Beyond the Headlines: How the New H classification Specialty Occupation Rule Quietly Reshapes Employer Strategy in 2025

A Quiet but Significant Shift

Public discussions in 2025 have focused on broad policy efforts that may restrict the use of the H classification. Less attention has been paid to a regulatory amendment that quietly reshaped the specialty occupation standard when it took effect in January 2025. This change, introduced through the rule titled “Modernizing H classification Requirements, Providing Flexibility in the program, and Program Improvements Affecting Other Nonimmigrant Workers,” refined the evidentiary framework that governs whether a position qualifies for the H classification. For employers preparing extensions, amendments, or transfers, understanding this shift is essential.

What a Specialty Occupation Really Means

A petition for H classification succeeds only if the offered position qualifies as a specialty occupation. The statute defines such an occupation as one that requires the theoretical and practical application of specialized knowledge and at least a bachelor’s degree in a specific specialty or its equivalent. This requirement focuses on the job itself rather than the individual worker. A beneficiary may hold an impressive academic background, but those credentials cannot transform a fundamentally general role into a specialty occupation.

Employers often conflate a worker’s academic major with the nature of the position, but the focus remains on what the occupation demands for entry. For example, an information technology support role may be performed exceptionally well by a candidate with a computer science degree. However, if the organization typically hires applicants with associate degrees or technical certifications for the same position, the job does not meet the statutory definition.

The Updated Rule and Its Purpose

The January 2025 amendment retains the long-standing structure of the specialty occupation standard but adds an important clarification. The position must require a bachelor’s degree in a directly related specific specialty. This provision does not require an exact match between degree title and job function. Rather, it calls for a logical connection between the specialized knowledge acquired through the degree program and the actual duties of the position.

This development affects how employers articulate the relationship between academic training and job functions. It also influences how the petition presents the beneficiary’s qualifications. If the employer asserts that certain fields of study impart the required specialized knowledge, then the beneficiary’s coursework must reflect that training. A concise transcript analysis is therefore recommended.

General Degrees and the Limits of Breadth

The final rule reinforces another key point. A role that requires only a general bachelor’s degree cannot meet the specialty occupation standard. A general degree program provides a broad academic base. If this broad foundation is sufficient to perform the duties of the job, then the position does not require the specialized knowledge contemplated by the statute. While earlier versions of the proposed rule gave specific examples of general degree fields(i.e. Liberal Arts, Business Administration, Engineering with no-subspecialty, etc.), the final rule removed those references and instead emphasized a case-specific analysis. Even so, employers are best served by defining the required fields of study with precision.

Multiple Academic Paths and How to Present Them

Many employers seek candidates with varying academic backgrounds for the same position. The regulation allows petitioners to identify multiple qualifying degree fields, provided each field imparts specialized knowledge that directly relates to the duties of the role. This framework is particularly relevant for technical and scientific positions that can be filled by graduates from distinct but rigorous programs. The petition must explain the theoretical and practical knowledge each field provides and how that knowledge is needed to perform the assigned tasks.

Engineering and the Practical Realities of Transferable Knowledge

Engineering is a good example of how the updated rule calls for thoughtful analysis. Earlier proposals by DHS suggested that engineering, without specialization, might not qualify as a specific specialty due to the diversity of its subfields. The final rule took a more measured approach, acknowledging engineering as a valid specific specialty. The decisive factor becomes how clearly the petition defines the specialized knowledge associated with engineering education and how that knowledge relates to the duties of the offered role. The same rule applies when the offered position requires a liberal arts or business administration degree. 

Strengthening Your Filing in a Changing Environment

The amended specialty occupation standard requires petitioners to present a clear, credible, and well-structured narrative. The strongest filings include a detailed description of the position, an explanation of the specialized knowledge required, reliable occupational data that supports the need for a specific specialty degree, and a consistent review of the beneficiary’s academic history. A thoughtful approach to these elements positions employers to navigate adjudications more effectively in 2025 and beyond.

This article summarizes the specialty occupation standard as it appears in the Code of Federal Regulations following the January 2025 final rule. Future regulatory updates may continue to refine these requirements.

Disclaimer: This article provides general information and should not be construed as legal advice. For guidance tailored to your specific circumstances, please consult with a qualified immigration attorney.