Improving Wage Protections for the Temporary and Permanent Employment of Certain Foreign Nationals in the United States

The Federation for American Immigration Reform (FAIR) supports the proposed rule to increase prevailing wage levels for H-1B and other foreign workers to prevent wage suppression and the displacement of U.S. workers. They also advocate for additional reforms, including eliminating the Optional Practical Training (OPT) program and monitoring other visa categories to prevent them from being used as H-1B substitutes.

The International Brotherhood of Teamsters supports the proposed rule to reform prevailing wage calculations for H-1B, H-1B1, and E-3 visa programs. They specifically advocate for the adoption of "Experience Benchmarking" to prevent employers from engaging in wage arbitrage by understating job requirements and paying foreign workers less than similarly qualified Americans.

The Economic Policy Institute (EPI) supports the Department of Labor's proposed rule to increase wage percentiles for H-1B, H-1B1, and E-3 visas, as it improves upon the status quo for protecting U.S. workers. However, they argue the proposal should go further by setting the Level I wage at the 50th percentile (median wage) and rejecting the "experience benchmarking" alternative, which they claim would lead to lower wages and potential age discrimination.

The commenter supports the proposed rule to increase prevailing wage requirements for various visa programs, including H-1B and PERM. They argue that many visa holders lack high-level skills and use deceptive practices to obtain employment, and that higher wages will encourage companies to hire more qualified American workers.

Brown Immigration Law P.C., L.L.O., a professional services firm providing business immigration support, opposes the proposed rule because it sets wage levels that do not align with market forces and will create significant financial burdens for employers. They argue that the higher wage thresholds will price out smaller organizations, such as nonprofits and schools, and will not effectively raise wages for U.S. workers.

Luke Farley, the Commissioner of Labor for the State of North Carolina, supports the proposed rule to reduce incentives for hiring H-1B foreign visa workers. He argues that current loopholes allow employers to depress wages and bypass qualified American workers, and he advocates for requiring wages that reflect true market rates.

Stephanie Howaniec of Clark Hill opposes the proposed wage level increases for foreign workers, arguing that the rule will create significant wage discrepancies between foreign and domestic workers. She contends that existing regulations are sufficient and that the proposed changes will be catastrophic for both employers and US workers.

The Attorneys General of Indiana, Alaska, Arkansas, Idaho, Kansas, Louisiana, Mississippi, Montana, Nebraska, North Dakota, Oklahoma, South Carolina, and South Dakota support the proposed rule to increase prevailing wage levels for H-1B, H-1B1, E-3, and PERM programs. They argue that the current wage levels are too low, leading to the displacement of American workers by low-cost foreign labor and creating national security risks. They also contend that the existing wage methodology is legally deficient and arbitrary under the Administrative Procedure Act.

The commenter opposes the proposed rule, arguing that the Department's analysis of wage suppression is based on a flawed "apple-to-apple" comparison between less experienced foreign workers and more experienced U.S. workers. They further contend that the rule is not narrowly tailored, as the Department could simply exclude specific occupations with lower educational requirements rather than restructuring the entire prevailing wage framework.