Employment Authorized on I-94 @ JFK Airport

[NaNaNaNaBooBoo 0]

My K-1 fiance (now husband) received an employment authorization stamp on his I-94 @ JFK airport. He now has his social security card. Can he get a job? How long can he work? When does it expire? Is it good until he gets his EAD?

[YuAndDan 153]

The "TEMP EAD" expires the same time as the I-94, 90 days after entry. You need an EAD CARD or GREEN-CARD to continue working.

SO file for AOS and EAD ASAP. EAD with AOS is part of the fee for AOS.

[omeysgirl 0]

Good info to know

[thetreble 19]

My K-1 fiance (now husband) received an employment authorization stamp on his I-94 @ JFK airport. He now has his social security card. Can he get a job? How long can he work? When does it expire? Is it good until he gets his EAD?

Can he get a job? yes.

How long can he work? until I-94 expires.

Is it good until he gets his EAD? Probably not. If you wait to apply for his EAD it may take several more months beyond the expiration date of the I94. If the I94 expires and he still does not have an EAD, he no longer has the validity to work until he receives that EAD. Try filing then as soon as possible as Yuanddan said.

[JoeCanuk 3]

( 2 ) Presents, within 90 days of the hire or, in the case of verification, the date employment authorization expires, either an unexpired Form I-766 or Form I-688B, or a social security account number card that contains no employment restrictions, and a document described under paragraph (B)(1)(v)(B) of this section.

Isn't this saying that if you have the receipt that you've applied for the EAD that you can stll work?

( 2 ) Presents, within 90 days of the hire or, in the case of verification, the date employment authorization expires, either an unexpired Form I-766 or Form I-688B, or a social security account number card that contains no employment restrictions, and a document described under paragraph (B)(1)(v)(B) of this section.

Isn't this saying that if you have the receipt that you've applied for the EAD that you can stll work?

[Kez/JWolf 6]

No.... when a K1 temp EAD expires (90 days after entry) the holder is no longer employment authorized.... they do not become employment authorized again until they have been approved for EAD applied with or after AOS....

The 90 days refered to is for someone who is employment authorized but is unable to provide the proof... ie they have lost their EAD and are awaiting a replacement...

Kez

[Phoenix_Guy 0]

Who's responsible for ensuring employment authorization? The immigrant, or the employer? My wife is currently working and we were wondering if she should remind the employer of her temporary EA expiration date. Or, does that responsibility fall on the employer? I'm thinking that if she continues to work, it is not her who could get "in trouble", it's the employer (not that we would want to do that). We just want to understand the situation better ...

[payxibka 10,045]

Who's responsible for ensuring employment authorization? The immigrant, or the employer? My wife is currently working and we were wondering if she should remind the employer of her temporary EA expiration date. Or, does that responsibility fall on the employer? I'm thinking that if she continues to work, it is not her who could get "in trouble", it's the employer (not that we would want to do that). We just want to understand the situation better ...

It is actually a problem for both but since unauthorized periods of work are "forgiven" for the spouse of a USC it then remains conceptually only an employer problem....

[thetreble 19]

Who's responsible for ensuring employment authorization? The immigrant, or the employer? My wife is currently working and we were wondering if she should remind the employer of her temporary EA expiration date. Or, does that responsibility fall on the employer? I'm thinking that if she continues to work, it is not her who could get "in trouble", it's the employer (not that we would want to do that). We just want to understand the situation better ...

I'm not quite sure but my husband says that this has happened at his work before and the employer is at no fault what so ever. They often point to the employee and say it's their fault for either lying or not telling the truth. The employer has no fault in whatever happens in your AOS case/EAD case.

[Achromatic 0]

I'm not quite sure but my husband says that this has happened at his work before and the employer is at no fault what so ever. They often point to the employee and say it's their fault for either lying or not telling the truth. The employer has no fault in whatever happens in your AOS case/EAD case.

They have the vested interest in saying that. According to the form, they are supposed to state, as the employer that they have seen legal, valid, current authorization documents that appear genuine. There is mention made on the form of where to find information on what a document should state/look like, in case they are not familiar with it. They are supposed to verify the employee's SSN, and identity.

So while the employee may not have told the truth, the employer is expected to have made a "reasonable person"'s effort in ensuring that said documentation sighted was accurate.

In some industries, there is a high motivation to the employer to be ... "overly cursory" ... when making these inspections.

As mentioned, as the spouse of a USC, at AOS any illegal work that you have undertaken that DHS has evidence of is not a valid grounds for denial of your AOS (in and of itself, but you can bet depending on those circumstances, you might get a far more detailed interrogation about everything else).

[JoeCanuk 3]

No.... when a K1 temp EAD expires (90 days after entry) the holder is no longer employment authorized.... they do not become employment authorized again until they have been approved for EAD applied with or after AOS....

The 90 days refered to is for someone who is employment authorized but is unable to provide the proof... ie they have lost their EAD and are awaiting a replacement...

Kez

Ok thanks.

Anyone find it retarded that we're employment authorized for 90 days and then we aren't allowed to work?

[Phoenix_Guy 0]

So while the employee may not have told the truth, the employer is expected to have made a "reasonable person"'s effort in ensuring that said documentation sighted was accurate.

I'm saying that my wife DID tell the truth; "I can only work until November 8th". And, the employer did the due diligence to verify that my wife was eligible to work; based on her I-94 temporary stamp. So, both did the correct thing at the time of employment. My question is what happens on November 9th -- if my wife does not "remind" them of her temporary EA end date and the employer forgets the same and continues to schedule her. Who is responsible for ensuring her eligibility to work? I say the employer, but that's just in my humble opinion.

Thanks.

[Jennymc11 2]

So while the employee may not have told the truth, the employer is expected to have made a "reasonable person"'s effort in ensuring that said documentation sighted was accurate.

I'm saying that my wife DID tell the truth; "I can only work until November 8th". And, the employer did the due diligence to verify that my wife was eligible to work; based on her I-94 temporary stamp. So, both did the correct thing at the time of employment. My question is what happens on November 9th -- if my wife does not "remind" them of her temporary EA end date and the employer forgets the same and continues to schedule her. Who is responsible for ensuring her eligibility to work? I say the employer, but that's just in my humble opinion.

Thanks.

So is it considered illegal for the non-USC spouse to continue working past the 90-day EAD temp stamp? My husband wants to keep working but I just don't know if its worth the risk...

[Caladan 19]

No.... when a K1 temp EAD expires (90 days after entry) the holder is no longer employment authorized.... they do not become employment authorized again until they have been approved for EAD applied with or after AOS....

The 90 days refered to is for someone who is employment authorized but is unable to provide the proof... ie they have lost their EAD and are awaiting a replacement...

Kez

Ok thanks.

Anyone find it retarded that we're employment authorized for 90 days and then we aren't allowed to work?

Yup. It's about the dumbest thing in the world, second only to the rest of this process.

[Achromatic 0]

So while the employee may not have told the truth, the employer is expected to have made a "reasonable person"'s effort in ensuring that said documentation sighted was accurate.

I'm saying that my wife DID tell the truth; "I can only work until November 8th". And, the employer did the due diligence to verify that my wife was eligible to work; based on her I-94 temporary stamp. So, both did the correct thing at the time of employment. My question is what happens on November 9th -- if my wife does not "remind" them of her temporary EA end date and the employer forgets the same and continues to schedule her. Who is responsible for ensuring her eligibility to work? I say the employer, but that's just in my humble opinion.

Thanks.

So is it considered illegal for the non-USC spouse to continue working past the 90-day EAD temp stamp? My husband wants to keep working but I just don't know if its worth the risk...

As I mentioned, it is documented, in procedure/law, not just subject-to-opinion, that illegal overstay or unauthorized employment can NOT be used as the grounds for the denial of Adjustment of Status, or when applying for Naturalization (though this may change).

You can be sure, though, that if either comes to the attention of USCIS/DHS, your next appointment / interview with them will spend a fair amount of time discussing your knowledge of the infraction you committed, and how complicit you were therein.

Again, however, if the adjudicating officer chooses to deny your application, this can NOT be the reason, though you might face a far more tight interrogation on other aspects of your relationship as a result thereof.

I am going to go out on a limb and say that I worked without authorization, unknowingly. I am also going to say that I did continue to do so after I received advice that I had been doing so.

I am also going to say this, and this is one thing that a lot of people here will caution against, as a general rule.

My partner is, or was at our AOS application, a student, that I was supporting. In or around that time, I started questioning whether K-1 Authorization was actual Employment Authorization, and the consensus was that it was not, that, though eligible, I would still have to apply.

I filed AOS with a joint sponsor, my fiance's mother.

I filed documents showing that I had been working, showing my income and assets as gained in the US, through unauthorized work.

The end result:

We got RFE'd.

One (of the five) pages (the others were for further proof of my joint sponsor's citizenship and tax info), stated that if I wished to use my income as part of this support statement, I had to show valid employment authorization, and had not done so.

Given that data matching, etc, etc, common sense re "EADs not processed within the initial 90 day K-1 period", etc, etc, that was made saying "You aren't authorized to work, so we cannot count any income you've claimed".

I had my AOS interview on Thursday.

What mention of this was made?

NONE.

We were approved based on the joint sponsor income and evidence of a genuine relationship. I think my reply to the RFE even mentioned that there was "no authorization document that could be supplied, so please continue our application without reference to this" (honesty at that point, knowing I'd screwed up, being the best policy).

Again, NO mention made of this.

May things change? Of course. This is not advice. This is my experience, that I can provide documentation of and the lack of issue it caused my partner and I, even as I got my welcome mail just today. Your milage, as they say, may vary, but BASED ON /CURRENT/ PROCEDURE AND LAW, your partner will not be negatively adjudicated against as the result of visa overstay or unauthorized employment.