How to answer: Will you now or in the future require sponsorship to work?

[V5712 11]

Background: I recently received my EAD and SSN after applying for AOS from K1. My EAD is valid for 2 years and can be renewed. AOS is in progress and could be another 1-2 years before getting my conditional green card.

 

I applied for a position with a Fortune 5 company, and marked that I’m legally authorized to work and do NOT need sponsorship (I’m only mentioning Fortune status because I believe top companies should be well versed in immigration legal stuff). 

 

During my interview, the hiring manager said he liked me and will asked the recruiter to close the position and make an offer. The position was removed from online an hour after the interview and the recruiter called with the verbal offer. However, she said she needs to know what visa I came in on so she can confirm with the legal team that the offer can be officially extended. I told her K1 and she said she wasn’t familiar with it, but that she will let legal know and also tell them I have the EAD through marriage based AOS. But it was implied they are not willing to sponsor now or in the future (and she noted the EAD has an expiration date). 

 

 

Question 1: 

On job applications they ask, “Are you legally authorized to work?”. Then they ask a SECOND question, “Will you now or in the future require sponsorship?” —Based on my current status (pending K1 based AOS), what should my answer have been for the SECOND question? 

 

 

Question 2:

I’m confident either my green card will be approved before EAD expires, or my EAD will be renewed without issue, so I don’t believe I will require sponsorship in the future. But how do corporate employers see this (are K1 EADs a risk)?

 

 

Question 3: 

Is it likely they will decide to no longer extend the offer because I’m K1 EAD and don’t have a green card yet?

 

(I couldn’t find a previous thread that clearly answered my above questions, so sorry if this was already answered somewhere. I do believe this will help me and others with managing employment expectations).

[Dashinka 23,354]

For question 1 it should be No.

 

For question 2 EAD’s from a K1 is not any riskier than from any other visa or AOS route.

 

For question 3, that is up to them.  Did you provide a copy of your AOS NOA to show you are in process of getting your GC.

 

Good Luck!

[Mike E 11,725]

36 minutes ago, V5712 said:

 . However, she said she needs to know what visa I came in on so she can confirm with the legal team that the offer can be officially extended.

This is illegal and legally they cannot ask this question. 
 

See https://www.justice.gov/sites/default/files/crt/legacy/2012/03/16/132.pdf

https://www.justice.gov/crt/file/867386/download  is a more recent letter on this topic which does let employers discriminate against F-1 students seeking employment Ed based on OPT but otherwise employers cannot discriminate hiring based on your class of visa. 

 

 

 

36 minutes ago, V5712 said:

Question 1: 

On job applications they ask, “Are you legally authorized to work?”. Then they ask a SECOND question, “Will you now or in the future require sponsorship?” —Based on my current status (pending K1 based AOS), what should my answer have been for the SECOND question?

 

The correct  answer is “no”. Sponsorship  in  this context means employment based sponsorship.  You have family based sponsorship.  It has nothing to do with them. 

36 minutes ago, V5712 said:

 

 

 

 

 

 

Question 2:

I’m confident either my green card will be approved before EAD expires, or my EAD will be renewed without issue, so I don’t believe I will require sponsorship in the future. But how do corporate employers see this (are K1 EADs a risk)?

 

 

 

Of course  employers will see it as a risk which is why you should not be as answering  this question as it breaks the law.  
 

36 minutes ago, V5712 said:

 

 

 

Question 3: 

Is it likely they will decide to no longer extend the offer because I’m K1 EAD and don’t have a green card yet?

Yes.  That’s why it Juan illegal for them to ask such questions. 
 

36 minutes ago, V5712 said:

 . I do believe this will help me and others with managing employment expectations).

 While some of these employment violations come from ignorance of the ale on the part of the employer, others comes from a desire to hire employees with a lower risk issues with employment authorization or a desire to hire only natural born Americans. 
 

If non citizens today  enable employers by sharing your visa status, eventually this will progress to discriminating against conditional LPRs, then LPRs  with extension letters, then LPRs with 10 year cards, and finally U.S. citizens whose only evidence of citizenship is a document that has an expiration date (such as a U.S.  passport).  
 

Someday it might  be you whose passport expires a week after your job starts and you’ve misplaced your naturalization certificate.  And you are denied the job because the recruiter “needs” to see your evidence of U.S. citizenship 

[Family 3,549]

2 hours ago, Mike E said:

This is illegal and legally they cannot ask this question. 
 

See https://www.justice.gov/sites/default/files/crt/legacy/2012/03/16/132.pdf

 

Thank you for posting that @Mike E..as I have read the “illegal question “ statement by others , without source. 
On reading it however, I see employers can absolutely chose not to hire anyone requiring sponsorship and may even post it in their recruitment.

 

it is important to note that the individuals protected for citizenship status discrimination are limited to U.S. citizens, certain lawful permanent residents, asylees, and refugees. See 8 U.S.C. §1324b(a)(3). Accordingly, non­ immigrant visa holders, such as H-1B visa holders, are not protected fromcitizenship status

ifanemployerchoosesnotto employ persons who require sponsorship for an employment visa, such as an H-1B visa, the emp10yermaystateinitsjobpostingsthatitwillnotsponsorapplicantsforworkvisas. For similar reasons, as discussed in the enc10sed technical assistance letters dated May 1,2009, July 31, 2008, and April 24, 2007, an employer may ask candidates for the position whether they will require sponsorship for a visa.

 

 

[Mike E 11,725]

8 hours ago, Family said:

On reading it however, I see employers can absolutely chose not to hire anyone requiring sponsorship and may even post it in their recruitment

OP doesn’t require sponsorship. 

[Family 3,549]

Agreed , he does not and will not require sponsorship. 
 

[V5712 11]

Thanks for the information @Mike E! This is very helpful. I’m expecting an update tomorrow so I’ll see how it goes, but now I know to be more careful with how I answer questions.

[V5712 11]

16 hours ago, Dashinka said:

For question 1 it should be No.

 

For question 2 EAD’s from a K1 is not any riskier than from any other visa or AOS route.

 

For question 3, that is up to them.  Did you provide a copy of your AOS NOA to show you are in process of getting your GC.

 

Good Luck!

Thank you! I did not provide any documentation and was not asked to do so yet. I was only asked what my visa category is. Then the recruiter said they need to talk to legal and get back to me 🫤. 

[V5712 11]

Update: I ended up receiving the offer. Apparently they asked about visa category just to confirm I truly didn’t need sponsorship. I guess still illegal but hey. 

[Family 3,549]

25 minutes ago, V5712 said:

Update: I ended up receiving the offer. Apparently they asked about visa category just to confirm I truly didn’t need sponsorship. I guess still illegal but hey

Congratulations! Their question about your need for sponsorship is perfectly legal . They loved you

[TBoneTX 43,404]

1 hour ago, V5712 said:

I ended up receiving the offer.

Heartiest congratulations, and thank you for returning with your update.  Everyone here can now celebrate with you.