“These less effective recruitment procedures deterred U.S. applicants from applying and nearly always resulted in zero or very few mailed applications that Apple considered for PERM-related job positions, which allowed Apple to fill the positions with temporary visa holders,” according to the settlement agreement between Apple and DOJ."
Certainly does look intentional. Perhaps it was no more than a simple effort to save money by hiring temp visa holders into psuedo-intern positions rather than permanent residents who would have expected better terms/pay.
Once again, you seem to have jumped the gun to criticize Apple. Certainly look intentional. But at least it looks like you're not the only one that misinterpret who is considered an "immigrant".
An "immigrant" as used here by the DoJ is not a person who is in the US on a temp work visa. An "immigrant" is a person living in the US that have not obtain a green card or citizenship, in order to be considered a "permanent resident". The DoJ requires Apple to prioritize hiring US workers that are permanent US residents. Either US citizens or immigrants that have obtained a green card. But Apple seems to have been hiring too many "immigrants" without green cards, not too many nonimmigrants.
People that are citizens of other countries that are here in the US tempaorary for school or work or vacation are not "immigrants. Immigrants are people that wants to immigrate to the US and live here permanently. That is why we don't refer to a citizen of France that is just visiting relatives and freinds in the US for 3 months ... an immigrant.
After the fact you wrote:
"Edit: Just read up the PERM Program and that statement is wrong. It should read ........ Apple prioritizing hiring foreign workers, not immigrants
What did your edit mean? I think you were changing your original understanding, but I can't tell since you sounded like you were wandering a bit.
Anyway, it looks to me that Apple targeted foreign hires, probably some new graduates from overseas universities, by distributing paper applications in specific locations that had to be mailed in. That's why I said "intentional" even if Apple might not have clearly understood the hiring method might be illegal. They do now, and have admitted as much.
I’ve seen a lot of settlement cases and they usually stipulate that the settlement is not an admission of guilt. Can you show me proof that Apple admitted it?
"We have implemented a robust remediation plan to comply with the requirements of various government agencies as we continue to hire American workers and grow in the U.S.," Apple said.
So yeah, Apple now recognizes the process they used is not legal, which is what I said. You were misreading what I wrote.
That statement you quoited is not an admission of guilt. It's an acknowledgment to comply with an order. Those are very different in the eyes of the law. You'll miraculously "understand" when another settlement with Google happens again (wait 5 minutes).
“These less effective recruitment procedures deterred U.S. applicants from applying and nearly always resulted in zero or very few mailed applications that Apple considered for PERM-related job positions, which allowed Apple to fill the positions with temporary visa holders,” according to the settlement agreement between Apple and DOJ."
Certainly does look intentional. Perhaps it was no more than a simple effort to save money by hiring temp visa holders into psuedo-intern positions rather than permanent residents who would have expected better terms/pay.
Once again, you seem to have jumped the gun to criticize Apple. Certainly look intentional. But at least it looks like you're not the only one that misinterpret who is considered an "immigrant".
An "immigrant" as used here by the DoJ is not a person who is in the US on a temp work visa. An "immigrant" is a person living in the US that have not obtain a green card or citizenship, in order to be considered a "permanent resident". The DoJ requires Apple to prioritize hiring US workers that are permanent US residents. Either US citizens or immigrants that have obtained a green card. But Apple seems to have been hiring too many "immigrants" without green cards, not too many nonimmigrants.
People that are citizens of other countries that are here in the US tempaorary for school or work or vacation are not "immigrants. Immigrants are people that wants to immigrate to the US and live here permanently. That is why we don't refer to a citizen of France that is just visiting relatives and freinds in the US for 3 months ... an immigrant.
After the fact you wrote:
"Edit: Just read up the PERM Program and that statement is wrong. It should read ........ Apple prioritizing hiring foreign workers, not immigrants
What did your edit mean? I think you were changing your original understanding, but I can't tell since you sounded like you were wandering a bit.
Anyway, it looks to me that Apple targeted foreign hires, probably some new graduates from overseas universities, by distributing paper applications in specific locations that had to be mailed in. That's why I said "intentional" even if Apple might not have clearly understood the hiring method might be illegal. They do now, and have admitted as much.
I’ve seen a lot of settlement cases and they usually stipulate that the settlement is not an admission of guilt. Can you show me proof that Apple admitted it?
"We have implemented a robust remediation plan to comply with the requirements of various government agencies as we continue to hire American workers and grow in the U.S.," Apple said.
So yeah, Apple now recognizes the process they used is not legal, which is what I said. You were misreading what I wrote.
That statement you quoited is not an admission of guilt. It's an acknowledgment to comply with an order. Those are very different in the eyes of the law. You'll miraculously "understand" when another settlement with Google happens again (wait 5 minutes).
I already understood.
When it's Google they too recognize whatever they were doing was illegal* after the fact, even if they might not have originally. AKA, acknowledging it's illegal to do so again. Just. Like. Apple.
I did not say that Apple (or Google) positively knew going in that whatever they were doing was illegal. But they know it now, and they are "remediating" so it won't happen again. IMO, you're arguing now to avoid admitting you either misread or are overstating what I wrote. Why is that surprising?
*Illegal meaning not in compliance with law or regulation.
Apple basically claims "we didn't intentionally break the long established law" we were supposed to follow. Yeah, right!! It's all about the money, U.S. applicants be damned! From the Reuters article:
Foreign labor can often be cheaper than hiring U.S. workers, and immigrants who rely on their employers for green card sponsorship are seen as less likely to leave for a different job.
Apple should have paid even more than the lousy $25M extracted via the settlement. Let's hope they don't run afoul of the plea deal... oopsie settlement.
The settlementis the largest ever for the Justice Department involving claims of discrimination based on citizenship, the agency said.
What do you mean by "immigrant" v citizen and green card holder. I know many now citizens who are immigrants into the US, and many more that are still "Green Card" holders.
Immigrant versus permanent resident of the United States. Meaning someone who will eventually return to their home country and is working with a Visa rather than a local person with a home and such.
Comments
When it's Google they too recognize whatever they were doing was illegal* after the fact, even if they might not have originally. AKA, acknowledging it's illegal to do so again. Just. Like. Apple.
I did not say that Apple (or Google) positively knew going in that whatever they were doing was illegal. But they know it now, and they are "remediating" so it won't happen again. IMO, you're arguing now to avoid admitting you either misread or are overstating what I wrote. Why is that surprising?
*Illegal meaning not in compliance with law or regulation.
Apple should have paid even more than the lousy $25M extracted via the settlement. Let's hope they don't run afoul of the plea deal... oopsie settlement.