←back to thread

241 points proberts | 1 comments | | HN request time: 0.201s | source

I'll be here for the next 5-6 hours. As usual, there are countless topics given the rapidly changing immigration landscape and I'll be guided by whatever you're concerned with. Please remember that I can't provide legal advice on specific cases because I won't have access to all the facts. Please stick to a factual discussion in your questions and I'll try to do the same in my answers.

Edit: I am taking a break now and will return later this afternoon/evening to respond to any comments and answer any questions. Thank you everyone for a great and engaged AMA so far.

Show context
joshdavham ◴[] No.44007821[source]
I'm a Canadian software developer who'd like to join an American startup so naturally I've been applying to a bunch of jobs. More specifically, I'm looking to go with TN visa.

In most job applications, I need to answer the two following questions 1) Are you legally authorized to work in the US? and 2) Will you now or in the future require sponsorship? I'm looking for advice on how I should be answering these questions.

For example, I believe I should technically be answering NO to 1) and YES to 2), but I'm slightly unsure about this.

I've heard recently that some Canadians actually recommend answering YES to 1) as getting a TN visa is very simple and not too much harder than just hiring an American. The idea is that when you answer NO to 1) that recruiters (and especially startups who are often more naive about visas) will lump you in as being hard to hire like immigrants who come to the US on the H1B and then filter out your application.

As for question 2), because the TN is a "Nonimmigrant" visa, does this technically mean I can answer NO here?

Basically in summary, how would you recommend I answer these questions? I don't want my applications to get auto filtered, but I'd also like to be as honest as possible.

replies(3): >>44008094 #>>44008272 #>>44012024 #
proberts ◴[] No.44008094[source]
Legally, the correct answers are No and Yes.
replies(3): >>44008674 #>>44008677 #>>44010361 #
joshdavham ◴[] No.44010361[source]
Thanks Peter for your answer. I’ll be sure to apply this advice going forward.

With that being said, from seeing the replies to my original question, would you mind expanding on your answer a little more? I’m sure many of the other commenters in this thread would appreciate some more clarity here.

replies(2): >>44012198 #>>44013796 #
nashashmi ◴[] No.44012198[source]
He won’t answer the question from a strategic perspective. He will answer only from a legal standpoint. That’s the only perspective he is an expert in.
replies(1): >>44012758 #
maeil ◴[] No.44012758[source]
GP nowhere indicated to be looking for a strategic perespective answer, they're saying they want to know the legal reasoning.
replies(1): >>44014047 #
1. nashashmi ◴[] No.44014047[source]
Ok. I thought the other replies he was referring to were of strategic nature.