info@bajajlaw.com
(619)-525-7005
The U.S. Department of Justice’s Civil Rights Division and the U.S. Department of Labor announced a coordinated settlement on October 16, 2026, with Cloudera Inc., a Santa Clara, California-based data management company. The agencies alleged that Cloudera discriminated against qualified U.S. workers during recruitment under the Permanent Labor Certification (PERM) program. Under the resolution, Cloudera is barred from the PERM program for two years, will fund $1.4 million in back pay, and will pay $600,000 in civil penalties.
What the Cloudera Settlement Includes
According to the Justice Department’s announcement, the resolution has several parts:
- Two-year PERM debarment. Cloudera will be barred from participating in the PERM program for two years. DOJ described this as one of the most significant sanctions available to DOL. The debarment follows DOL’s earlier suspension of Cloudera’s PERM processing.
- $1.4 million back-pay fund. Cloudera will establish a fund to compensate qualified U.S. workers who tried to apply for the jobs at issue but were not given fair consideration.
- $600,000 in civil penalties payable to the United States.
- Resolution of a federal lawsuit. The settlement resolves a lawsuit DOJ filed in April 2026 alleging that Cloudera violated the Immigration and Nationality Act (INA) by discriminating against U.S. workers when recruiting and hiring for seven positions under the PERM process.
- Ongoing compliance obligations. Cloudera will be subject to enhanced monitoring, revised PERM compliance procedures, and reporting requirements intended to prevent future violations.
Assistant Attorney General Harmeet K. Dhillon of the Civil Rights Division said: “There are no exceptions: the Justice Department will hold accountable employers who discriminate against U.S. workers. This substantial settlement, in partnership with DOL, sends a strong signal to employers that the federal government will work together to ensure employers treat U.S. workers fairly.”
Part of a Broader Federal Enforcement Push
The Cloudera matter is not an isolated case. DOJ reports that it is the fourteenth settlement since the Department relaunched its Protecting U.S. Workers Initiative in 2025. That initiative enforces the INA’s prohibition on citizenship status discrimination against companies that illegally discriminate against U.S. workers in favor of those with temporary employment visas.
DOJ stated that under these settlements it obtains civil penalties for each violation and “will continue to appropriately seek the maximum penalty permitted by law.” The settlements may also include back pay, mandatory training for relevant staff and recruiters, and requirements that employers stop restricting job opportunities based on citizenship status without a lawful reason. DOJ also said the Cloudera debarment and compliance framework “establish an important enforcement precedent.”
Why California Employers Should Pay Attention
Many California employers sponsor workers through employment-based immigration programs. The Cloudera settlement highlights several practical realities:
Two agencies, one investigation. This resolution involved both the DOJ Civil Rights Division and DOL working together. An employer may face parallel inquiries, one focused on INA discrimination and another on labor certification compliance, each with its own consequences.
The consequences extend beyond money. Back pay and civil penalties are significant, but a PERM debarment and years of monitoring and reporting can affect how a company recruits and operates long after a case is resolved.
Recruitment records matter. The PERM program requires employers to show that qualified U.S. workers were given a genuine opportunity to apply. When agencies review that process, the employer’s recruitment practices, communications, and records are likely to be central.
The Risks of Document Requests and Interviews
The following is general information, not legal advice about any specific situation or about immigration law.
Federal investigations often begin with a letter, a document request or subpoena, or a call asking to speak with HR staff, recruiters, or managers. How a company responds in those early days can shape everything that follows.
- Document requests can be broad. They may reach emails, job postings, applicant files, and internal messages. Producing incomplete, inconsistent, or poorly organized materials can create avoidable problems, while destroying or altering records after an inquiry begins can create serious ones.
- Interviews are evidence. Statements by employees and managers to federal investigators may be documented and relied on later. Employees may not understand the scope of the inquiry, their own rights, or whether the company’s counsel represents them personally.
- Civil matters can raise broader questions. The Cloudera matter was resolved through a civil settlement. Still, any federal inquiry deserves careful handling, because inaccurate statements or mishandled records can create separate legal exposure.
Why Early Counsel Matters
When federal investigators call, it is generally wise to speak with experienced counsel before producing documents or sitting for interviews. Counsel can help clarify the requests, preserve records, prepare employees, communicate with the agencies, and evaluate exposure. Early involvement does not guarantee any particular outcome, but it can help a company make informed decisions rather than reactive ones.
Vikas Bajaj has nearly 25 years of legal experience, and our team at the Law Office of Vikas Bajaj, APC regularly helps clients approach government inquiries thoughtfully and strategically. For a closer look at how our team responds to these investigations, from document requests to interview preparation, see our page on defending employers and executives in federal hiring and PERM investigations.
Frequently Asked Questions
What did Cloudera agree to in the October 2026 settlement?
According to DOJ, Cloudera agreed to a two-year PERM debarment, a $1.4 million back-pay fund for qualified U.S. workers who were not given fair consideration, $600,000 in civil penalties, and enhanced monitoring, revised PERM compliance procedures, and reporting requirements.
What is the PERM program?
PERM (Permanent Labor Certification) allows employers to sponsor foreign workers for permanent residence only after demonstrating that qualified U.S. workers were given a genuine opportunity to apply and that no qualified, willing, and available U.S. workers could be found.
What is the Protecting U.S. Workers Initiative?
It is a DOJ initiative, relaunched in 2025, that enforces the INA’s prohibition on citizenship status discrimination against employers that illegally favor workers with temporary employment visas over U.S. workers. DOJ says the Cloudera settlement is the fourteenth under the relaunched initiative.
Which agencies investigate these cases?
In the Cloudera matter, the DOJ Civil Rights Division and the U.S. Department of Labor acted together. DOJ pursued INA discrimination claims, while DOL suspended and then debarred the company from the PERM program.
What should an employer do if federal investigators contact it?
As general information, many employers find it prudent to consult counsel before producing documents or allowing interviews, to preserve relevant records, and to avoid informal or unprepared statements. Every situation is different.
If your company has been contacted by federal investigators, or you have questions about a government inquiry, the Law Office of Vikas Bajaj, APC is available for a confidential consultation. Call (619) 525-7005 or visit us at the Bajaj Building, 2150 First Avenue, Suite 200, San Diego, CA 92101.
Source: U.S. Department of Justice, Office of Public Affairs, “U.S. Departments of Justice and Labor Secure Settlement with Cloudera, Enforce Two-Year PERM Debarment & Back Pay Following Discrimination Against U.S. Workers” (Oct. 16, 2026).
This article is for general informational purposes only and is not legal advice, including immigration legal advice. Reading it does not create an attorney-client relationship. Past results do not guarantee a similar outcome.