Use this button to switch between dark and light mode.

W.D. Mo. on H-1B Benching, Illegal Fee Shifting: Greater Mo. Medical Pro-Care Providers, Inc. v. Perez

November 02, 2014 (1 min read)

"This case originated on or about June 23, 2006 when Alena Gay Arat, a therapist from the Philippines, submitted an H-1B complaint against Greater Missouri.  Arat made several allegations, including: Greater Missouri failed to pay her and other  H-1B therapists the wages required under its LCA while they were gaining their licenses; she was required to pay all fees, including attorney’s fees, related to her H-1B visa; she was given work not identified in her contract; and she was threatened with a monetary penalty for ending her employment early. ... The ARB’s Final Decision and Order found Greater Missouri liable for only $123,230.13. R4081-R4082. This total amount was based on the finding that 8 H-1B employees were owed $106,785.85 for benching violations (the ARB reversed the ALJ with regard to 32 H-1B employees, reducing the ALJ’s award for benching violations by $231,256.34); 17 H-1B employees were owed $8,160.00 for illegal deduction of fees; and 4 H-1B employees were owed $8,284.23 for illegal withholding of final paychecks. Id. Greater Missouri initiated this action seeking judicial review of the ARB’s Final Decision and Order. As previously stated, it is undisputed Plaintiff made improper deductions from several H-1B employee paychecks for attorney and LCA fees; did not pay any of its H-1B employees for training time; and withheld final paychecks from certain employees all in violation of the INA. Nonetheless, Plaintiff maintains it should be liable only to Arat, and only in the amount of $690 for deductions for USCIS fees and attorneys’ fees, and $1,964.59 for amounts withheld from her paycheck. Greater Missouri’s pending Motion for Summary Judgment moves the Court to set aside the decision of the ARB as to all employees other than Arat, the original aggrieved complainant. Defendants move for summary judgment upholding the ARB’s Final Decision and Order. ... the Court denies Plaintiff’s Motion for Summary Judgment (Doc. No. 16) and grants Defendants’ Motion for Summary Judgment (Doc. No. 18)." - Greater Mo. Medical Pro-Care Providers, Inc. v. Perez, Oct. 24, 2014.