IN THIS GUIDE · Reconciling HR and hiring-manager offer details
Start with the TN eligibility and application overview
Find factual conflicts before choosing a category
Canadian or Mexican citizenship, a listed profession, the relevant credentials, prearranged work, and temporary intent remain the TN foundation. Conflicting offer details can prevent a reliable assessment of that foundation. Compare the employer name, duties, reporting line, pay arrangements, and proposed duration across the materials already available. Distinguish harmless shorthand from a real disagreement about the job; a polished letter cannot resolve an offer that the employer has not actually settled.
Assign the right person to each question
The hiring manager may know the daily responsibilities while HR controls contractual terms and the authorized signatory. Create a short issue list identifying each conflict, its source, and the person responsible for confirming the answer. This is an internal preparation method, not a government form. Avoid asking the applicant to choose between inconsistent employer statements. The people offering and supervising the work should resolve the underlying terms and explain any legitimate differences.
Use examples to uncover hidden differences
A hypothetical HR letter may describe professional analysis while the manager expects the worker to spend substantial time on sales operations. Ask for examples of actual assignments and how performance will be measured. Those details may reveal a different role, not merely different vocabulary. Reassess the professional category once the real duties are clear. Never erase responsibilities or manufacture a temporary end date simply to make the support package look internally consistent.
Control the final version
After the employer resolves the issues, verify that the signed support letter reflects the agreed job and that related documents are consistent or clearly explained. Keep a dated final copy and identify who can answer follow-up questions. If the offer changes again before application or entry, review the change before relying on earlier documents. The work date must remain conditional on the required authorization, even if all internal signatures have been collected.
Name the entity that will actually employ you
Two departments can describe the same job while naming different companies. Settle that first. The classification requires prearranged professional employment with a United States employer, or with a U.S. entity contracting for the services; self-employment is not permitted, so the entity question is not a formality. Ask which company issues the offer, which company supervises daily work, which company pays, and whether any of those differ. Where a group operates through several corporate names, obtain the legal name used in the offer and confirm that the supervising unit belongs to it. Hypothetical example: a dairy scientist receives a letter on a parent company’s letterhead while the laboratory that will direct the work is a separately incorporated U.S. processing subsidiary. That is not a wording problem. Ask the employer to state which entity employs the applicant and how the other one relates to it, then keep that answer with the file so a later reviewer reads one arrangement rather than two.
Check that the signatory can bind the employer
A support letter carries weight because someone with authority stands behind it. Recruiters and relocation coordinators often draft the text; they rarely hold the authority to commit the company to duties, salary or duration. Ask who reviewed the final wording and whether that person can approve a change to the role. Where an external recruiting firm handles the correspondence, note that the recruiter is not the employer and cannot resolve a dispute about what the job involves. The practical test is simple. Send the disputed term back and see who answers. If the reply arrives from the same coordinator who produced the conflicting draft, the boundary has not been crossed and the conflict remains open. Keep the response that comes from the person with authority, dated, and attached to the final letter. Note also that the credential requirement belongs to the applicant: the employer states the position, while the applicant must hold the credential the USMCA appendix specifies for that professional category.
Sources reviewed 2026-09-07. This guide covers a preparation focus; it is not an individual eligibility assessment.