Skip to main content

Liable for Back Wages After Termination of H1B employee? Maybe Not Anymore!

By Anna Erwin, Associate Attorney

Has your employment been terminated while under H-1B status or have you terminated an H-1B employee? The standards under immigration law for what a previous H-1B employee can receive in back wages after termination are now significantly affected by whether the employee obtains subsequent employment after termination.

H-1B status is of particular benefit to foreign national employees in the U.S. because they can transfer their status to a new employer. An H-1B transfer employee also benefits the employer because that transferred employee does not count against the H-1B visa cap for that year. But if the employer/employee relationship is terminated during the employee's H-1B status, both sides must be aware of back wage eligibility or liability.

The Basis for Back Wage Liability

In Amtel Group v. Florida, Inc., the Administrative Review Board found that for an employer to avoid liability after the termination of an H-1B employee, the employer must: 1) expressly notify the H-1B employee of the termination; 2) notify USCIS that the employment relationship has been terminated so that the I-129 is cancelled; and 3) pay for the H-1B employee’s transportation home. If the employer does not follow these steps, it can be held liable for back wages to the employee, possibly throughout the duration of the employee's H-1B status.

However, a recent case, Batyrbekov v. Barclays Capital, held that employers are not liable for back wages when the employee successfully transfers his H-1B status to a new employer, even when the requirements of Amtel are not met.

In this case, the employee, Batyrbekov, was terminated by Barclays Capital. Barclays notified Batyrbekov of his termination but neglected to notify USCIS of the termination. Barclays also did not initially pay for Batyrbekov’s travel to his home country, but rather reimbursed him several months after he left the country.

Batyrbekov initiated his case to collect back wages, eight months after the termination, because Barclays did not follow the Amtel requirements for termination. Since Barclays did not follow the requirements, Batyrbekov thought he was going to get his back wages.

However, after Batrybekov was terminated, he transferred his employment under his H-1B status to another employer. This subsequent job fell through after Batyrbekov transferred, and Batyrbekov left the United States.

Impact for Both Employers and Employees

The Administrative Review Board found that, although Barclays did not follow the Amtel requirements, and Batyrbekov's subsequent employment to which he transferred fell through, Barclays was not liable for back wages. The ARB stated that when an H-1B employee is terminated but successfully transfers his H-1B status to another employee, the original employer's back wage liability ends once USCIS approves the change in the H-1B's employer.

The only requirement on behalf of the original employer is that the employee be expressly notified of termination. The other Amtel requirements do not have to be met to avoid back wage liability when the employee successfully transfers his H-1B to another employer.

The Batrybekov case is significant for employees and employers:

·         Employees whose termination does not meet the Amtel requirements who are offered other employment will want to be absolutely sure that the new job is stable before transferring status. Otherwise of claim on back wages may not be upheld.
·         Employers will want to investigate a past employee's subsequent employment if asked to pay back wages to ensure the legitimacy of the claim.

If you are an H-1B who has been terminated or an employer who has terminated an H-1B contact our immigration team to discuss your legal liabilities or options. 


Comments

Popular posts from this blog

If You Are An Immigrant (even a US Citizen), Here Are 9 Things You Should Know

Are you a Naturalized U.S. Citizen, Lawful Permanent Resident, Visa Holder, or an Undocumented Immigrant? We recommend you take the following steps to protect yourself in our current version of America. The last couple of weeks have reminded immigrants, even naturalized U.S. citizens, that they were not born in the United States. Our office has received countless phone calls, emails, and social media messages from people worrying about what their family’s future in the United States holds. Most people want to know what they can do now to protect themselves from what promises to be a wave of anti-immigration activity by the federal government. Trump's Executive Order on Interior Enforcement has some provisions that should make most Americans shiver.  We recommend the following actions for each of the following groups: Naturalized U.S. citizens. In particular if you have a foreign accent, and you are traveling within 100 miles of any US Border (including the oceans...

Seven Reasons Why the Georgia Legislature Should Repeal HB-87

Recently the Alabama Attorney General called on the Alabama State Legislature to repeal parts of Alabama's horrid anti-immigration law ( HB 56), because of the "unintended" consequences of the bill (frankly, what happened was not unintended). Because of the similarity between the two laws, Georgia's Speaker of the House, David Ralston was asked whether Georgia Legislature would repeal part or all of HB 87, Georgia own anti-immigration law. HB 87 has caused almost a half a billion dollars in damage to the Georgia economy (along with untold suffering in Georgia's immigrant communities) without any noted or reported positive effect. Speaker Ralston plainly stated that the Georgia Legislature would NOT do anything to repeal HB 87 . While it understandable why a politician would not admit that a pet bill he shepherded and pushed through the state legislature was simply bad law, it is also clear that Speaker Ralston is facing a challenge on his RIGHT in th...

Why is USCIS Taking So Long to Renew DACA Work Permits?

If the calls to our office are any indicator, there are thousands of DACA recipients whose work permit applications were filed at least three months prior to expiration, who are still waiting for their renewed work permits.  Without renewed permits, these individuals lose the right to work legally, the right to drive, and may once again accrue unlawful presence. The DHS published a notice in October 2014 advising DACA recipients that they could file their request for extension up to 150 days (5 months) prior to expiration.  As with all things government, very few of the DACA recipients, who tend not to frequent government websites, knew about the memo and many did not file so far before expiration perhaps thinking that extending a work permit was a like extending a drivers license, its is done in a few minutes.  As an experienced immigration lawyer will tell you, the USCIS does nothing quickly, and certainly does not worry that a person may lose their job or their drive...