The U.S. Department of Labor is auditing all the permanent labor certification applications filed by Cisco's immigration law attorneys at Fragomen - Del Rey - Bernsen & Loewy LLP.
The purpose of the audit is to determine whether the nation's largest immigration law firm improperly instructed clients to contact Fragomen before hiring apparently qualified U.S. workers.
Such activity would be considered improper attorney involvement in the consideration of U.S. worker applicants.
U.S. Department of Labor regulations specifically prohibit an employer's immigration attorney or agent from participating in considering the qualifications of U.S. workers who apply for positions for which certification is sought, unless the attorney is normally involved in the employer's routine hiring process.
 "The department's decision to further investigate these applications will help ensure the integrity of the permanent labor certification process and ultimately protect job opportunities for American workers," said Gregory F. Jacob - Solicitor of Labor for the U.S. Department of Labor. |
"The department takes seriously its responsibility to ensure that American workers have access to jobs they are qualified and willing to do and that their wages and working conditions are not adversely affected by the hiring of foreign workers."
The American Immigration Lawyers Association immediately went on the offensive in support of Cisco's immigration law firm - Fragomen - Del Rey - Bernsen & Loewy LLP, by chastising the Department of Labor's use of conclusory statements in its press release.
View Department of Labor Q&A on Fragomen Audit
(2) What incident/incidents prompted this audit?
The Department identified information indicating that in at least some cases the firm may have improperly instructed clients who filed permanent labor certification applications to contact their attorney before hiring apparently qualified U.S. workers.
Specifically, several recruitment forms drafted by some Fragomen attorneys instructed their clients that:
| "After interview, should any of the applicants appear to be qualified for the position, please contact a Fragomen attorney immediately to further discuss the candidate’s background as it relates to the requirements stated for said position," or some variation thereof. |
View the CNN Lou Dobbs video of the above Labor Department audit:
At the 1:38 time point in the above CNN video, network engineer David Huber is interviewed about his response to a Chicago newspaper employment advertisement.
According to an email message from Norm Matloff - professor of computer science at the University of California - Davis, the unidentified software company/high tech internet company whose ad in the Chicago newspaper David Huber responded to in the above video, was in actuality an ad that was placed by Fragomen's immigration law client, Cisco Systems.
Cisco ad that appeared in the Chicago Tribune:
View explanation of the Cisco ad above that appeared in the Chicago Tribune.
Note: Neither Megan Clarke at Fragomen's Santa Clara, CA office nor Cisco itself responded to telephone inquiries by yours truly for comment.
Update: July 8th, 2008
|
Fragomen Statement And Letter From Ad Agency (appeared online in the Immigration Daily ILW.com) |
Letter from Miller Advertising Agency
FRAGOMEN STATEMENT CONCERNING DAVID HUBER'S ALLEGATIONS
David Huber is a committed opponent of immigration.
A year before he ever responded to the advertisement in question, he testified in Congress against permitting foreign workers in the U.S.
These are the accurate facts concerning the ad he has publicly described having responded to:
The ad Mr. Huber responded to directed him to send his resume to the employer at the employer's street address.
It did not refer to Fragomen or direct resumes to Fragomen.
The name "M.E. Clarke" -- who is a Fragomen employee -- was used temporarily by the employer's mailroom to identify a mailstop at the employer's request.
There was no indication in the ad of any connection between M.E. Clarke and Fragomen.
M.E. Clarke provided clerical support to the employer's H.R. function, including collecting resumes to ensure that they would be properly and promptly distributed to the appropriate hiring managers for evaluation.
Neither M.E. Clarke nor any other Fragomen employee reviewed or evaluated the resumes received to assess the applicants' credentials.
No interview was conducted by any Fragomen employee.
No hiring decision was made by any Fragomen employee.
Mr. Huber's resume was evaluated solely by the employer, and the employer determined Mr. Huber was not qualified for the job.
At the 0:50 time point in the below video learn more about the Cisco job ad:
Professor Norm Matloff describes the Cisco ad:
| Now, I urge everyone to see another video (the one directly above), this one by journalist Sue Kwon at the CBS affiliate in San Francisco, there you'll see unemployed programmer David Huber, telling the viewing audience exactly what happened when he applied for a job at Cisco Systems. |
Turned out that the contact person stated in the Chicago Tribune ad was a lawyer with...Fragomen, Del Rey, Bernsen & Loewy, LLP.
Programmer Pete Bennett is also featured.
Dave Huber has given me some details on his adventure with Cisco and Fragomen, permitting me to share here:
Regarding speaking with [Fragomen's] Megan Clarke:
If you recall, I saw the ad on Sunday, June 3, 2007.
On Monday morning, June 4, 2007, I called Cisco's HQ in San Jose and spoke with a random operator.
I confirmed that the person I was talking to was working at Cisco in San Jose.
I asked the operator something to the effect I was trying to contact a M E Clarke.
The operator said Clarke didn't work at Cisco, but that there was a Megan Clarke, who worked at Fragomen.
I had never heard of Fragomen.
(And, of course, I didn't even know about the C&G [Cohen & Grigsby] seminar.)
So I googled Fragomen and found out it was an immigration law firm.
I'm getting more curious now, so I decided to contact the closest Fragomen office to San Jose.
This office happened to be in Santa Clara.
I called the Santa Clara Fragomen office, and actually spoke with a Megan Clarke.
I asked her about the ad I saw.
I confirmed through my brief conversation with her, that she was the M E Clarke in the Cisco ad.
At first, she seemed open, and somewhat willing to answer my questions about the ad.
After about 2-3 minutes, I heard a sense of nervousness in Ms. Clarke's voice, and she sort of ended the conversation by saying I should just respond to the ad.
My recollection of this was that I was even more perplexed, thinking that something just wasn't right: the newspaper ad; the immigration law firm referenced in ad.
Well, I think the mystery was solved for me when I saw that C & G video.
After about almost a month (end of June), I decided, just for grins, to respond to the Cisco newspaper ad.
I sent my resume, via registered mail, to the Cisco address in the ad.
I did get an eventual response from Cisco, which I think was a result of this specific ad I responded to with registered mail.
An Indian contracting firm contacted me about a job at Cisco in San Jose, paying the princely sum of about $30 or $35/hour.
This compensation was/is a joke, needless to say.
View Professor Norm Matloff's email message in its entirety.
View an updated email message from Professor Matloff.
Once more, the U.S. Department of Labor specifically states:
Where an employer does not normally involve immigration attorneys in its hiring process, there is no legitimate reason to consult with immigration attorneys before hiring apparently qualified U.S. workers who have responded to recruitment required by the permanent labor certification program.
Resources:
View letter from the Miller Advertising Agency explaining to Fragomen why the law firm has been appearing on the employment ads of Fragomen immigration law clients.
U.S. Department of Labor press release as well as Q&A on Fragomen audit.
View the American Immigration Lawyers Association Complaint Letter chastising the Department of Labor's use of conclusory statements in its press release and Q&A.
Pay special attention to Page 2, 2nd Paragraph, Last Sentence of the AILA letter:
"This was a tacit acknowledgement of the role of the attorney in advising employers regarding what elements on those resumes they could or could not take into account when considering applicants."
In the opinion of yours truly, the American Immigration Lawyers Association admits in the above statement, that a client could use the services of a knowledgeable immigration law firm to meet the letter of the law, while intentionally pushing away qualified U.S. workers in favor of non-U.S. workers when hiring skilled positions.
Why do YOU think Cisco's immigration law attorneys were the contact for this Chicago newspaper ad, which according to the Department of Labor would be improper attorney involvement?
Buy your Cisco Refurbished from me:
http://www.bradreese.com/refurbished.htm
Search 60,082 current Cisco Job openings worldwide!
Advertisement: |
Brad Reese cofounded BradReese.Com Cisco Refurbished which offers one year warranties on Cisco Refurbished and Cisco Repair.
The Leader in Network Knowledge
Not quite the full story...as usual
Brad is Cisco Bashing again...you can read a real journalists article on this subject here:
http://www.usatoday.com/news/washington/2008-06-24-immigration-firm_N.htm
However Brad would have you think that this is a puppet organization for Cisco...meanwhile this happens to be the largest immigration law firm in the US. An excerpt that lists some of their clients:
"Fragomen's prestigious client roster includes General Electric Co., IBM Corp., Cisco Systems Inc., Intel Corp. and Bank of America Corp., according to company publications and trade journals. The firm also represents The Associated Press on immigration issues."
That Brad...still pissed because he got his hand slapped by Cisco.
Big law firm= instant credibility
Brad,
How are we to believe that a huge professional company with an impressive client roster ever do anything improper? cough, Anderson Consulting, cough. I mean come on, just because the Department of Labor sent out a memo that said that they would audit every case that the Fragomen firm files doesn't mean that there was any wrong doing.
I think the point of the article is not that Fragomen is a puppet for Cisco, but rather Fragomen is instituting policies that break laws and displace US workers. Do you think that they havent instituted those policies at IBM, Intel, or GE? Do you really think it is isolated to Cisco? Next time, try to read the article before slapping down the author.
Thank you
Hi Anonymous_One,
Thank you for documenting with the USA Today article, that Cisco is indeed a client of Fragomen, Del Rey, Bernsen & Loewy LLP, the immigration law firm being audited for improper behavior by the U.S. Department of Labor.
Regarding your puppet reference, yours truly thinks that you may in fact have it the wrong way around.
Once more Anonymous_One, thank you for documenting that Cisco is indeed a Fragomen client.
Sincerely and most gratefully yours,
Brad Reese
http://www.BradReese.Com
Your Welcome...
Brad,
You are WELCOME.
But I think you missed the POINT.
It is quite clear that YOU are implying that Cisco masterminded some international immigration scheme. When it is CLEAR that the government is targeting a top LAWFIRM'S ACTIONS and not the actions if any particular client of that LAWFIRM.
I hope I have used enough bold and italics to allow you to comprehend the message this time.
Anonymous_One
Letter of the law
Are you saying that YOU think it is O.K. for a Fragomen immigration law client to intentionally push away qualified U.S. workers in favor of non-U.S. workers when hiring skilled positions, as long as the letter of the law is followed?
Sincerely,
Brad Reese
http://www.BradReese.Com
Deflection Denied
Brad,
There are no references to me supporting this action anywhere in any of my replies. Actually as an American IT worker, I am appalled by these actions, but I don't think it is Cisco, GE, Bank of America, the associated press or IBM is masterminding this scheme. I think it is as usual greedy, slimy lawyers that get paid for every person they get hired.
However you are trying to deflect from the point of my posting, which is to point out that you seem to be on a personal mission to slander Cisco every chance you get. I believe this comes from the fact that they slapped you down publicly, and to rub salt into the wound, they made you retract your story here on Network World.
GET OVER IT YOU BABY. You make enough money selling Cisco gear and placing Cisco talent. Try helping the Network World community rather than biting the hand that feeds you. Otherwise, I hope Cisco really comes after you. People that live in glass houses shouldn't throw stones.
Cisco shareholders
Appreciate your viewpoint, but disagree with it!
Yours truly stated on May 8th, 2008 that Cisco shareholders should be very concerned:
http://www.networkworld.com/community/node/27608#comment-181577
The Cisco stock price chart as of today: July 3rd, 2008:
http://finance.yahoo.com/q/bc?s=CSCO&t=2y&l=on&z=l&q=l&c=
Certainly appears to indicate that my warning had merit.
Yours truly apologized to Cisco that I could not prove channel stuffing, however, yours truly did not retract my interpretation of their financial numbers as being a "red flag."
http://www.networkworld.com/community/node/27608
Once more, yours truly points to the decline of the Cisco stock price as an indicator that my warning appears to have had merit.
As far as slandering Cisco, they have refused my invitation to comment on this immigration law story.
However, you are correct that when yours truly has an idea for a Cisco story, it will be pursued.
So far you have mentioned stories that you don't like, have you ever liked a story by yours truly, and if so which one(s)?
Thank you,
Brad Reese
http://www.BradReese.Com
Channel Stuffing
While this is a little off topic, I do disagree with the comment about the declining stock price. I may be missing your point - it sounds like you believe that the Cisco stock price is trending downward because of channel stuffing:
This is a graph comparing 2 year performance of CSCO vs NASDAQ composite (http://tinyurl.com/6xswlb).
They definitely seem to follow the same trend. I don't think it's a coincidence, and I don't think it is due to channel stuffing.
Appreciate the flattery
Yours truly will not be taking credit for moving the S&P, Nasdaq or even the Dow index, but do appreciate the flattery!
Anytime in one quarter, Cisco gets a Net Sales decline of $619 million and a simultaneous Accounts Receivable increase of $687 million compared year-over-year, Cisco shareholders need to be concerned.
Again, the price decline in Cisco shares appears to echo my above statement.
Sincerely,
Brad Reese
http://www.BradReese.Com
Dear Mr. Reese
Yours truly received the following email message regarding this story:
-------------------
Dear Mr. Reese,
Re: "Cisco's immigration law firm audited for improper behavior by U.S. Department of Labor"
Let the chips fall.
Let the whiners on your blog whine all they want.
Cisco and their ilk who put profits above all will have their day in court where the whiners can "reason" to their hearts content.
Whiners like some on your blog are a waste of time.
There is no end to individuals that will argue that black is white and white is black.
They have been around for ages and will always be.
Just turn your TV set on and you will see them.
They are all over the place.
Regards,
PS: It is just not the engineering talent that is being offshored.
How about the manufacturing jobs of hard working Americans that Cisco and corporate America are offshoring?
Don't they count?
Where is the equity for them?
Where is the justice for them?
-------------------
Sincerely,
Brad Reese
http://www.BradReese.Com