Editing Eilberg Amendment (1976) (section)

==Additional Criticism==

Archived communication between the then acting Secretary of Labor and James T Lynn, then Director of the Office of Management and Budget, puts forward concerns expressed by the Secretary of Labor at the time that the amendment was being considered:

[[File:Secretary-of-Labor-Concern-1.png|100px|thumb|Acting Secretary of Labor's Letter, p. 1]]
[[File:Secretary-of-Labor-Concern-2.png|100px|thumb|Acting Secretary of Labor's Letter, p. 2]]

<blockquote>
Of concern to us is the manner in which the bill would change the labor certification provision, section 212(a) (14) of the Immigration Act.

That section now excludes entry of skilled and unskilled workers, unless the Secretary of Labor certifies that "there are not sufficient workers in the United States who are able, willing, qualified ..." The change would add, after the word "qualified": "or equally qualified in the case of aliens who are members of the teaching profession or who have exceptional ability in the sciences or the arts."

This provision may have the effect of requiring the Secretary of Labor to certify the admission of alien teachers in many instances where qualified U.S. teachers are available but "more qualified" alien teachers are involved.

<span class="highlight">Except in the case of certain persons of exceptional merit and ability, the Department of Labor does not believe that aliens should be admitted if "qualified" U.S. workers are available.<span>

We note that under the bill the Secretary would not certify aliens for employment if there were sufficient workers of that type available for work at the place where the alien will work. In our view, the bill does not substantially differ from the Department's present interpretation of the permissible area of consideration for the determination of the availability of US workers. However, <span class="highlight">we are concerned that this may be construed as permitting employers to ignore U.S. workers who are willing and available to relocate.<span>
</blockquote>

This concern foreshadows the criticism Eric puts forward in his analysis, but does not seem to have been addressed before the amendment was passed.

Highlights in the quoted paragraph above are ours.