On December 14, 2020, another district court ruled against the U.S. Department of Labor’s (DOL) Strengthening Wage Protections for the Temporary and Permanent Employment of Certain Aliens in the United States interim final rule (“Wage Rule”), issued on October 8, 2020, that changed the prevailing wage methodology for the Permanent Employment Certification, H-1B, H-1B1, and E-3 visa programs.
The court found that the interim-final-rule was poorly-drafted, improperly-issued and did not comply with the procedural requirements for rule-making and was substantively arbitrary, incorrect, and irrational. In the decision, the court noted that, “DOL did not sufficiently justify its prediction that advance notice-and-comment procedures would have been contrary to the public interest.” In addition, the court ordered DOL to reissue prevailing wage determinations that were issued under the Wage Rule.
This lawsuit (Purdue University, et al., v. Scalia, et al., 12/14/2020) was brought by 17 individual and organizational plaintiffs, institutions of higher education, nonprofit organizations, and businesses, including Purdue University, the University of Michigan and Indiana University amongst others.
Last week, another district court issued a limited injunction against DOL’s implementation of its Wage Rule, but this decision was limited to the small group of plaintiffs. (ITServe Alliance, Inc., et al. v. Scalia, et al., 12/3/20)
These cases follow on the heels of the District Court of Northern California’s decision in Chamber of Commerce, et al., v. DHS, et al. (12/1/20), resulting in DOL’s rollback of its Wage Rule on December 3, 2020 and the U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services’ (USCIS) similar withdrawal of its draconian H-1B rules. However, the decision in this case went beyond the previous lawsuits by ordering DOL to reissue any prevailing wage determinations issued on or after October 8, 2020 under the “new” wage methodology.
