MARCOUX

                                                     Interim Decision #1892




                            MAT= or MArccoux
                       In Deportation Proceedings
                                  A-17618499
                   Decided by Board August 16,1968
In the absence of fraud, an alien who entered the United States as an immigrant
  based on a labor certification for employment as a trainee weaver of woven
 goods but who because of dissatisfaction with working conditions and low
 wages left such certified employment after 5 days and thereafter obtained
 non•related employment as a fiber glass repairer for which he did not have
 a labor certification, is not deportable for lack of a valid labor certification at
 entry. [Matter of Tucker, Int. Dec. No. 1758, distinguished.]
CHARGE:
  Order: Act of 1952—Section 241(a) (1) [8 U.S.C. 1251(a) (1))—Exclndable at
                      entry—not in possession of valid labor certification.
ON BEHALF or SERVICE: R. A. Vielhaber
                        Appellate Trial Attorney


  The special inquiry officer terminated proceedings and certified his
order. We will make no change in his order.
  Respondent, a 32-year-old married male, a native and citizen of
Canada, was admitted to the United States for permanent residence
on November 29, 1967. In Canada, he had been a truck and taxi driver
for three years. He had a labor certification issued to him because he          -


was coming to Maine for employment as a trainee weaver of woven
goods. He was to be paid about $1.65 an hour. He began this employment the day after his entry.
  Respondent was unhappy in his job which required him to sit at a
bench and make five knots every 30 seconds for eight hours a day. He
planned to ask for a transfer. In fact, he was put elsewhere but liked
this even less. A few days after he began to . work, he heard that in
Connecticut work was available at $2.50 an hour. On December 9, 1967,
he went to Hartford, Connecticut, where on about December 13, 1967,
he applied for a job with the Kaman Aircraft Corporation. On December 18, 1967 he started to work for them repairing fiber glass—a job
he did not consider a skilled one. He did not have a labor certification
for the second job. •


     321-054-69--84                    827
  Interim Decision #1802
      Respondent testified that lie entered the United States with the intention of working for the woven goods manufacturer (Ex. 3,.p. 2),
   that he had contact with no other employer before he came to the
   United States (p. 12), that he used his own money to come, that he
   came willing to work and earn a living, and that he did not see that he
   had done anything wrong.
      The special inquiry officer terminated proceedings finding that
   respondent entered the United States in good faith to take employment
   with the woven goods manufacturer, that he had left because he had
   found working conditions unsatisfactory and wages low, and that
   while he did not have a labor, certification for the second employment,
   there was an obvious need foihii services.
      At oral argument, the Appellate Trial Attorney contended that if
  one comes to take certified employment with which he becomes dissatisfied, he should leave the United States and seek a new certification
  because his entrance was conditioned upon his working for a particular
  United States employer. He.contended that the putpeSe of the law is
  to permit selected people to enter for jobs which cannot be filled by
  labor in the United States, and that only by requiring the departure of
  the person who did.not:give the job a reasonable trial can the purpose
  of the law be achieved. The Appellate Trial Attorney believes that the
  respondent did not give the first job a reasonable trial since he only
  worked five days, had no previous experience on the job and had been
 hired to learn the job. The Appellate Trial Attorney draws an analogy,
 between the instant case and that of a person the Board found deportable because he hack taken a job other than the one for whibh he
 had a. certification. He also stated that an informal inquiry at the
 United States Department of Labor in Boston, Massachusetts, revealed that respondent's job was not one for which a labor certification
 would be issued because it required no particular speetalized Skill or
 experience and was essentially an apprenticeship.
     We believe that the, decision of the special inquiry officer properly
 disposed of the case. There was no requirement in the law that an alien
 who took a job for which he has a labor certification must remain on
the job any, particular length of time. There is no evidence that respondent took employment in the United States as part of a scheme to
 obtain other employinent. The record reveals that he entered the
 United states to take the certified employment in good faith. Matter
of Tucker, Int. *Dec. No. 1758, involved an alien who had a labor certification as a domestic but took employment as a machine operator although employment as a domestic appeared to be available. She never
took , certified employment: In the instant case; respondent did take
certified employment.


                                  828
                                           Interim Decision #1892
  Respondent made two visits to Canada. He last returned on March 4,
1963 when he brought his wife and children to the United States for
permanent residence. At the time of his reentry he was returning to
continue his employment with the aircraft company.
  ORDER: It is ordered that no change be made in the order of the
special inquiry officer.




                               829