Before my interview, I may want to let some skeletons out

[JoeCanuk 3]

You are working for a Canadian-based company, so US work authorization does not apply. I did the same. All the EAD does is give you the right to work for an employer in the US, and the US employer the right to hire you. Think of it this way..... when someone employed in another country comes to the US on business they do not have to apply for employment authorization first. That is because they are not here working for a US-based company.... they are working for a foreign-based company.

This is so wrong.... employment authorization is required for working in the US for ANY company that has US nexus

I agree with fwaguy. EAD is required to work in the US.

Here's something straight off the USCIS site:

"EAD: This document proves you are allowed to work in the United States."

Brad worked while in the US... even though the company was Canadian based.

You're right. The EAD proves you are allowed to work in the United States. Now...why would a Canadian company that Brad ALREADY worked for need proof that he is allowed to work in the United States? A Canadian company is not subject to the "EAD" rule of the United States as far as I know. A Canadian company can hire whomever they wish, whether they have an "EAD" or not.

[Sapphire 0]

I do not see where Brad was saying that the Canadian company had any nexus with US, but maybe you understood more than I did from his post. I think though that Fwaguy was referring strictly to Krikit's post and that situation.

And yes, if it did have any US branch and he was working for that branch, than it doesn't matter that the headquarters are in Canada, EAD would still be required.

As for the matter of "working while in US", I believe it's just a "slip" from uscis, because one can travel in USA for a business congress, let's say, or even pleasure, and still be working for his/her company in his/her country, without a need to ask for any employment authorization from US government. In other words, if you are in vacation here, no EAD needed And legally, you "are working while in USA" (the labor contract is not suspended during the vacation).

Of course, no parallel can be done between such a situation and the one Brad exposed, as he is not here as a tourist On the other hand, as mentioned, nor is he here as a USC or resident.

[JoeCanuk 3]

If it's a Canadian company, I believe he can work for them.

[payxibka 10,045]

You are working for a Canadian-based company, so US work authorization does not apply. I did the same. All the EAD does is give you the right to work for an employer in the US, and the US employer the right to hire you. Think of it this way..... when someone employed in another country comes to the US on business they do not have to apply for employment authorization first. That is because they are not here working for a US-based company.... they are working for a foreign-based company.

This is so wrong.... employment authorization is required for working in the US for ANY company that has US nexus

I agree with fwaguy. EAD is required to work in the US.

Here's something straight off the USCIS site:

"EAD: This document proves you are allowed to work in the United States."

Brad worked while in the US... even though the company was Canadian based.

You're right. The EAD proves you are allowed to work in the United States. Now...why would a Canadian company that Brad ALREADY worked for need proof that he is allowed to work in the United States? A Canadian company is not subject to the "EAD" rule of the United States as far as I know. A Canadian company can hire whomever they wish, whether they have an "EAD" or not.

If they Canadian company does not have US nexus (typically meaning NO physical presence) and therefore is not considered a US employer then I would tend to agree... But simply being Canadian "based" does not mean you are not considered a US employer.... If the Canadian "based" company has an office or any other US based employees, I can almost guaranty they have satisfied the nexus requirement and are a US employer....

[tom_g 3]

If I were in your shoes, I'd keep it to myself. There's not much you can do now to "right the wrong" even if there was a wrong in the first place- which appears debateable. You did what you had to do to support yourself and your family, and - personally - i think thats a higher priority than sticking to the letter of a badly worded law written by someone who's never been in your position.

As you have probably guessed, I'm not a lawyer, so the above is only what I'd do, nothing more

[JoeCanuk 3]

I think he did the right thing by the way. If it weren't for that stupid EAD rule, I would not have fallen behind in my bills. Basically, it's bs. The policy needs to be changed. People who get married should automatically be allowed to work! I'm going to get off my soapbox now before I really get angry.

[Nanusia & Lukaszek 0]

You are working for a Canadian-based company, so US work authorization does not apply. I did the same. All the EAD does is give you the right to work for an employer in the US, and the US employer the right to hire you. Think of it this way..... when someone employed in another country comes to the US on business they do not have to apply for employment authorization first. That is because they are not here working for a US-based company.... they are working for a foreign-based company.

This is so wrong.... employment authorization is required for working in the US for ANY company that has US nexus

I agree with fwaguy. EAD is required to work in the US.

Here's something straight off the USCIS site:

"EAD: This document proves you are allowed to work in the United States."

Brad worked while in the US... even though the company was Canadian based.

You're right. The EAD proves you are allowed to work in the United States. Now...why would a Canadian company that Brad ALREADY worked for need proof that he is allowed to work in the United States? A Canadian company is not subject to the "EAD" rule of the United States as far as I know. A Canadian company can hire whomever they wish, whether they have an "EAD" or not.

Its not the Canadian companies responsibility to check whether they can retain or hire Brad or not. It's his responsibility, as he's the one who has changed residence.

[JoeCanuk 3]

You are working for a Canadian-based company, so US work authorization does not apply. I did the same. All the EAD does is give you the right to work for an employer in the US, and the US employer the right to hire you. Think of it this way..... when someone employed in another country comes to the US on business they do not have to apply for employment authorization first. That is because they are not here working for a US-based company.... they are working for a foreign-based company.

This is so wrong.... employment authorization is required for working in the US for ANY company that has US nexus

I agree with fwaguy. EAD is required to work in the US.

Here's something straight off the USCIS site:

"EAD: This document proves you are allowed to work in the United States."

Brad worked while in the US... even though the company was Canadian based.

You're right. The EAD proves you are allowed to work in the United States. Now...why would a Canadian company that Brad ALREADY worked for need proof that he is allowed to work in the United States? A Canadian company is not subject to the "EAD" rule of the United States as far as I know. A Canadian company can hire whomever they wish, whether they have an "EAD" or not.

If they Canadian company does not have US nexus (typically meaning NO physical presence) and therefore is not considered a US employer then I would tend to agree... But simply being Canadian "based" does not mean you are not considered a US employer.... If the Canadian "based" company has an office or any other US based employees, I can almost guaranty they have satisfied the nexus requirement and are a US employer....

If they are a U.S. employer then THEY broke the law and should get in more trouble than Brad would/could get into. I think you agree with this eh?

You are working for a Canadian-based company, so US work authorization does not apply. I did the same. All the EAD does is give you the right to work for an employer in the US, and the US employer the right to hire you. Think of it this way..... when someone employed in another country comes to the US on business they do not have to apply for employment authorization first. That is because they are not here working for a US-based company.... they are working for a foreign-based company.

This is so wrong.... employment authorization is required for working in the US for ANY company that has US nexus

I agree with fwaguy. EAD is required to work in the US.

Here's something straight off the USCIS site:

"EAD: This document proves you are allowed to work in the United States."

Brad worked while in the US... even though the company was Canadian based.

You're right. The EAD proves you are allowed to work in the United States. Now...why would a Canadian company that Brad ALREADY worked for need proof that he is allowed to work in the United States? A Canadian company is not subject to the "EAD" rule of the United States as far as I know. A Canadian company can hire whomever they wish, whether they have an "EAD" or not.

Its not the Canadian companies responsibility to check whether they can retain or hire Brad or not. It's his responsibility, as he's the one who has changed residence.

Actually, the main responsiblity does lay with the employer. Are you saying it is a Canadian company?

Edited January 11, 2008 by JoeCanuk

[Nanusia & Lukaszek 0]

Actually, the main responsiblity does lay with the employer.

And try telling that to an IO at the AOS interview.

[JoeCanuk 3]

Actually, the main responsiblity does lay with the employer.

And try telling that to an IO at the AOS interview.

I don't have to. But actually, the responsibility does lay with the employer. And next time, before you want to put the wacko emoticon, I'd suggest you find out what you're talking about first. Because you are flat out wrong.

Now, are you saying it is a Canadian company?

[Sapphire 0]

And anyway, leaving aside the question in debate and going back to basis... I seem to remember that I read somewhere that spouses of USC are pardoned if they work in US without an EAD, and indeed it's the company who has to pay if any problems arises.

[Nanusia & Lukaszek 0]

Actually, the main responsiblity does lay with the employer.

And try telling that to an IO at the AOS interview.

I don't have to. But actually, the responsibility does lay with the employer. And next time, before you want to put the wacko emoticon, I'd suggest you find out what you're talking about first. Because you are flat out wrong.

Now, are you saying it is a Canadian company?

Take a chill pill. I quoted directly off the USCIS site and am sticking to it. Where's your proof?? I'm not saying its a Canadian company or not, cause I'm not the one working for it. My comments were based on if it was a Canadian based.

Your comments that people should work as soon as they are married would encourage unauthorized work. There is a reason people file and wait for EAD you know.

[JoeCanuk 3]

And anyway, leaving aside the question in debate and going back to basis... I seem to remember that I read somewhere that spouses of USC are pardoned if they work in US without an EAD, and indeed it's the company who has to pay if any problems arises.

You're right. My employer knew when I was hired that my work permit would expire a month later. When the time came, they still scheduled me for work after it expired. I did the honest thing and told them but if I hadn't, they would have been the ones having to answer to the government. I probably should have just kept my mouth shut and worked.

[Dakine10 5,452]

It doesn't matter who the employer is. If you work and are receiving compensation while you are a US resident, you need to have work authorization. Believe me, even if the USCIS doesn't care, the IRS will.

Edited January 11, 2008 by Dakine10

[JoeCanuk 3]

Actually, the main responsiblity does lay with the employer.

And try telling that to an IO at the AOS interview.

I don't have to. But actually, the responsibility does lay with the employer. And next time, before you want to put the wacko emoticon, I'd suggest you find out what you're talking about first. Because you are flat out wrong.

Now, are you saying it is a Canadian company?

Take a chill pill. I quoted directly off the USCIS site and am sticking to it. Where's your proof?? I'm not saying its a Canadian company or not, cause I'm not the one working for it. My comments were based on if it was a Canadian based.

Your comments that people should work as soon as they are married would encourage unauthorized work. There is a reason people file and wait for EAD you know.

I think it is you who needs to take a chill pill. I followed the law. I am simply angry about it and stated so. Don't take it as if I'm advocating people go out and break the law. However, if you acknowledge it is a Canadian company then your theory is shot out of the water. A Canadian has every right to work for a Canadian company, whether it's in the U.S. or Timbuckfriggintoo.

Where's my proof? It's all over visajourney. The employer is responsible. And you provided absolutely zero proof to back up your position that the individual is responsible. Are you going to?

It doesn't matter who the employer is. If you work and are receiving compensation while you are a US resident, you need to have work authorization. Believe me, even if the USCIS doesn't care, the IRS will.

And the IRS has what authority over Canada?