Changing companies 30 days after GC approval due to downsizing risk - impact on naturalization?

[tcklim 0]

Hello All,

 

My GC was approved in early January. I was on an L1, have been working with the company (combined with overseas) for 11 years or so. The second week I got back, we received an e-mail from the President that we had lost an account worth double our annual profit from the previous year. This was accompanied with a vague statement about looking into what this new reality means for the business and how to respond. He also encouraged employees to discuss their anxieties, ask questions and talk about it. Everyone naturally assumes, we will need to cut costs accordingly and we have been through 2 re-organizations in the past to get us to profitability (layoffs).

 

So my question is - given the above - is it reasonable for me to switch employers without waiting the regularly advised 60 days?  I've been approached by a recruiter for a position with the same title, that pays substantially more, but they want me to start asap (within 2 weeks). That puts me just over 30 days since I received my GC. 

 

My direct boss hasn't told me my job is at risk - the only thing I have is that e-mail above.

 

I don't want to put my GC at risk or risk have it be revoked.

Edited January 25, 2019 by tcklim

[USS_Voyager 1,971]

35 minutes ago, tcklim said:

Hello All,

 

My GC was approved in early January. I was on an L1, have been working with the company (combined with overseas) for 11 years or so. The second week I got back, we received an e-mail from the President that we had lost an account worth double our annual profit from the previous year. This was accompanied with a vague statement about looking into what this new reality means for the business and how to respond. He also encouraged employees to discuss their anxieties, ask questions and talk about it. Everyone naturally assumes, we will need to cut costs accordingly and we have been through 2 re-organizations in the past to get us to profitability (layoffs).

 

So my question is - given the above - is it reasonable for me to switch employers without waiting the regularly advised 60 days?  I've been approached by a recruiter for a position with the same title, that pays substantially more, but they want me to start asap (within 2 weeks). That puts me just over 30 days since I received my GC. 

 

My direct boss hasn't told me my job is at risk - the only thing I have is that e-mail above.

 

I don't want to put my GC at risk or risk have it be revoked.

 

Is the new job in the same or similar to your current job (assume that is the one you got the GC based on)? If it is, and sounds like it is, there is no problem. This is misconception out there. There is absolutely NO problem changing company as long as it is in "the same or similar" classification. You were allowed to change job/company BEFORE you got a GC (180 days after your filed I-485 per AC21, if I remember correctly. My memory is fuzzy as I've been out of the game for a while), there is NO reason that it's problem after you got the GC.

 

There is only a very remote chance it might be a problem, if you drastically change you field of work, and I mean it has to be drastic. Like if you were a software engineer and then suddenly right after you got the GC, you started working as a sushi chef. Then, they might have a argument that you always secretly wanted to be a sushi chef and you just used your employment (for which the GC and Labor certification were based on) to circumvent the immigration system. The key issue here is "intent", and the burden of proof is on them. Does it make sense?

 

I personally have never seen a case where they revoked the GC based on this issue.

Edited January 25, 2019 by USS_Voyager

[tcklim 0]

1 hour ago, USS_Voyager said:

 

Is the new job in the same or similar to your current job (assume that is the one you got the GC based on)? If it is, and sounds like it is, there is no problem. This is misconception out there. There is absolutely NO problem changing company as long as it is in "the same or similar" classification. You were allowed to change job/company BEFORE you got a GC (180 days after your filed I-485 per AC21, if I remember correctly. My memory is fuzzy as I've been out of the game for a while), there is NO reason that it's problem after you got the GC.

 

There is only a very remote chance it might be a problem, if you drastically change you field of work, and I mean it has to be drastic. Like if you were a software engineer and then suddenly right after you got the GC, you started working as a sushi chef. Then, they might have a argument that you always secretly wanted to be a sushi chef and you just used your employment (for which the GC and Labor certification were based on) to circumvent the immigration system. The key issue here is "intent", and the burden of proof is on them. Does it make sense?

 

I personally have never seen a case where they revoked the GC based on this issue.

Thanks for the help.

 

Yes, it's the exact same title as the amended I-140 we filed after acquisition (Successor-In-Interest). This is different to the title in the PERM and original I-140, though same occupational title and duties. Have a letter explaining this.

 

I guess what my question comes down to is, when it comes time for naturalization, is the e-mail from the President above sufficient proof that while I intended to work for the organization that sponsored me - circumstances changed enough that I had to leave.  The e-mail does not explicitly state we will be downsizing or that my job personally is at risk.

 

Also - I assume even if the company complains to USCIS that I left shortly after GC, that won't be an issue if I present the e-mail I mention.

 

 

 

 

[USS_Voyager 1,971]

37 minutes ago, tcklim said:

Thanks for the help.

 

Yes, it's the exact same title as the amended I-140 we filed after acquisition (Successor-In-Interest). This is different to the title in the PERM and original I-140, though same occupational title and duties. Have a letter explaining this.

The key is the "duties". Tittle could change. People performing the same duties for different organizations could carry different tittle. If the job duties are "same or similar", you are golden. The "similar" part allows for a certain percentage of differences. Again, I am out of the game for many years, so I don't remember exactly but I want to say like 60% or something like that.

 

37 minutes ago, tcklim said:

 

I guess what my question comes down to is, when it comes time for naturalization, is the e-mail from the President above sufficient proof that while I intended to work for the organization that sponsored me - circumstances changed enough that I had to leave.  The e-mail does not explicitly state we will be downsizing or that my job personally is at risk.

Yes, but it doesn't matter. You are ALLOWED to leave, even when you job is not threatened, as long as your new job is "same or similar" to the PERM, as stated above. The company/employer doesn't matter. The job duties are.

 

37 minutes ago, tcklim said:

 

Also - I assume even if the company complains to USCIS that I left shortly after GC, that won't be an issue if I present the e-mail I mention.

Cannot possibly be an issue. Employment is "at-will" in the US. There is something called the "13th Amendment of the Constitution" that makes involuntary servitude illegal and abolish slavery. The company can NOT force you work for them unless you agree to work for them. Doing otherwise is the definition of "involuntary servitude: a person laboring against that person's will".