## Facts

- An employer in the computer consulting industry sought alien labor certification for a “Systems Engineer” position.
- The application listed minimum requirements of both a B.S. in Engineering and an M.S. in Computer Science.
- The Department of Labor Certifying Officer determined the stated requirements were not in compliance with the labor-certification regulations governing restrictive job requirements.
- After the employer submitted rebuttal materials, the Certifying Officer issued a final denial, concluding the combined degree requirements were unduly restrictive.
- The employer appealed to the Board of Alien Labor Certification Appeals (BALCA), which heard the case en banc.

## Issues

1. Whether requiring both a B.S. in Engineering and an M.S. in Computer Science for a Systems Engineer position is an unduly restrictive job requirement under 20 C.F.R. Part 656.
2. If the requirement is unduly restrictive, whether the employer met its burden to show business necessity for the combined degree requirement.

## Decision

- BALCA affirmed the denial of labor certification.
- BALCA treated the combined degree requirement as facially restrictive and required a business-necessity showing.
- BALCA concluded the employer did not carry its burden to establish business necessity for requiring two specific degrees for the position as defined.

## Legal Principles

- Labor-certification regulations prohibit job requirements that exceed normal occupational requirements if they unnecessarily exclude qualified U.S. workers.
- When a job requirement is found unduly restrictive, the employer bears the burden of proving business necessity.
- Business necessity requires evidence that:
  - the challenged requirement bears a reasonable relationship to the occupation in the context of the employer’s business; and
  - the requirement is essential to perform, in a reasonable manner, the job duties for the position.
- Conclusory assertions that a job is specialized are insufficient; the employer must provide job-duty-specific support showing why less restrictive alternatives (such as different education/experience combinations) would not reasonably meet the employer’s needs.

## Conclusion

BALCA upheld the Certifying Officer’s denial because the employer’s dual-degree requirement narrowed the pool of U.S. workers and was not supported by evidence showing the requirement was reasonably related to the occupation and essential to perform the job’s duties in a reasonable manner.


In re Information Industries, Inc., 1989 WL 103627 (B.A.L.C.A. Feb. 9, 1989) (en banc)