Eilberg Amendment (1976): Difference between revisions

No edit summary
Line 103: Line 103:
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.
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.


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.
'''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.'''


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, we are concerned that this may be construed as permitting employers to ignore U.S. workers who are willing and available to relocate.
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, '''we are concerned that this may be construed as permitting employers to ignore U.S. workers who are willing and available to relocate.'''
</blockquote>
</blockquote>


This concern does not seem to have been addressed before the amendment was passed.
This concern does not seem to have been addressed before the amendment was passed. Emphases in '''bold''' in the quoted paragraph above are ours.


==References==
==References==