IN THIS GUIDE · A joint appointment between a university and an external laboratory: identifying each legal employer and what each agreement authorizes
Start with the TN eligibility and application overview
Establish who each entity is on paper
Ask both organizations to state, in writing, their legal names and their relationship to one another. A laboratory hosted on a campus may be a department of the university, a separately incorporated institute, or a facility operated under a funding agreement. Which of these is true determines whose letter supports the case and whether one employer or two are involved. A campus address proves nothing about corporate identity.
Read each agreement for the work it actually covers
Read the appointment letter and the laboratory agreement side by side, noting who sets the work, who pays, who supervises, and what each says about the other. One may describe the laboratory time as part of the university role; the other may create an independent engagement. If the two documents describe the arrangement differently, the discrepancy needs to be resolved by the parties before anything is submitted or presented.
Document the duties as one professional role, or as two
Set out the professional duties as an officer would need to see them: what the person does, for which entity, in what proportion of time, and how the work fits the ordinary scope of a listed profession. If the laboratory portion is genuinely separate employment, it needs its own supporting documentation rather than a mention inside the university letter. Do not merge two roles into one description for convenience.
Take the structure to counsel before an entry attempt is planned
Multi-entity arrangements, cost-shared appointments, and contracts routed through a research institute raise questions a checklist cannot settle, including whether a second employer relationship exists and what would be authorized on admission. Bring both agreements, the organizational chart if one exists, and the funding source to counsel. Where any ownership or control interest in a U.S. entity is involved, raise it early.
Separate what the entity owes from what the applicant owes
An employing entity carries obligations the individual cannot discharge for it, and the reverse holds equally. The organization states the position, the duties and the terms it is prepared to honour, and a signatory with authority commits it to that description. The applicant carries the citizenship requirement, since the principal must be a Canadian or Mexican citizen, along with the qualification requirement attached to the specific listed profession, which a degree earned in an adjacent field does not automatically satisfy. Neither party can cure the other's gap. When a letter reads thin, ask which of those two responsibilities it was meant to discharge, then return it to the party that owns it.
Advisers who describe the arrangement but cannot bind it
Grant administrators, departmental coordinators and outside consultants often produce the clearest summary of how a split appointment works, and none of them is a party to it. Their memoranda explain intent; they neither create nor limit an employment relationship, and an officer may fairly ask who actually holds the obligation described. Treat such summaries as orientation for counsel rather than as evidence in their own right. Where an adviser's account conflicts with a signed agreement, the agreement governs. Self-employment is not permitted on TN status, so an arrangement leaving the professional effectively engaging themselves needs restructuring rather than better drafting.
Sources reviewed 2026-09-07. This guide covers a preparation focus; it is not an individual eligibility assessment.