The Department of Labor’s 2026 regulatory agenda entry on PERM, entitled “Modernizing the Labor Market Test and Improving Protections for U.S. Workers in the PERM Immigrant Visa Program,”   has generated an unusual amount of buzz for a single line item in an obscure regulatory listing. It has been picked up across the immigration bar, cited in global mobility industry alerts, and highlighted in webinars and LinkedIn threads . What has gotten a lot less attention is what it might mean for employers relying on PERM. 

That is partly because there is not much to go on yet — no proposed rule, no draft text. But the title, when read against DOL’s own description of the current program and its stated priorities, points toward the requirements most likely to change.  

Rather than merely repeat the headline that “PERM is finally getting updated,” we wanted to provide insights into the potential substance of the rule and the following is a non-exhaustive list of where we believe the proposed rule is most likely to bring significant change, with suggestions on what actions employers should start thinking about before a proposed rule gets published. 

The current test was not built for how hiring actually works today. 

The PERM regulations have not been meaningfully revised since they took effect in 2005. Employers are still required to run print ads and post to a state job board that most job seekers in professional and technical occupations never review, while genuinely effective recruitment now happens on LinkedIn, Indeed, etc. as well as other industry-specific sites that did not exist when the regulations were issued. Employers already know this gap exists; it is a common practice for employers to run their recruitment for actual job openings on modern channels and then layer the DOL mandatory steps on top, purely to check the regulatory box. That disconnect will almost certainly be a major focus for whatever DOL proposes. 

How the PERM Labor Market Test May Change.  

The regulatory agenda entry lists DOL’s priorities as: 

• improving the minimum standards for recruiting qualified U.S. workers,  

• strengthening safeguards for U.S. Workers impacted by layoffs, and  

• enhancing employer compliance with program requirements related to non-discriminatory recruitment and hiring practices, and record retention requirements.  

Based on this admittedly limited description of the proposed rule, we believe the following changes are likely: 

1. Recruitment requirements that track actual hiring practices.Expect DOL to move away from a fixed menu of prescribed activities (newspaper ads are the most likely casualty) and toward a standard that ties the labor markettest to the employer’s actual recruitment practices for comparable roles. If the recruiting steps currently taken for actual open job opportunities are largely dissimilar to the steps required for the PERM labor market test, that’s worth consideration now, before any changes become mandatory. 
2. More detailed documentation, not less.DOL’s language points towardexpanded recordkeeping; more granular applicant-tracking data, clearer documentation of why each U.S. applicant was rejected, and audit requirements built around comparing the PERM labor market test against normal hiring behavior.  
3. Sharper scrutiny of rejection reasons.DOL has flagged non-discriminatory recruitment and hiring practices as ahigh priority. We would expect closer review of why U.S. applicants were found unqualified, with less acceptance of boilerplate or vague rejection reasons and more emphasis on demonstrating a rejection reason that a business would rely on outside the PERM context. 
4. Attention to layoffs and workforce changes.Under current rules, an employer that has laid off U.S. workers in the same or a related occupation in the area of intended employment within six months before filing a PERM application must document that it considered those workers for the sponsored role and notified them of it.We would expect the proposed rule to tighten several parts of this requirement, including creating a broader definition of “related occupation,” requiring stronger documentation for establishing the reason(s) each laid-off worker was not qualified for the role, and mandating a longer lookback window. 
5. Likely norelief on processing times, at least initially. Nothing in DOL’s stated agenda suggests that faster processing is a goal. If anything, more documentation, and audit-driven review usually mean slower, not faster processing, at least in the transition period. We would not expect this rule to ease the current backlog, rather we would plan for it to stay the same or get temporarily worse as OFLC adapts to new requirements. 

What this means for current  PERM strategy. 

While no changes are required now and the proposed rule is unlikely to be finalized until sometime next year, this may be a good time to employers to start planning for a PERM process that requires a labor market test resembling actual recruitment. That is the tone running through nearly every signal DOL has sent for a while now. Proactively planning now, rather than responding reactively once a rule is final, will be critical to maintaining a compliant PERM program that is a competitive advantage for hiring and retaining key global talent.  

Meltzer Hellrung will continue to track this proposal closely and will highlight the key changes to the PERM process when the rule is published, with a particular focus on what it may mean for pending PERM applications. In the meantime, if you have plans to initiate PERM applications in the near future, please contact your Meltzer Hellrung professional to discuss your current recruitment procedures and documentation.