The Tech Recruitment Ruse That Has Avoided Trump's Crackdown on Immigration

An investigation into how PERM recruitment shielded tech hiring

A ProPublica investigation reports that major tech employers have used narrow, paper-heavy hiring procedures in the PERM labor certification process to steer jobs to existing foreign workers, even as the Trump administration cracked down on H‑1B visas. The tactic centers on how companies “test” the U.S. labor market before sponsoring a green card: placing hard‑to‑find or mail‑only ads that allegedly deter U.S. applicants, preserving the role for a preselected H‑1B employee. While H‑1B adjudications saw skyrocketing requests for evidence and higher denial rates under the “Buy American and Hire American” agenda, this quieter backdoor—PERM—continued largely untouched.

How the system works—and where it’s vulnerable

PERM (Program Electronic Review Management) is run by the U.S. Department of Labor (DOL) and is the first step for most employment‑based green cards in the EB‑2 and EB‑3 categories. Employers must prove there are no qualified, willing, and available U.S. workers for the role after good‑faith recruitment. USCIS (U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services) only gets involved later, at the I‑140 immigrant petition stage. It has been reported that some employers exploit the gap between paper rules and real‑world practice—posting Sunday newspaper ads rather than online listings, requiring mailed resumes to P.O. boxes, or tailoring job requirements—so they can lawfully certify there were “no qualified U.S. workers” even when interest existed.

Enforcement has lagged, but notable cases signal risk

Trump‑era scrutiny targeted nonimmigrant visas like H‑1B rather than DOL’s labor certifications, and PERM audits remain limited relative to volume. However, federal discrimination enforcement has begun to catch up. In 2021, the U.S. Department of Justice settled with Facebook for $14.25 million over allegations it reserved PERM positions for temporary visa holders by using mail‑only applications and minimal advertising. In 2023, Apple agreed to a $25 million settlement after DOJ alleged it imposed paper‑based, email‑free applications for PERM roles, diverging from its standard hiring channels. Both companies denied wrongdoing but committed to reforming recruitment. These cases underscore that PERM recruitment that deviates from normal corporate practices can trigger liability under the anti‑discrimination rules of the Immigration and Nationality Act.

What this means if you’re in the process now

For foreign workers, the PERM pathway remains viable—and crucial for extending H‑1B status beyond six years under AC21—yet it depends on your employer’s willingness to run compliant, genuine recruitment and absorb months‑long processing (audits can add many more). Even with PERM and I‑140 approval, severe visa backlogs persist for India and China, delaying final green card stages for years. For U.S. workers, if you encounter a PERM ad with unusual barriers (mail‑only, no online applications, or atypical requirements), you can still apply and document the process; suspected discrimination can be reported to DOJ’s Immigrant and Employee Rights Section. The headline takeaway: while H‑1B scrutiny tightened under Trump, PERM remained a powerful—if sometimes misused—channel, and the real risk today lies in compliance lapses that can derail cases and invite enforcement.