Anyone qualified with a temp to hire position?
 

Wondering if anyone has qualified as a sponsor with a temp to hire job. My husband just started his, but has already worked at the company for 5 months as a regular temp. My interview should come up shortly, so there's no chance he'll be taken on as a permanent before then.

Thanks.

Re: Anyone qualified with a temp to hire position?
 

I think it's shaky.

You might want to review 9 FAM 40.41 Notes, N5.5 The employer's letter should describe the nature of the employment, which in your husband's case could be described as probationary.

Regards, JEff

Re: Anyone qualified with a temp to hire position?
 

Even if he's very likely to continue indefinitely? No one ever gets the boot there, there are even people who's been temp (not temp to hire) for years.

I'll check into that resource, though I probably won't understand much.

Re: Anyone qualified with a temp to hire position?
 

I couldn't find any information in that paragraph pertaining to what type of employment qualifies.

And before I give up on it altogether, can anyone explain why it's shaky? I understand a job should be 'permanent with likely prospects to continue', and to me it sounds like the 'prospects to continue' is more important than that it's officially permanent. Whenever I got a job in the US, it always looked so easy on the contract to be let go of, even on a permanent basis.

Re: Anyone qualified with a temp to hire position?
 

It's a bit shakey only because he's still in what the company calls a probation period (i.e., easier to be let go during this time than after the probation period?).

If the employer can write a letter stating that his employment is full time, what his yearly salary is, and that it's likely to continue, that should be fine. The employer does not have to write that it's a probation period.

Rene

Re: Anyone qualified with a temp to hire position?
 

True, there is no such guidance. I was pointing you there for the paragraph that mentions what information a letter from an employer should contain.

The only definitive anwer you are going to get to your question is the one that will come from the consular officer who handles your husband's visa application. As Rene wrote, an employer's letter that says the position is permanent will be stronger than a letter that says the position is temp-to-permanent, which in turn will be stronger than a letter that says the position is temporary. (It's unlikely that an employer will use the word "permanent" these days, but there are other words or phrases that can be used that will carry the same meaning for immigration purposes.) A temporary position is highly unlikely to be acceptable, a temp-to-perm position is, as I've already written, shaky. Even a 'permanent' position can bee deemed unacceptable if the person has only been in the position for a short time.

You say that "No one ever gets the boot there, there are even people who's been temp (not temp to hire) for years." Tell this to a consular officer and the response will either be 'yeah, right' or 'document that and I'll consider it'. Your say-so will not cut it.

Regards, JEff

Re: Anyone qualified with a temp to hire position?
 

No, I wasn't planning on telling the consular officer that:). Just giving some background, thinking what they may be able to put down in a letter. I'll ask him if he can get a letter from the company as well, besides the staffing agency which is still his employer.

Last time around, all he did was send some payslips from a minimum paying job he had had for a couple months and everything was fine:). I hope the other two tax returns will count, he's always been able to support us, while we were living in the US before.

Thanks again.

Re: Anyone qualified with a temp to hire position?
 

So wait...he isn't actually employed by the company yet? He's still under the employment of the temp/staffing agency?

I guess get whatever he can together that puts him to the greatest advantage, but I'm not sure the company will write anything for him yet, since he's not actually employed by them yet.

Rene

Re: Anyone qualified with a temp to hire position?
 

I thought the sponsor was required for the purpose of mitigating the potential public burden?

Is the employment history/current situation/possible future situation relevant?

Recent earnings is the pertinent info, is it not?

Re: Anyone qualified with a temp to hire position?
 

Correct.

Yes.

Not "recent earnings", but "current earnings".

ene

Re: Anyone qualified with a temp to hire position?
 

The current situation is very relevant.

Employment history is relevant to the extent that it indicates that the current situation is sustainable, or shows that the current situation may not be sustainable.

Possible future situation is meaningless.Current earnings, as documented by the most recent income tax return.

Or, if the current situation as changed since the most recent income tax return, as documented by recent pay statements and letter from the employer, or by documentation evidencing self-employment income.Regards, JEff

Re: Anyone qualified with a temp to hire position?
 

I'll start off by saying I don't know - however, california is an "at will" state, meaning that any employment can be terminated at any time by either party without any notice period.

I don't know about your state, but I suspect that if immigration can use a supporter from California, who could be terminated any moment from a job that may have been held for years, they wouldn't or couldn't not accept a temp job.

Re: Anyone qualified with a temp to hire position?
 

State employment law is not a consideration.

Regards, JEff

Re: Anyone qualified with a temp to hire position?
 

Did you understand my point? The federal government accepts sponsorship from all over the country, where jobs have no guarantee of permanency, regardless of if it's status as a permanent job. A perm job doesn't mean a thing.

Re: Anyone qualified with a temp to hire position?
 

That was my point too. I'm assuming that MN is an at will state too, though I hadn't heard of that before. Just know that any permanent job I've ever had there has carried no guarantee whatsoever. People can be let go for any or no reason, with a two week notice. Compare that to Swedish laws! The only difference between a permanent and temporary job is that the latter comes with no benefits.

Ok, so the letter he received today says this about the nature of the job: 'in a temp to hire position, meaning he will be hired on by X company'. It doesn't say 'may be' so perhaps this looks good?

Another option is holding off with our RFE until he may get taken on by the company in hopefully 2 months from now. Though, it all depends on whether there's an opening at that time. Work performance requirements are pretty easy though. He's going to ask the company to write a letter describing the terms.

He could get a full-time permanent job easily I think, but not at the pay he's currently receiving.