The Competitive Recruitment Report

A provision of the Department of Labor’s permanent employment certification regulations, called "special recruitment," provides unique eligibility requirements for international faculty whose job responsibilities involve classroom teaching. To qualify for special recruitment, the Application for Permanent Employment Certification must include a detailed report describing the competitive recruitment. The report must provide the specific job-related reasons why the selected foreign national was more qualified than each of the U.S. workers who were available, able and willing to do the job, and that job duties of the faculty position include classroom teaching. The report must be signed by an official who has actual hiring authority. The following "sample" provides guidance in writing a recruitment report that meets the Department of Labor’s special recruitment certification requirements for permanent residence.

“SAMPLE” recruitment report

University of Washington Department of Esoterics, Description of the Competitive Recruitment, Selection, and Appointment of Assistant Professor Lily Rowan

Composition of the Search Committee

A Search Committee was appointed in April 20XX by the chair, Department of Esoterics, for the hiring of an assistant professor to perform teaching and research in esoterics. (Describe the job. Explain the business necessity of any unusually restrictive requirements that appeared in the advertising.) Faculty committee members included professors Horstmann, Cohen, Cramer, Stebbins, and Brenner. Professor Brenner chaired the search committee.

Solicitation of Applications

The position was advertised nationally in the July 8, 20XX issue of The Chronicle of Higher Education. In an effort to attract the widest possible applicant pool, the chair also sent letters to all doctoral degree granting programs in the discipline of esoterics along with a description of the position and an invitation to publicize its availability. (List all recruitment sources used.)

Competitive Selection Process

  1. There were a total of twenty-eight applicants. (State the total number of applications received. If there were a large number of applications, describe how the field was narrowed to the finalists. Note that Department of Labor requires that all candidates’ resumes be retained for five years.)
  2. The Search Committee met twice to discuss and screen applications in light of the job criteria as outlined in the published advertisement, and the quality of the applicants’ writing samples was studied critically. Most of the candidates rejected at this stage were conducting research on topics already covered by other faculty in the department, or were rejected because their letters of intent did not give us a clear sense of their ability to teach courses of the sophistication necessary at a major research university. Some of the applicants were not really specialists in esoterics, but generalists. Also, committee members consulted with each other and colleagues in the esoterics community who might have had knowledge of the applicants.
  3. On the basis of this information the list was narrowed to a "short list" comprising five individuals whom the Committee considered best qualified for this position and whose combination of research interests, teaching experience, and writing ability best matched the needs of our department.
  4. Letters of recommendation were requested and obtained from all the references listed by the applicants on the "short list."
  5. The finalists visited the Department, gave seminars, and met with committee members and students. (Note: phone interviews are acceptable for labor certification purposes.)
  6. Following are the three finalists who were deemed unacceptable for the position: (Do not list each finalist by name but use other identifier such as "candidate X" and "candidate Y". State the job-related reasons why each was not as qualified as the foreign national you hired. The reasons must directly relate to the advertised requirements for the position.)
  • Candidate A (Ph.D., Harvard) teaches at UCLA. His research methods are somewhat dated and he has had trouble (for that reason) attracting graduate students. He had just been denied tenure there at the time of the interview.
  • Candidate B recently completed his Ph.D. at Washington State University, and his resume had some visionary remarks that intrigued us. Unfortunately, when interviewed he did not pick up on opportunities to talk about his vision. This candidate did not appear to have the sophistication or theoretical ability to teach students in a doctoral program. One of the interviewers noted that despite twelve years of college there was "no real evidence of intellectual development" in this person.
  • Candidate C , Ph.D., Wisconsin, and seeking a teaching position. There was genuine concern about his philosophy of esoteric criticism, an area in which he would have responsibilities if he were hired. Many on the Search Committee strongly disagreed with his approach, and he has not demonstrated a desire or ability to work with experimentalists.
  • After the interviews, Candidate D was ranked first. Candidate D (Ph.D., Iowa State) currently teaches at the University of Iowa. The interview with him indicated that his emphasis in and focus on new wave esoterics is broad enough to cover the range of courses for which we need coverage. He was the most impressive of the group, the most experienced, and has published several books. Eventually, however, he turned down our offer and decided for personal reasons to stay at Iowa State.
  • The Search Committee then recommended to the faculty and on (date) the faculty voted unanimously in favor of offering the position to Dr. Lily Rowan. She accepted as shown in the attached appointment letters. (Specify the date the candidate was selected for the position. Typically, the "selection date" coincides with the date of the offer letter.)
 

Evaluation of the Most Qualified Candidate

(Evaluate in detail the qualifications of the foreign national you hired, including her educational or professional qualifications and academic achievements. Emphasize that she was more qualified than any of the U.S. workers who had applied for the position.) Dr. Rowan (Ph.D., City University of New York) has a strong background and competence in esoterics that is suited to the needs of our department (and will help fill the enormously large gap left by the recent retirement of Professor Wolfe). Dr. Rowan will also strengthen the Department in statistical data analysis. She has a breadth of experience in basic theoretical and applied research (thirty-six published articles), including a demonstrated ability and interest to work closely with an experimental group, research experience in theoretical esoterics and extensive work with graduate students. She has also worked in Europe with experimentalists where she demonstrated an ability to apply her strong theoretical background to a variety of research problems. We are very excited to have Dr. Rowan join our faculty. In our estimation she is clearly the best qualified of all of the applicants for the position and we expect she will contribute substantially to meeting present departmental needs and to developing our departmental curriculum.

Statement of Teaching Responsibilities

All University of Washington professorial ranks integrate teaching, research and service activities. We anticipate that Dr. Rowan will become an active member of the Department in all aspects.

Respectfully submitted,

Fritz Brenner, Chair

(The competitive recruitment report must be signed by an official who has actual hiring authority.)