Interim Decision #1892 

MAT= or MArccoux 

In Deportation Proceedings 

A-17618499 

Decided by Board August 16,1968 

In the absence of fraud, an alien who entered the United States as an immigrant 

based on a labor certification for employment as a trainee weaver of woven 

goods but who because of dissatisfaction with working conditions and low 

wages left such certified employment after 5 days and thereafter obtained 

non•related employment as a fiber glass repairer for which he did not have 

a labor certification, is not deportable for lack of a valid labor certification at 

entry. [Matter of Tucker, Int. Dec. No. 1758, distinguished.] 

CHARGE: 

Order: Act of 1952—Section 241(a) (1) [8 U.S.C. 1251(a) (1))—Exclndable at 

entry—not in possession of valid labor certification. 

ON BEHALF or SERVICE: R. A. Vielhaber 

Appellate Trial Attorney 

The special inquiry officer terminated proceedings and certified his 

order. We will make no change in his order. 

Respondent, a 32-year-old married male, a native and citizen of 

Canada, was admitted to the United States for permanent residence 

on November 29, 1967. In Canada, he had been a truck and taxi driver 

for three years. He had a labor certification issued to him because - he 

was coming to Maine for employment as a trainee weaver of woven 

goods. He was to be paid about $1.65 an hour. He began this employment the day after his entry. 

Respondent was unhappy in his job which required him to sit at a 

bench and make five knots every 30 seconds for eight hours a day. He 

planned to ask for a transfer. In fact, he was put elsewhere but liked 

this even less. A few days after he began to .work, he heard that in 

Connecticut work was available at $2.50 an hour. On December 9, 1967, 

he went to Hartford, Connecticut, where on about December 13, 1967, 

he applied for a job with the Kaman Aircraft Corporation. On December 18, 1967 he started to work for them repairing fiber glass—a job 

he did not consider a skilled one. He did not have a labor certification 

for the second job. • 

321-054-69--84 827 
Interim Decision #1802 

Respondent testified that lie entered the United States with the intention of working for the woven goods manufacturer (Ex. 3,.p. 2), 

that he had contact with no other employer before he came to the 

United States (p. 12), that he used his own money to come, that he 

came willing to work and earn a living, and that he did not see that he 

had done anything wrong. 

The special inquiry officer terminated proceedings finding that 

respondent entered the United States in good faith to take employment 

with the woven goods manufacturer, that he had left because he had 

found working conditions unsatisfactory and wages low, and that 

while he did not have a labor, certification for the second employment, 

there was an obvious need foihii services. 

At oral argument, the Appellate Trial Attorney contended that if 

one comes to take certified employment with which he becomes dissatisfied, he should leave the United States and seek a new certification 

because his entrance was conditioned upon his working for a particular 

United States employer. He.contended that the putpeSe of the law is 

to permit selected people to enter for jobs which cannot be filled by 

labor in the United States, and that only by requiring the departure of 

the person who did.not:give the job a reasonable trial can the purpose 

of the law be achieved. The Appellate Trial Attorney believes that the 

respondent did not give the first job a reasonable trial since he only 

worked five days, had no previous experience on the job and had been 

hired to learn the job. The Appellate Trial Attorney draws an analogy, 

between the instant case and that of a person the Board found deportable because he hack taken a job other than the one for whibh he 

had a. certification. He also stated that an informal inquiry at the 

United States Department of Labor in Boston, Massachusetts, revealed that respondent's job was not one for which a labor certification 

would be issued because it required no particular speetalized Skill or 

experience and was essentially an apprenticeship. 

We believe that the, decision of the special inquiry officer properly 

disposed of the case. There was no requirement in the law that an alien 

who took a job for which he has a labor certification must remain on 

the job any, particular length of time. There is no evidence that respondent took employment in the United States as part of a scheme to 

obtain other employinent. The record reveals that he entered the 

United states to take the certified employment in good faith. Matter 

of Tucker, Int. *Dec. No. 1758, involved an alien who had a labor certification as a domestic but took employment as a machine operator although employment as a domestic appeared to be available. She never 

took, certified employment: In the instant case; respondent did take 

certified employment. 

828 
Interim Decision #1892 

Respondent made two visits to Canada. He last returned on March 4, 

1963 when he brought his wife and children to the United States for 

permanent residence. At the time of his reentry he was returning to 

continue his employment with the aircraft company. 

ORDER: It is ordered that no change be made in the order of the 

special inquiry officer. 

829