Labor Department pauses PERM green-card processing at 8 companies

PERM is an early labor-certification step in some employer-sponsored green-card cases. Employers use it to show that hiring a foreign worker will not harm U.S. workers’ wages or jobs. H-1B visas are temporary work visas; the pause targets PERM, not the H-1B program itself, as the distinction between the two processes makes clear.

For a worker with a pending PERM application, the pause interrupts a process tied to long-term plans. Immigration lawyer Lidice Samper told TIME that workers nearing the typical six-year H-1B limit without an earlier green-card filing faced the greatest risk from the delay. That does not describe every worker at the affected companies, but it points to how an administrative decision can shape whether people feel able to change jobs or negotiate for better pay.

The pressure is not only on the employee. When a company sponsors a worker’s path to permanent residency, the company’s decisions affect that worker’s options. The government’s pause adds another force outside the worker’s control.

Fraud claims deserve scrutiny, not a verdict in advance

Vice President JD Vance argued that the affected companies abused immigration programs and displaced U.S. workers. To make his case about Microsoft, he pointed to 6,000 layoffs, nearly 3,000 green cards and 6,300 H-1B visas. Those totals are Vance’s figures; they are not a finding that a particular visa holder replaced a particular laid-off worker.

Microsoft offered a different account of its filings. It said 80% of its H-1B applications in the prior fiscal year involved extensions or changes of status for current employees. The company said its filings for new employees equaled 1% of its U.S. workforce, and that those workers were already legally in the country. Microsoft also said it pays H-1B employees the same as other workers in comparable roles, TIME reported.

That response does not exempt a large employer from scrutiny. The government has a legitimate role in enforcing labor and immigration rules, and U.S. workers deserve protection from unlawful practices. But an accusation is not a finding of fraud. If the administration’s case is strong, it should identify the conduct at issue and hold responsible decision-makers accountable without treating workers’ immigration pathways as a substitute for that accountability.

The administration also announced investigations into nine universities over alleged misuse of J-1 exchange visas. The visas cover temporary programs involving study, teaching and research; the investigations have not changed J-1 eligibility. The probes extend the same policy tension beyond tech employers: government scrutiny can create uncertainty for people whose work, study or research depends on an immigration program, even as the inquiry proceeds.

Sponsorship should come with worker protections

Companies that rely on workers with temporary immigration status should not leave those workers to absorb every consequence when sponsorship changes or a federal investigation interrupts a process. Employers should give prompt notice about sponsorship decisions, provide access to independent immigration counsel and explain what happens to a pending application when a job or filing is affected. These are proposed protections, not rules already in place.

The administration should also disclose the basis for each suspension and set a public schedule for review, while protecting workers’ private information. That would let the public assess the fraud rationale and give affected workers a clearer sense of what comes next.

Congress should consider legislation requiring stronger employer duties and a fair process for workers whose cases are caught in enforcement actions. It should guarantee affected employees access to independent legal advice and a way to preserve or transfer their cases while investigations proceed. Employers and the government may control the filings, but workers should not be left to carry the risk alone.