Innovation Employment Act (Introduced in House)

[imh1b]

110th CONGRESS

2d Session

H. R. 5630

To modify certain requirements with respect to H-1B nonimmigrants.

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

March 13, 2008

Ms. GIFFORDS introduced the following bill; which was referred to the Committee on the Judiciary

A BILL

To modify certain requirements with respect to H-1B nonimmigrants.

Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled,

SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

This Act may be cited as the `Innovation Employment Act'.

SEC. 2. NUMERICAL LIMITATIONS.

Section 214(g)(1)(A)(vii) of the Immigration and Nationality Act (8 U.S.C. 1184(g)(1)(A)(vii)) is amended to read as follows:

`(vii) 130,000 in fiscal year 2008 and each succeeding fiscal year, except that in fiscal years 2010 through 2015, if such limitation is reached in the previous fiscal year, such limitation shall equal the greater of 180,000 and the limitation applicable for the previous fiscal year increased by 20 percent; or'.

SEC. 3. EXEMPTION FROM NUMERICAL LIMITATION FOR CERTAIN NONIMMIGRANTS.

Section 214(g)(5) of the Immigration and Nationality Act (8 U.S.C. 1184(g)(5)) is amended--

(1) in subparagraph (B), by striking `or';

(2) in subparagraph (C), by striking the period at the end and inserting a semicolon; and

(3) by adding at the end the following:

`(D) has earned a master's or higher degree from a United States institution of higher education (as defined in section 101(a) of the Higher Education Act of 1965 (20 U.S.C. 1001(a)) in a field of science, technology, engineering, or mathematics and with respect to whom the petitioning employer requires such education as a condition for the employment; or

`(E) has earned a master's or higher degree (or its equivalent) from an institution of higher education outside of the United States in a field of science, technology, engineering, or mathematics and with respect to whom the petitioning employer requires such education as a condition for the employment, until the number of aliens who are exempted from such numerical limitations under this subparagraph during a fiscal year exceeds 20,000.'.

SEC. 4. H-1B EMPLOYER REQUIREMENTS.

Section 212(n)(1) of the Immigration and Nationality Act (8 U.S.C. 1182(n)(1)) is amended by inserting after subparagraph (G) the following:

`(H) The employer has not advertised the available jobs specified in the application in an advertisement that states or indicates that--

`(i) the job or jobs are only available to persons who are or who may become H-1B nonimmigrants; or

`(ii) persons who are or who may become H-1B nonimmigrants shall receive priority or a preference in the hiring process.

`(I) If the employer employs not less than 50 employees in the United States, not more than 50 percent of such employees are H-1B nonimmigrants.'.

SEC. 5. H-1B GOVERNMENT AUTHORITY AND REQUIREMENTS.

(a) Safeguards Against Fraud and Misrepresentation in Application Review Process- Section 212(n)(1) of the Immigration and Nationality Act (8 U.S.C. 1182(n)(1)) is amended, in the matter following subparagraph (I) (as inserted by section 3 of this Act)--

(1) by inserting `and through the Department of Labor's website, without charge.' after `D.C.';

(2) by inserting `, clear indicators of fraud, misrepresentation of material fact,' after `completeness';

[imh1b]

(3) by striking or `obviously inaccurate' and inserting `presents clear indicators of fraud or misrepresentation of material fact, or is obviously inaccurate';

(4) by striking `within 7 days of' and inserting `not later than 14 days after'; and

(5) by adding at the end the following: `If the Secretary's review of an application identifies clear indicators of fraud or misrepresentation of material fact, the Secretary may conduct an investigation and hearing under paragraph (2).'.

(b) Investigations by Department of Labor- Section 212(n)(2) of such Act is amended--

(1) in subparagraph (A)--

(A) by striking `12 months' and inserting `24 months'; and

(B) by striking `The Secretary shall conduct' and all that follows and inserting `Upon the receipt of such a complaint, the Secretary may initiate an investigation to determine if such a failure or misrepresentation has occurred.';

(2) in subparagraph (C)(i)--

(A) by striking `a condition of paragraph (1)(B), (1)(E), or (1)(F)' and inserting `a condition under subparagraph (B), (C)(i), (E), (F), (H), (I), or (J) of paragraph (1)'; and

(B) by striking `(1)(C)' and inserting `(1)(C)(ii)';

(3) in subparagraph (G)--

(A) in clause (i), by striking `if the Secretary' and all that follows and inserting `with regard to the employer's compliance with the requirements of this subsection.';

(B) in clause (ii), by striking `and whose identity' and all that follows through `failure or failures.' and inserting `the Secretary of Labor may conduct an investigation into the employer's compliance with the requirements of this subsection.';

(C) in clause (iii), by striking the last sentence;

(D) by striking clauses (iv) and (v);

(E) by redesignating clauses (vi), (vii), and (viii) as clauses (iv), (v), and (vi), respectively;

(F) in clause (iv), as redesignated, by striking `meet a condition described in clause (ii), unless the Secretary of Labor receives the information not later than 12 months' and inserting `comply with the requirements under this subsection, unless the Secretary of Labor receives the information not later than 24 months';

(G) by amending clause (v), as redesignated, to read as follows:

`(v) The Secretary of Labor shall provide notice to an employer of the intent to conduct an investigation. The notice shall be provided in such a manner, and shall contain sufficient detail, to permit the employer to respond to the allegations before an investigation is commenced. The Secretary is not required to comply with this clause if the Secretary determines that such compliance would interfere with an effort by the Secretary to investigate or secure compliance by the employer with the requirements of this subsection. A determination by the Secretary under this clause shall not be subject to judicial review.';

(H) in clause (vi), as redesignated, by striking `An investigation' and all that follows through `the determination.' and inserting `If the Secretary of Labor, after an investigation under clause (i) or (ii), determines that a reasonable basis exists to make a finding that the employer has failed to comply with the requirements under this subsection, the Secretary shall provide interested parties with notice of such determination and an opportunity for a hearing in accordance with section 556 of title 5, United States Code, not later than 120 days after the date of such determination.'; and

(I) by adding at the end the following:

`(vii) If the Secretary of Labor, after a hearing, finds a reasonable basis to believe that the employer has violated the requirements under this subsection, the Secretary may impose a penalty under subparagraph (C).'; and

(4) by striking subparagraph (H).

(c) Information Sharing Between Department of Labor and Department of Homeland Security- Section 212(n)(2) of such Act, as amended by this section, is further amended by inserting after subparagraph (G) the following:

`(H) The Director of United States Citizenship and Immigration Services shall provide the Secretary of Labor with any information contained in the materials submitted by H-1B employers as part of the adjudication process that indicates that the employer is not complying with H-1B visa program requirements. The Secretary may initiate and conduct an investigation and hearing under this paragraph after receiving information of noncompliance under this subparagraph.'.

(d) Audits- Section 212(n)(2)(A) of such Act, as amended by this section, is further amended by adding at the end the following: `The Secretary may conduct surveys of the degree to which employers comply with the requirements under this subsection and may conduct annual compliance audits of employers that employ H-1B nonimmigrants. The Secretary shall conduct annual compliance audits of not less than 1 percent of the employers that employ H-1B nonimmigrants during the applicable calendar year.'

(e) Penalties- Section 212(n)(2)(C) of such Act, as amended by this section, is further amended--

(1) in clause (i)(I), by striking `$1,000' and inserting `$2,000';

(2) in clause (ii)(I), by striking `$5,000' and inserting `$10,000'; and

(3) in clause (vi)(III), by striking `$1,000' and inserting `$2,000'.

(f) Information Provided to H-1B Nonimmigrants Upon Visa Issuance- Section 212(n) of such Act, as amended by this section, is further amended by inserting after paragraph (2) the following:

`(3)(A) Upon issuing an H-1B visa to an applicant outside the United States, the issuing office shall provide the applicant with--

`(i) a brochure outlining the employer's obligations and the employee's rights under Federal law, including labor and wage protections; and

`(ii) the contact information for Federal agencies that can offer more information or assistance in clarifying employer obligations and workers' rights.

`(B) Upon the issuance of an H-1B visa to an alien inside the United States, the officer of the Department of Homeland Security shall provide the applicant with--

`(i) a brochure outlining the employer's obligations and the employee's rights under Federal law, including labor and wage protections; and

`(ii) the contact information for Federal agencies that can offer more information or assistance in clarifying employer's obligations and workers' rights.'.

SEC. 6. WHISTLEBLOWER PROTECTIONS.

Section 212(n)(2)(C)(iv) of the Immigration and Nationality Act (8 U.S.C. 1182(n)(2)(C)(iv)) is amended--

(1) by inserting `take, fail to take, or threaten to take or fail to take, a personnel action, or' before `to intimidate'; and

(2) by adding at the end the following: `An employer that violates this clause shall be liable to the employees harmed by such violation for lost compensation, including back pay.'.

[imh1b]

This is a good bill for us. Don't just think about your own greencard. Think about the visa you used to come here. It will allow more talented people to come to USA. It will stop any misuse by consulting companies too.

[go_guy123]

Old Bill....This for 110 congress....we are in 111 congress

[imh1b]

Old Bill....This for 110 congress....we are in 111 congress

It has been reintroduced.
See Bill Would Double Cap on H-1B Visas by PC World: Yahoo! Tech (http://tech.yahoo.com/news/pcworld/20091020/tc_pcworld/billwoulddoublecaponh1bvisas_1)

and read the date

[dummgelauft]

Antis and racists will have a filed day with this. IV needs to shout this bill down vociferously, if it does not contain anything for EB.

[dummgelauft]

This is a good bill for us. Don't just think about your own greencard. Think about the visa you used to come here. It will allow more talented people to come to USA. It will stop any misuse by consulting companies too.

Not everybody on this forum used the H1B/L1 via a desi consultant to come to USA.
There are other visa types too.

[immigrant2007]

Antis and racists will have a filed day with this. IV needs to shout this bill down vociferously, if it does not contain anything for EB.

Practically we shouldmove to court to ban any new H1b's / L1's or other type of VISAS to be introduced unless US Govt takes a stand on GCs.
they should allow only those many number of total VISAs as there are number of GCs available in that country. they should introduce priority date in VISAS.

[gauravster]

While this bill looks good on the face of it, a big problem with this is that it does not simultaneously increase EB limits. As such in a few years, it can lead to further exploitation of employees as the EB waits would be longer without a corresponding change in EB green cards.

My answer would be that we should oppose this bill unless it is accompanied with EB reform.

my 2 cents.

[arnab221]

The hopes and aspirations that I have from the senate and the house have progressively reduced with each year that I have waited and watched them derail one bill after another .


I still remember the SKIL bill by a Texas senator in the year 2006 ( when the economy was doing well ) . After that I personally have counted more than 10 bills every year ( total 30 ) When they could not pass anything in the boom time , do you think it will pass now .

We support or not , this bill will fail .. period .

These are introduced by the politicians just to show their industry lobby that they have tried their best but it still did not work . They just show their solidarity to the industry lobby since they receive campaign money from them . What happens ultimately to these bills , THEY FAIL !!

[ronhira]

ditto.........

The hopes and aspirations that I have from the senate and the house have progressively reduced with each year that I have waited and watched them derail one bill after another .


I still remember the SKIL bill by a Texas senator in the year 2006 ( when the economy was doing well ) . After that I personally have counted more than 10 bills every year ( total 30 ) When they could not pass anything in the boom time , do you think it will pass now .

We support or not , this bill will fail .. period .

These are introduced by the politicians just to show their industry lobby that they have tried their best but it still did not work . They just show their solidarity to the industry lobby since they receive campaign money from them . What happens ultimately to these bills , THEY FAIL !!

[go_guy123]

The hopes and aspirations that I have from the senate and the house have progressively reduced with each year that I have waited and watched them derail one bill after another .


I still remember the SKIL bill by a Texas senator in the year 2006 ( when the economy was doing well ) . After that I personally have counted more than 10 bills every year ( total 30 ) When they could not pass anything in the boom time , do you think it will pass now .

We support or not , this bill will fail .. period .

These are introduced by the politicians just to show their industry lobby that they have tried their best but it still did not work . They just show their solidarity to the industry lobby since they receive campaign money from them . What happens ultimately to these bills , THEY FAIL !!

Of all the bills SKIL bill had the highest chances (faced minimum opposition)

But it was held up by the Hispanic caucus who wanted it to be part of the CIR
only. Unless this CIR is abandoned for piecemeal there will be no relief.

[Leo07]

This bill has just as much Probability as I have to get elected as President:)

[msgrewal81]

Practically we shouldmove to court to ban any new H1b's / L1's or other type of VISAS to be introduced unless US Govt takes a stand on GCs.
they should allow only those many number of total VISAs as there are number of GCs available in that country. they should introduce priority date in VISAS.


oh!! because ur own GC in process, why care about those who are on H1B and their GC not started yet..

It is so unfortunate that EB immigrants dont care about the ones following them, while illegal Hispanics threaten governments to care about those following them. shame on you...

[krish2005]

This bill has just as much Probability as I have to get elected as President:)

ha ha choking..... :D

[ronhira]

oh!! because ur own GC in process, why care about those who are on H1B and their GC not started yet..

It is so unfortunate that EB immigrants dont care about the ones following them, while illegal Hispanics threaten governments to care about those following them. shame on you...


y do i've a feeling that u'r anti immigrant who is disguising to always post about undocumented.....

it seems u want everybody here to think that undocumented is our enemy..... which is not true ....... & u want us to think that undocumented r getting in our way....... which is again not true......

isn't this what likes of senator sessions have been doing for many years..... whenever there is any discussion @ immigration bill...... u anti immigrants pitch legals against undocumented..... & then in the next step u turn around to attack legal immigrants on h1.... waiting for gc.... right?

[grimreaper]

Practically we shouldmove to court to ban any new H1b's / L1's or other type of VISAS to be introduced unless US Govt takes a stand on GCs.
they should allow only those many number of total VISAs as there are number of GCs available in that country. they should introduce priority date in VISAS.

Not everyone on H1 and L1 want to go on process their green cards. This is a classic example of trying to shut the door after you come in.

[arnab221]

This bill totally defies any logic . Why do we need more H1B visas in a year when the existing H1B visas has no takers . There are still 20,000 visas left and there are no takers .

The H1B was always enough for the real H1B seekers , but if some companies apply blanket petitions of 15,000 visas per company to keep their employees in "Travel Ready" state then no matter how much the quota increases it will never be enough . The emmployee may never actually travel but still eats up a work a visa just to make himself travel ready .This year we see so many visas remaining just because the most companies in India have stopped the blanket petition policy on H1B petitions after Grassley cracked down on them last year .


Also what will High tech individual do after coming here sell falafel in NewYork city . The tech sector is deeply affected by the recession and no matter how upbeat the Press or President Obama or Billionaire Warrn Buffet might seem , the ground reality is very different and the ones who face it know it the best . Clients want to hold on to their wallets and not fund new projects .


There are no jobs/ work to offer ,
There are 20,000 work visas which are yet to be taken and may be lost .

and they create a bill for increase of work visas . WHAT A BUNCH OF JOKERS !!!