other deferred compensation plans. Employers will be required to provide documentation to the DOL to show how under the Internal Revenue Code they are or are not subject to the rules. For now, the covered relationship are the following:

  • A “controlled group of companies” including parent-subsidiary groups, a “brother-sister” group (where five or fewer people own 80% or more of the stock of at the companies), or a combined group (a mix of parent-subsidiary and brother-sister).
  • Trades or businesses that are under common control regardless of whether or not they are incorporated. Ownership of 80% of a business would constitute a controlling interest.
  • “Affiliated service groups” where the group consisting of a service organization (such as a law firm) and 1) a second service organization that has an ownership interest in the first organization and regularly performs services for the first group OR 2) any organization if a sizable portion of the second organization’s business is the performance of services for the first organization and 10% or more of the interest in the second organization is held by employees of the first organization.

- The following is the formula for determining if an employer is H-1B dependent:

  • 25 or fewer full time employees and more than seven H-1B workers
  • 26 to 50 full time employees and more than twelve H-1B workers
  • More than 50 full time workers and at least 15% of the work force is comprised of H-1B workers
- An employer can use its own standard in determining who is a full-time employee provided that the standard is no less than 35 hours of work per week.
- The earlier proposed rule on calculating these numbers has largely been dropped due to concerns that it was overly burdensome and a new system has been set up.
  • All employers must now retain copies of I-129 petitions or requests for extensions.
  • Employers can use a “snap shot” test to determine if dependency status is readily apparent; a full computation is only needed if the number of H-1B workers exceeds 15% of the total number of workers employed.
  • Employers are given an option of considering all part-time workers as one half of a full time employee rather than having to calculate the average hours worked by part time employees.
  • If a full calculation shows an employer is not H-1B dependent, the employer must retain a copy of this documentation.
  • A full computation must be retained if the employer changes status from dependent to non-dependent.
  • If the employer uses the Internal Revenue Code single employer test to determine dependency, it must maintain records documenting which entities are included in the single employer as well as the computation performed showing the number of workers employed by each entity included in the calculation.
  • If an employer includes workers not in the payroll, a record of the computation must be kept.
  • Computations can be kept in a private area and need not be kept in a public access file.
  • The DOL estimates the time burden per employee will be 30 minutes (twice the earlier estimate) on a semi-annual basis.
  • The DOL estimates only 5% of employers will face this burden.

- “Willful violators” of H-1B laws generally have the same restrictions as H-1B dependent employers. Willful violators are those employers found to have violated H-1B rules in a Department of Labor or Department of Justice proceeding. The violation must have occurred during the five year period preceding the filing of the LCA and the agency’s finding must have been entered on or after October 21, 1998.

Exempt H-1B Employees
- LCAs for exempt H-1B workers do not need to comply with ACWIA provisions regarding non-displacement and recruitment of US workers. An exempt worker includes an H-1B worker who
- Receives wages of at least $60,000 per year or
- Has a master’s degree or higher in a specialty related to the intended area of employment
- Equivalent work experience will not substitute for the advanced degree
- To prove a worker had an advanced degree, the INS or DOL may call upon the employer to produce an academic transcript of courses and evidence that the institution from which the degree was awarded is accredited or recognized.
- A “specialty related to the intended area of employment” means that the degree is in a specialty which is generally accepted in the industry or field as an appropriate or necessary credential or skill for the person who undertakes the work in question.
- If an employee is exempt, then an employer is not required to comply with the H-1B dependent rules with respect to that employee and will indicate on the new LCA that the employee is exempt.
- Under the proposed rule, the DOL would have required employers to maintain a copy of documentation in a public access file that a worker is exempt (usually an INS determination). The DOL reversed course, however, and now says that documentation of a worker’s exempt status need not be included in the public access file. But they will now require to be included in a public access file a list of the H-1B workers covered by any LCA stating that it will only be used to cover exempt workers.

Non-Displacement Rules
- ACWIA prohibits H-1B dependent employers and willful violators from hiring H-1B workers if their doing so would displace similar US workers from an essentially equivalent job in the same area of employment. Under the proposed rule, the DOL would have required employers to create documentation regarding employees that leave an employer in the 90 days before or after an H-1B petition is submitted. It softened that requirement and will generally only require maintaining basic payroll information. The main exception to this is if an employer seeks to avoid the anti-layoff rules by claiming that it offered the US worker another employment opportunity. The employer in this case must document and retain the offer and the response to the offer.
- ACWIA prohibits an H-1B-dependent employer from placing H-1B workers with another employer unless the dependent employer makes a bona fide inquiry as to the secondary employer’s intent regarding displacement of equivalent US workers by H-1B workers. The primary employer should secure and retain a written assurance from the second employer, a contemporaneous written record of the second employer’s oral statements regarding non-displacement, or a prohibition in the contract between the two employers. This section of the regulations seems to be largely targeted at “job shops” that place workers – such as computer programmers or nurses - at client sites.
- The rule regarding secondary employers will not apply unless there are indicia or an employment relationship between the H-1B worker and the secondary employer. This does not have to rise to the level of an “employment” relationship. Rather, look to the following issues:

  • whether the secondary employer has the right to control how the H-1B worker performs his or her job,
  • whether the secondary employer furnishes tools and equipment,
  • whether the work is performed on the presence of the secondary employer,
  • whether there is a continuing relationship between the H-1B worker and the secondary employer,
  • whether the secondary employer has the right to assign additional projects to the nonimmigrant,
  • whether the secondary employer sets the hours of work and the duration of the job,
  • whether the work done by the H-1B holder is the same type of work typically done by the employer,
  • whether the secondary employer is itself in business and whether the secondary employer can discharge the H-1B visa holder from providing services.
- If an employer is H-1B dependent and then becomes non-dependent, the firm must still comply with the secondary displacement rule above unless the firm files a new LCA and H-1B petition for the specific employee.
- Likewise, if a non-dependent employer becomes dependent, it is not required to comply with the H-1B dependent employer rules with respect to a pre-existing LCA.
- Under these rules, a secondary employer would not be liable for violating the non-displacement rules unless the employer is itself found to be an H-1B employer that failed to meet its own obligations.

- Under ACWIA, H-1B-dependent employers are required to make good faith efforts to recruit US workers before hiring H-1B workers. Employers must document in the public access file a summary of the principal recruiting methods used and the time frames in which they were used. The employer must preserve documents in the public access file relating to the recruiting including:

  • Places and dates of the advertisements and postings or other recruiting methods used
  • The content of advertisements or postings and the compensation terms
  • Documentation concerning the consideration of applications of US workers, such as copies of applications and related documents, rating forms, job offers, etc.
- Employers are expected to undertake bother “passive” and “active” solicitation methods to find workers. Passive solicitation includes advertising a job in various media outlets. Active solicitation refers to directly communicating with current workers at a firm to workers previously employed in the operation as well as participating in job fairs, professional associations and college placement services and using public and/or private recruiting agencies.
- Employers are expected to recruit based on “industry-wide standards for recruitment” but are given the flexibility to determine the specific method. Such methods might include using trade organization surveys, studies by consultative groups, or reports from trade organizations.

Fringe Benefits
- Under ACWIA, all employers of H-1B workers are required to offer benefits to H-1B workers on the same basis and under the same criteria as offered to similarly employed US workers. The exact benefits received by an H-1B employee need not be identical to those received by US workers as long as the H-1B worker is offered the same benefits package and voluntarily chooses to receive different benefits.
- Employers must retain copies of all fringe benefit plans and summary plan descriptions, including all rules regarding eligibility and benefits, evidence of what benefits are actually provided to individual workers and how costs are shared between employers and employees. This must be retained in the LCA public access file.
- The public access file needs to contain a summary of the benefits offered to US workers in the same occupation as H-B workers, including a statement of how employees are differentiated, it at all. The DOL believe this will be satisfied with the employee handbook or a summary description of the program.
- About 25% of H-1B employers are multinational employers. A note to the file that these workers receive “home country” benefits will meet the regulations. Evidence of the benefits provided to the nonimmigrant before and after he/she went to the US must also be included in the public access file. Note that if the employer has a separate set of benefits available to US workers, if the employee coming to the US is employed less than 90 days, the employer can still offer the home country benefits. But the employer must offer a reciprocal benefit to US workers who go abroad and work for the company in the home country. The DOL specifically warns companies here not to establish a pattern of transferring employees out “briefly” just before the 90 days runs and then immediately sending them back to the US. If the employment in the US lasts more than 90 days, an employer can still pay the home country benefits, but the employer must show that the H-1B worker continues to employed in the home country, is enrolled in the benefits program, the benefits provided are equivalent to or comparable to similarly employed US workers and US workers stationed abroad by the company are offered reciprocal benefits.

Prevailing Wage Issues
- The H-1B statute requires employers to pay the higher of the actual or prevailing wage. To meet the actual wage requirement, the DOL requires employers to document the system an employer uses to determine the wages of non-H-1B workers. Employers are also required to maintain payroll records for employees in the specific job classification in question to be able to show that H-1B workers are being paid as much as their non-H-1B counterparts.
- The DOL originally proposed rules in 1994 that dealt with documenting the actual wage. After six years, the DOL is finally issuing rules in this area.
- The DOL is easing the requirement that all H-1B employers keep payroll records for non-FLSA exempt H-1B workers and other employees for the specific employment in question. FLSA refers to the Fair Labor Standards Act.
- The DOL has abandoned proposed provisions suggesting that the employer’s wage system must be objective and that the employer must describe the system in sufficient detail in the public access file for a third party to determine the actual wage rate for an H-1B worker. Employers are still required to describe the actual wage system, however.
- When a State Employment Security Agency provides a prevailing wage as an hourly rate as opposed to a salary, the employer is permitted to convert the wage determination into a form that reflects the wages it will pay.
- While employers are not required to keep hourly records for full-time H-1B employees paid on a salary basis, the DOL continues to require employers to keep hours worked records for employees not paid on a salary basis and for part-time H-1B workers, regardless of how paid.
- The prevailing wage for an H-1B worker is based on the LCA supporting that petition. Prevailing wages on later LCAs do not “relate back” to act as an “update” of the wages stated on earlier LCAs. However, the DOL would view a potential change in the prevailing wage to affect the actual wage and this might create the need to raise the salary of H-1B workers on previously filed LCAs.
- Separate prevailing wage figures can be used for employees in higher education or governmental or non-profit organizations. For an educational organization to qualify, the institution must be accredited or pre-accredited. Governmental organizations must be at the federal level and must have a primary mission of performing or promoting basic or applied research.
- A wage determination pursuant to the McNamara-O’Hara Service Contract Act (the “SCA”), there are new restrictions. Where an SCA wage determination for a computer industry employee states a rate of $27.63, that rate will not be allowed to be the prevailing wage. In that case, the employer must consult a different wage source. It is also irrelevant now in SCA wage determinations whether an employee is working under an SCA-subject contract and whether the employee would be exempt under the SCA’s “professional employee” exemption.
- Future bonuses and similar compensation (i.e. unpaid but to-be-paid) may be credited toward satisfaction of the required wage if their payment is assured.
- For salaried employees, paychecks must be offered at least monthly. However, in the case of non-discretionary payments to supplement the employee’s pay (e.g. a quarterly production bonus), the employer can include this information in the prevailing wage as long as they can also show that the employer did, in fact, pay the bonuses in prior pay periods.

Attorney’s Fees, Other Salary Deductions and Termination Penalties
- The new rules contain guidelines on what types of payroll deductions are authorized without affecting the prevailing wage. “Authorized deductions” include a) deductions required by law (income tax, FICA, etc.) or b) deductions authorized by a collective bargaining agreement with a union, or is customary in the occupation and/or area of employment (e.g. union dues, contributions to premium for health insurance policies covering all employees, savings or retirement funds). Deductions can also include voluntary deductions for items that principally benefit the employee such as housing and food allowances (other than those relating to travel)
- Deductions that include business expenses of the employer will be subtracted from the prevailing wage determination. The DOL considers this to include attorneys’ fees and costs connected to the performance of H-1B program functions which are required to be performed by the employer, e.g. preparation and filing of the LCA and H-1B petition. Business expenses would also include items like tools and equipment, transportation costs when such costs are necessary for the job, living expenses while an employee is traveling, etc. NOTE, however, that if a deduction falls into this category, it merely will mean that the deduction is subtracted from the wage offered. If the wage is still higher than the actual or prevailing wage after the deduction is subtracted, then an employee can still these expenses deducted from their paycheck. If the offered wage is below the prevailing wage after these business expenses are deducted, the DOL will consider the amount to be an unauthorized deduction from wages.
- Deductions that would normally be permissible must be disclosed to the worker prior to starting work for the employer and if the deduction is a condition of employment, the employer must also disclose this.
- The deduction must also be made against the wages of US workers.
- The amount deducted may not exceed the fair market value or the actual cost (whichever is lower) o the matter covered. The employer must document the cost and value in a public access file.
- One of the biggest complaints by H-1B employees, particularly those in the high tech sectors, is the inclusion of onerous contract provisions that severely penalize an employee for leaving an employer prior to the end of the contract. The DOL has addressed this issue in the regulations. A penalty paid by the H-1B worker for quitting prior to an agreed date is prohibited under the rules. An employer is, however, allowed to receive “bona fide” liquidated damages from the worker if they quit early. Applicable state law determines whether a deduction is a penalty or liquidated damages. However, in general, penalties are amounts that are not reasonable approximations or estimates of damage. A payment typically will not be permitted if the payment is a result of fraud or “where it cloaks oppression.” The percentage of the employment contract completed will also be considered.
- The $500 or $1000 filing fee established under ACWIA can never be included in any liquidated damages received by an employer. This is consistent with ACWIA since an employer may never pass on these expenses to an employee.
- Deductions made by an employer for the repayment of a loan or a salary advance to an employee will be scrutinized if the DOL is investigating the employer. The employer will have to establish the legitimacy and purpose of the loan or advance.

Traveling Employees
- If an employee travels outside of the “area of intended employment” it may trigger the need to follow special procedures. If an employee’s travel does not involve going to a new “place of employment” or “worksite”, there are no special requirements.
- The regulations now define “place of employment.” It is not a “place of employment” if the “nature and duration” of the worker’s job necessitates frequent changes of location with little time in any one location. Most of one’s work time must be spent at one location, but occasional travel on a “casual, short-term basis” is permissible. Travel may not exceed five consecutive workdays for any one visit by a “peripatetic worker, or 10 consecutive workdays for any one visit by a worker who spends most work time at one location and travel occasionally to other locations.” The regulations provide a number of examples of situations that are and are not covered.
- If the travel constitutes going to a new “place of employment” within the same geographic “area of employment,” notices must be posted at the new worksites within that area on or before the date that the H-1B employee goes to that location. If travel is outside the area of intended employment, either a new LCA must be filed before the travel starts or new “short-term placement” rules must be followed. These short-term rules apply if a placement is for less than 30 workdays at a worksite not mentioned on the LCA in any calendar year. The existing rule states that employers can post workers to an out of area site for a total of 90 days over three years and does not set a limit for a single year. There is an exception to the new 30 day rule that allows for a placement of up to sixty days in a one-year period if the employees has a work station at a “permanent” worksite and spends a substantial part of the year at that location. If the employer has an LCA in a specific area, then the short-term rules will not apply. The employer must use the open slots on the LCA. If there are not enough open slots on the LCA, the employer must file new LCAs. The DOL has indicated that it may overlook insignificant “overcrowding” of the LCA.
- If an employer uses the short-term placement rules rather than filing new LCAs, the wage requirements for the permanent worksite must still be met and the employer must cover travel expenses for the employee. The employer must document that it covered the employee’s actual expenses or, if this cannot be documented, than at least the General Service Administration per diem schedules.
- Once the short term limits are met, the employer must file a new LCA or remove the employee. Employers are not permitted to rotate employees into an area for the purpose of avoiding the H-1B placement rules.

Whistleblower Form
- ACWIA mandated the creation of a form for someone to allege H-1B program violations. The DOL has created a new H-1B Nonimmigrant Information Form, WH-4, which was included in the published rule.

- Benched employees must be paid the full pro rata wage due. Part-time benched employees must be paid at least for the number of hours indicated on the I-129 petition. If a salary range was indicated, then the employee must be paid for the average number of hours ordinarily worked.
- If the non-productive time is due to “conditions unrelated to employment” (such as maternity leave or caring for an ill relative), then the employer is not obligated to pay the employee, provided the period is not covered by an employer’s benefit plans or another statute. Employers will not be forgiven for annual plant shutdowns or holidays that affect both US and H-1B workers. Note, however, that keeping H-1B workers on in these circumstances could violate the anti-layoff rules noted above.
- Wages must be paid within 30 days of the H-1B worker being admitted to the US or, if the worker is in the US already, within 60 days of the worker becoming eligible to work for the employer.
- The obligation to pay only stops if there is a “bona fide” termination of the worker’s employment. This occurs only when the employer notifies the INS of the termination, the H-1B petition is canceled and the return fare obligation is fulfilled

About The Author

Gregory Siskind has experience handling all aspects of immigration and nationality law and has represented numerous clients throughout the world. Mr. Siskind provides consultations to corporations and individuals on immigration law issues and handles cases before the Immigration and Naturalization Service, the Department of State, the Department of Labor and other government agencies. Gregory Siskind is also committed to community service. He regularly provides free legal services to indigent immigration clients and speaks at community forums to offer information on immigration issues. After graduating magna cum laude from Vanderbilt University, Gregory Siskind went on to receive his law degree from the University of Chicago. For the past several years, he has been an active member of the American Immigration Lawyers Association and he currently serves as a member of the organization's Technology Committee. He is the current committee chair for the Nashville Bar Association's International Section. Greg is a member of the American Bar Association where he serves on the LPM Publishing Board as Marketing Vice Chairman and on the Council of the Law Practice Management Section. He is also a member of the Tennessee Bar Association, the Nashville Bar Association and the Memphis Bar Association. He serves on the board of the British American Business Association of Tennessee. And he serves on the Board of Directors of the Hebrew Immigrant Aid Society and on the executive boards of the Jewish Family Service agencies in Nashville and Memphis, Tennessee. He recently was named one of the Top 40 executives under age 40 in his hometown of Memphis, Tennessee.

Greg regularly writes on the subject of immigration law. He has written several hundred articles on the subject and is also the author of the new book The J Visa Guidebook, published by Matthew Bender and Company, one of the nation's leading legal publishers. He is working on another book for Matthew Bender on entertainment and sports immigration.

Greg is also, in many ways, a pioneer in the use of the Internet in the legal profession. He was one of the first lawyers in the country (and the very first immigration lawyer) to set up a web site for his practice. And he was the first attorney in the world to distribute a firm newsletter via e-mail listserv. Mr. Siskind is the author of the American Bar Association's best selling book, The Lawyer's Guide to Marketing on the Internet. He has been interviewed and profiled in a number of leading publications and media including USA Today, the New York Times, the Wall Street Journal, Lawyers Weekly, the ABA Journal, the National Law Journal, American Lawyer, Law Practice Management Magazine, National Public Radio's All Things Considered and the Washington Post. As one of the leading experts in the country on the use of the Internet in a legal practice, Greg speaks regularly at forums across the United States, Canada and Europe.

In his personal life, Greg is the husband of Audrey Siskind and the proud father of Eden Shoshana and Lily Jordana. He also enjoys collecting rare newspapers and running in marathons and triathlons. He can be reached by email at


Immigration Daily: the news source for
legal professionals. Free! Join 35000+ readers
Enter your email address here: