[4death4]

According to TFA, the discrimination happens when Apple doesn’t adequately look for a U.S. employee and instead chooses to to relocate you to the US. How is that not obvious? If Apple is happy to hire you in the UK and you’re happy to live there, the DOJ isn’t going to ask many questions.

[izardak]

This discussion is about EB2/green card process, not L1/H1 visa that employee is given when relocating to the US. That is why it is not obvoius. In a lot of cases, an employee works in UK (or another European) office for many years, then moves to the US on L1A visa, works there for several years, applies to green card (not with intent to stay in US forever, but because L1 visa (and H1 too) cannot be extended for more than 5/6 years). Then to get this EB2/green card document employer has to pretend that they plan to replace this person who is already working in this organization for 10 or more years. It is not specific for Apple, Intel is doing the same when a CPU architect from Haifa or fab engineer from Dublin is working in Hillsboro for several years and decide to stay for a few more years. Or google bringing someone from Zurich.

[4death4]

Yes… and you’re not allowed to do that unless you truly can’t find an American to fill the role.

[chabons]

Right, but the argument that the original comment was making is that the government's policy is incorrect.

My comment argues that independent of government policy, relocating an existing employee from one country to another does not consume a position that was otherwise free, unless the employee was hired expressly for the purpose of relocation.