HELP.. Denied a job for not having a GC yet... Is this legal?

[A&H2018 148]

Again, it comes back to the environment the OP is entering. I understand people wanting to fight the great fight, live by the exact law. But realistically, OP is entering an environment where within 3-5 years if successful will be getting compenstated better than people 10+ years into their career. An environment where unsucessful will be let go within 6 months. An environment where the community is very small and for sure word gets around. An environment where HR is just there to send your paystubs and protect the CEO. Unfortunately the law, is in a grey-area and is a matter of what you can prove in a court before a judge.

 

 

[Orangesapples 1,954]

36 minutes ago, florida racer 73 said:

Listen, an ead will still stop you from enjoying certain type of jobs, ones that need a security clearance, especially one from the government. 

Did anyone stop to find out what exactly is required from morgan stanley for this job? Maybe it is one that requires a US citizenship or LPR. I am sure the company has specific hiring standards and the amount of posts I have seen negative to the company...... well it is disturbing.

 

i am a business owner and quite honestly, this topic would lead me away from hiring someone with an ead. Talk of filing complaints, eeoc complaints, why would I open myself up to that!

 

The amount of negative posts about the OP is the disturbing part. And you're not supposed to know if someone has an EAD before they fill out their i9, so just don't ask a question different from "Are you authorized to work in the US?" and don't illegally discriminate once you receive the I9. This way no lawsuits about this will follow. It's really simple to follow the law. 

[Orangesapples 1,954]

36 minutes ago, florida racer 73 said:

Folks i apologize for my outburst and if it offends you, but this is crazy..... I am not saying it is right or wrong but it happens everyday.

 

as a business owner I need to protectmy intreats and my business that I built and this thread is very disturbing to me from a business standpoint.

 

i wish the best for the op but their chance of sucess is slim to none. 

Yes indeed

So keeping the law sounds disturbing? It's simple - don't discriminate illegally and you'll be in the clear. Is it also disturbing to you that you're not allowed to discriminate based on religion or pregnancy status? Or that you must pay taxes? Laws exist for a reason. Employment laws in the US are very lax anyway, it's not hard for employers to not break them. 

Edited July 13, 2018 by Orangesapples

[ttram312 10]

In my experience, I had been asked if I am a USC or LPR as a very first question on a job interview. When I said no, but I had a valid EAD, the person said that the company only hired USC or LPR and he had to stop the interview. I know for fact that the job I was interviewing for did not require applicant to be USC or LPR for any special restriction. Discrimination on EAD holder does happen everyday and kudos to OP to try fighting it. 

 

However, with that being said, let me tell you my full story. I got my EAD through F1 status. I got a good job couple months from that. I was also adjusting status through marriage with USC at the end of my EAD. Unfortunately, the new EAD through AOS did not arrive on time before my old EAD expired and I was off work for 3 months. I was lucky that my company agreed to wait it out until I was in status again. But that is exactly why companies hesitate to hire EAD holder and I understand their position, as well as the unexpectedness of immigration process. I do sympathize with OP but think that the best course of action is to move on, find another job or work temporary assignment (which does not mind EAD holder) and try again after GC. Anyway, good luck to OP. 

[florida racer 73 200]

6 minutes ago, Orangesapples said:

The amount of negative posts about the OP is the disturbing part. And you're not supposed to know if someone has an EAD before they fill out their i9, so just don't ask a question different from "Are you authorized to work in the US?" and don't illegally discriminate once you receive the I9. This way no lawsuits about this will follow. It's really simple to follow the law. 

We agree to disagree.

 

[george8880 27]

5 minutes ago, ttram312 said:

In my experience, I had been asked if I am a USC or LPR as a very first question on a job interview. When I said no, but I had a valid EAD, the person said that the company only hired USC or LPR and he had to stop the interview. I know for fact that the job I was interviewing for did not require applicant to be USC or LPR for any special restriction. Discrimination on EAD holder does happen everyday and kudos to OP to try fighting it. 

 

However, with that being said, let me tell you my full story. I got my EAD through F1 status. I got a good job couple months from that. I was also adjusting status through marriage with USC at the end of my EAD. Unfortunately, the new EAD through AOS did not arrive on time before my old EAD expired and I was off work for 3 months. I was lucky that my company agreed to wait it out until I was in status again. But that is exactly why companies hesitate to hire EAD holder and I understand their position, as well as the unexpectedness of immigration process. I do sympathize with OP but think that the best course of action is to move on, find another job or work temporary assignment (which does not mind EAD holder) and try again after GC. Anyway, good luck to OP. 

The OP’s situation is slightly different from yours. She already has her EAD via AOS. Any extension is relatively quick (you get temporary extension with NOA upon filing) and straightforward. The only real risk is botching the interview.

 

Just wanted to throw that out there for people who might freak out about their EAD through AOS

[Orangesapples 1,954]

Just now, george8880 said:

The OP’s situation is slightly different from yours. She already has her EAD via AOS. Any extension is relatively quick (you get temporary extension with NOA upon filing) and straightforward. The only real risk is botching the interview.

 

Just wanted to throw that out there for people who might freak out about their EAD through AOS

Yes. Also, anti discrimination laws are there to protect the people even if it might be an inconvenience for the business. Disability might be a pain to accommodate but you can't discriminate based on that. The same with pregnancy. Also, younger people might be quicker to adapt to a work environment but age discrimination is not allowed either. 

 

If employers didn't have incentives to discriminate then anti discrimination laws would not be necessary. 

[Amadia 711]

First, hats off to the advocate member on here who keeps rehashing on laws.

 

Second, @kvito28, when does the EAD expire? I never had to go through that process so excuse the lack of time span knowledge on EADs. 

 

On 12/07/2018 at 11:41 AM, kvito28 said:

awaiting my green card interview

Third, as quoted above, you mentioned that you are waiting on a GC interview....meaning........you have yet to get alerted on an interview date........meaning.......that you do not have a scheduled interview. THAT could be what the recruitment agency/hiring manager looked at. They have no way of knowing if you will be approved/denied a GC whenever you have that interview. Therefore, they may not want to risk having to hire you then having to fill your position some months down the road if you do not get your GC.

 

Just looking at this from the business side.

[ttram312 10]

5 minutes ago, george8880 said:

The OP’s situation is slightly different from yours. She already has her EAD via AOS. Any extension is relatively quick (you get temporary extension with NOA upon filing) and straightforward. The only real risk is botching the interview.

 

Just wanted to throw that out there for people who might freak out about their EAD through AOS

 

Agree. 

 

But I also think that employers do not see the difference between both situations because EAD is EAD in their eyes. There is also the unexpectedness of not passing the interview. I'm just throwing it out there that it is complex when it comes to visa and immigration that US employers may not understand. 

[jdaveh 58]

5 hours ago, kvito28 said:

I have e-mail exchange record from the hiring manager which is a pretty good proof in my book. If they are gonna be full of it and say we found somebody else only after I addressed this issue with proper agencies, then it is their call. I do not think they can get away with that with DOJ. I am not gonna get involved in that whatsoever. 

Please tell us what the email says, be specific. I think all of us here are looking out for your best interest

 

[Ontarkie 14,445]

~~As this thread has become nothing more then personal attacks it is now locked to further discussion. As it is also in the wrong forum it will be moved. Once the OP has an update from her complaint she is free to start a new thread to update everyone.~~

~~Moved to Working and Traveling, from AOS from Work, Student, and Tourist Visas.~~

Edited July 13, 2018 by Ontarkie