ILW.COM - the immigration portal Seminars

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

Home Page

Advanced search

Immigration Daily


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.

Listserv Q&A for
""Are We All Certifiable?" -- An Insider's Tour Through The Maddening World Of Labor Certification "

For more info, or to signup online, click here.
For more info, or to signup by fax, click here.


I have a question regarding a labor certification substitution. Our client acquired company B, and company B has an "unused" certified ETA 750 for a software engineer. The position remains open at the acquiring company (same MSA). We can readily make the successorship arguments for I-140 purposes. Our question relates to the wage. The application was filed (via traditional processing) in 1997 and certified in 1998. In the 6.5 years since filing, the wage has gone up substantially. It has nearly, but not quite, doubled. How much is too much? (The I-140 will be filed at Vermont). Based on experience, do you think a metric of 10% increase would withstand scrutiny, provided that the acquiring company provides information related to its wage structure? Any other evidence you would recommend?

Answer by Ester Greenfield:

In my experience, we have successfully used substitutions at the NSC, especially with older labor certs, when the current salary of the new beneficiary is much higher than the salary in the labor certification.

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