Blog Feeds
02-01 08:30 AM
Summary
(LINK TO FULL REPORT BELOW)
Congress created the H-1B program in 1990 to enable U.S. employers to hire temporary, foreign workers in specialty occupations. The law capped the number of H-1B visas issued per fiscal year at 65,000. Since then, the cap has fluctuated with legislative changes. Congress asked GAO to assess the impact of the cap on the ability of domestic companies to innovate, while ensuring that U.S. workers are not disadvantaged. In response, GAO examined what is known about (1) employer demand for H-1B workers; (2) how the cap affects employer costs and decisions to move operations overseas; (3) H-1B worker characteristics and the potential impact of raising the cap; and (4) how well requirements of the H-1B program protect U.S. workers. GAO analyzed data from 4 federal agencies; interviewed agency officials, experts, and H-1B employers; and reviewed agency documents and literature.
In most years, demand for new H-1B workers exceeded the cap: From 2000 to 2009, demand for new H-1B workers tended to exceed the cap, as measured by the numbers of initial petitions submitted by employers who are subject to the cap. There is no way to precisely determine the level of any unmet demand among employers, since they tend to stop submitting (and the Department of Homeland Security stops tracking) petitions once the cap is reached each year. When we consider all initial petitions, including those from universities and research institutions that are not subject to the cap, we find that demand for new H-1B workers is largely driven by a small number of employers. Over the decade, over 14 percent of all initial petitions were submitted by cap-exempt employers, and only a few employers (fewer than 1 percent) garnered over one-quarter of all H-1B approvals. Most interviewed companies said the H-1B cap and program created costs, but were not factors in their decisions to move R&D overseas: The 34 H-1B employers GAO interviewed reported that the cap has created some additional costs, though the cap's impact depended on the size and maturity of the company. For example, in years when visas were denied by the cap, most large firms reported finding other (sometimes more costly) ways to hire their preferred job candidates. On the other hand, small firms were more likely to fill their positions with different candidates, which they said resulted in delays and sometimes economic losses, particularly for firms in rapidly changing technology fields. Limitations in agency data and systems hinder tracking the cap and H-1B workers over time: The total number of H-1B workers in the U.S. at any one time--and information about the length of their stay--is unknown, because (1) data systems among the various agencies that process such individuals are not linked so individuals cannot be readily tracked, and (2) H-1B workers are not assigned a unique identifier that would allow for tracking them over time--particularly if and when their visa status changes. Restricted agency oversight and statutory changes weaken protections for U.S. workers: Elements of the H-1B program that could serve as worker protections--such as the requirement to pay prevailing wages, the visa's temporary status, and the cap itself--are weakened by several factors. First, program oversight is fragmented and restricted. Second, the H-1B program lacks a legal provision for holding employers accountable to program requirements when they obtain H-1B workers through a staffing company. Third, statutory changes made to the H-1B program have, in combination and in effect, increased the pool of H-1B workers beyond the cap and lowered the bar for eligibility. Taken together, the multifaceted challenges identified in this report show that the H-1B program, as currently structured, may not be used to its full potential and may be detrimental in some cases. This report offers several matters for congressional consideration, including that Congress re-examine key H-1B program provisions and make appropriate changes as needed. GAO also recommends that the Departments of Homeland Security and Labor take steps to improve efficiency, flexibility, and monitoring of the H-1B program. Homeland Security disagreed with two recommendations and one matter, citing logistical and other challenges; however, we believe such challenges can be overcome. Labor did not respond to our recommendations.
Recommendations
Our recommendations from this work are listed below with a Contact for more information. Status will change from "In process" to "Open," "Closed - implemented," or "Closed - not implemented" based on our follow up work.
Director:Andrew SherrillTeam:Government Accountability Office: Education, Workforce, and Income SecurityPhone:(202) 512-7252
Matters for Congressional Consideration
Recommendation: To ensure that the H-1B program continues to meet the needs of businesses in a global economy while maintaining a balance of protections for U.S. workers, Congress may wish to consider reviewing the merits and shortcomings of key program provisions and making appropriate changes as needed. Such a review may include, but would not necessarily be limited to (1) the qualifications required for workers eligible under the H-1B program, (2) exemptions from the cap, (3) the appropriateness of H-1B hiring by staffing companies, (4) the level of the cap, and (5) the role the program should play in the U.S. immigration system in relationship to permanent residency.
Status: In process
Comments: When we determine what steps the Congress has taken, we will provide updated information.
Recommendation: To reduce duplication and fragmentation in the administration and oversight of the H-1B application process, consistent with past GAO matters for congressional consideration, Congress may wish to consider eliminating the requirement that employers first submit a Labor Condition Application (LCA) to the Department of Labor for certification, and require instead that employers submit this application along with the I-129 application to the Department of Homeland Security's U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services for review.
Status: In process
Comments: When we determine what steps the Congress has taken, we will provide updated information.
Recommendation: To improve the Department of Labor's ability to investigate and enforce employer compliance with H-1B program requirements, Congress may wish to consider granting the department subpoena power to obtain employer records during investigations under the H-1B program.
Status: In process
Comments: When we determine what steps the Congress has taken, we will provide updated information.
Recommendation: To help ensure the full protection of H-1B workers employed through staffing companies, Congress may wish to consider holding the employer where an H-1B visa holder performs work accountable for meeting program requirements to the same extent as the employer that submitted the LCA form.
Status: In process
Comments: When we determine what steps the Congress has taken, we will provide updated information.
Recommendations for Executive Action
Recommendation: To help ensure that the number of new H-1B workers who are subject to the cap--both entering the United States and changing to H-1B status within the United States--does not exceed the cap each year, U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services should take steps to improve its tracking of the number of approved H-1B applications and the number of issued visas under the cap by fully leveraging the transformation effort currently under way, which involves the adoption of an electronic petition processing system that will be linked to the Department of State's tracking system. Such steps should ensure that linkages to the Department of State's tracking system will provide Homeland Security with timely access to data on visa issuances, and that mechanisms for tracking petitions and visas against the cap are incorporated into U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services' business rules to be developed for the new electronic petition system.
Agency Affected: Department of Homeland Security
Status: In process
Comments: When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.
Recommendation: To address business concerns without undermining program integrity, U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services should, to the extent permitted by its existing statutory authority, explore options for increasing the flexibility of the application process for H-1B employers, such as (1) allowing employers to rank their applications for visa candidates so that they can hire the best qualified worker for the jobs in highest need; (2) distributing the applications granted under the annual cap in allotments throughout the year (e.g. quarterly); and (3) establishing a system whereby businesses with a strong track-record of compliance with H-1B regulations may use a streamlined application process.
Agency Affected: Department of Homeland Security
Status: In process
Comments: When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.
Recommendation: To improve the transparency and oversight of the posting requirement on the Labor Condition Application (LCA), as part of its current oversight role, the Employment and Training Administration should develop and maintain a centralized Web site, accessible to the public, where businesses must post notice of the intent to hire H-1B workers. Such notices should continue to specify the job category and worksite location noted on the LCA and required by statute on current noncentralized postings.
Agency Affected: Department of Labor
Status: In process
Comments: When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.
Recommendation: To improve the efficiency and effectiveness of its investigations of employer compliance with H-1B requirements, the Employment and Training Administration should provide Labor's Wage and Hour Division searchable access to the LCA database.
Agency Affected: Department of Labor
Status: In process
Comments: When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.
VIEW FULL REPORT (http://www.gao.gov/new.items/d1126.pdf)
More... (http://ashwinsharma.com/2011/01/25/h-1b-visa-program-reforms-are-needed-to-minimize-the-risks-and-costs-of-current-program.aspx?ref=rss)
(LINK TO FULL REPORT BELOW)
Congress created the H-1B program in 1990 to enable U.S. employers to hire temporary, foreign workers in specialty occupations. The law capped the number of H-1B visas issued per fiscal year at 65,000. Since then, the cap has fluctuated with legislative changes. Congress asked GAO to assess the impact of the cap on the ability of domestic companies to innovate, while ensuring that U.S. workers are not disadvantaged. In response, GAO examined what is known about (1) employer demand for H-1B workers; (2) how the cap affects employer costs and decisions to move operations overseas; (3) H-1B worker characteristics and the potential impact of raising the cap; and (4) how well requirements of the H-1B program protect U.S. workers. GAO analyzed data from 4 federal agencies; interviewed agency officials, experts, and H-1B employers; and reviewed agency documents and literature.
In most years, demand for new H-1B workers exceeded the cap: From 2000 to 2009, demand for new H-1B workers tended to exceed the cap, as measured by the numbers of initial petitions submitted by employers who are subject to the cap. There is no way to precisely determine the level of any unmet demand among employers, since they tend to stop submitting (and the Department of Homeland Security stops tracking) petitions once the cap is reached each year. When we consider all initial petitions, including those from universities and research institutions that are not subject to the cap, we find that demand for new H-1B workers is largely driven by a small number of employers. Over the decade, over 14 percent of all initial petitions were submitted by cap-exempt employers, and only a few employers (fewer than 1 percent) garnered over one-quarter of all H-1B approvals. Most interviewed companies said the H-1B cap and program created costs, but were not factors in their decisions to move R&D overseas: The 34 H-1B employers GAO interviewed reported that the cap has created some additional costs, though the cap's impact depended on the size and maturity of the company. For example, in years when visas were denied by the cap, most large firms reported finding other (sometimes more costly) ways to hire their preferred job candidates. On the other hand, small firms were more likely to fill their positions with different candidates, which they said resulted in delays and sometimes economic losses, particularly for firms in rapidly changing technology fields. Limitations in agency data and systems hinder tracking the cap and H-1B workers over time: The total number of H-1B workers in the U.S. at any one time--and information about the length of their stay--is unknown, because (1) data systems among the various agencies that process such individuals are not linked so individuals cannot be readily tracked, and (2) H-1B workers are not assigned a unique identifier that would allow for tracking them over time--particularly if and when their visa status changes. Restricted agency oversight and statutory changes weaken protections for U.S. workers: Elements of the H-1B program that could serve as worker protections--such as the requirement to pay prevailing wages, the visa's temporary status, and the cap itself--are weakened by several factors. First, program oversight is fragmented and restricted. Second, the H-1B program lacks a legal provision for holding employers accountable to program requirements when they obtain H-1B workers through a staffing company. Third, statutory changes made to the H-1B program have, in combination and in effect, increased the pool of H-1B workers beyond the cap and lowered the bar for eligibility. Taken together, the multifaceted challenges identified in this report show that the H-1B program, as currently structured, may not be used to its full potential and may be detrimental in some cases. This report offers several matters for congressional consideration, including that Congress re-examine key H-1B program provisions and make appropriate changes as needed. GAO also recommends that the Departments of Homeland Security and Labor take steps to improve efficiency, flexibility, and monitoring of the H-1B program. Homeland Security disagreed with two recommendations and one matter, citing logistical and other challenges; however, we believe such challenges can be overcome. Labor did not respond to our recommendations.
Recommendations
Our recommendations from this work are listed below with a Contact for more information. Status will change from "In process" to "Open," "Closed - implemented," or "Closed - not implemented" based on our follow up work.
Director:Andrew SherrillTeam:Government Accountability Office: Education, Workforce, and Income SecurityPhone:(202) 512-7252
Matters for Congressional Consideration
Recommendation: To ensure that the H-1B program continues to meet the needs of businesses in a global economy while maintaining a balance of protections for U.S. workers, Congress may wish to consider reviewing the merits and shortcomings of key program provisions and making appropriate changes as needed. Such a review may include, but would not necessarily be limited to (1) the qualifications required for workers eligible under the H-1B program, (2) exemptions from the cap, (3) the appropriateness of H-1B hiring by staffing companies, (4) the level of the cap, and (5) the role the program should play in the U.S. immigration system in relationship to permanent residency.
Status: In process
Comments: When we determine what steps the Congress has taken, we will provide updated information.
Recommendation: To reduce duplication and fragmentation in the administration and oversight of the H-1B application process, consistent with past GAO matters for congressional consideration, Congress may wish to consider eliminating the requirement that employers first submit a Labor Condition Application (LCA) to the Department of Labor for certification, and require instead that employers submit this application along with the I-129 application to the Department of Homeland Security's U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services for review.
Status: In process
Comments: When we determine what steps the Congress has taken, we will provide updated information.
Recommendation: To improve the Department of Labor's ability to investigate and enforce employer compliance with H-1B program requirements, Congress may wish to consider granting the department subpoena power to obtain employer records during investigations under the H-1B program.
Status: In process
Comments: When we determine what steps the Congress has taken, we will provide updated information.
Recommendation: To help ensure the full protection of H-1B workers employed through staffing companies, Congress may wish to consider holding the employer where an H-1B visa holder performs work accountable for meeting program requirements to the same extent as the employer that submitted the LCA form.
Status: In process
Comments: When we determine what steps the Congress has taken, we will provide updated information.
Recommendations for Executive Action
Recommendation: To help ensure that the number of new H-1B workers who are subject to the cap--both entering the United States and changing to H-1B status within the United States--does not exceed the cap each year, U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services should take steps to improve its tracking of the number of approved H-1B applications and the number of issued visas under the cap by fully leveraging the transformation effort currently under way, which involves the adoption of an electronic petition processing system that will be linked to the Department of State's tracking system. Such steps should ensure that linkages to the Department of State's tracking system will provide Homeland Security with timely access to data on visa issuances, and that mechanisms for tracking petitions and visas against the cap are incorporated into U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services' business rules to be developed for the new electronic petition system.
Agency Affected: Department of Homeland Security
Status: In process
Comments: When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.
Recommendation: To address business concerns without undermining program integrity, U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services should, to the extent permitted by its existing statutory authority, explore options for increasing the flexibility of the application process for H-1B employers, such as (1) allowing employers to rank their applications for visa candidates so that they can hire the best qualified worker for the jobs in highest need; (2) distributing the applications granted under the annual cap in allotments throughout the year (e.g. quarterly); and (3) establishing a system whereby businesses with a strong track-record of compliance with H-1B regulations may use a streamlined application process.
Agency Affected: Department of Homeland Security
Status: In process
Comments: When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.
Recommendation: To improve the transparency and oversight of the posting requirement on the Labor Condition Application (LCA), as part of its current oversight role, the Employment and Training Administration should develop and maintain a centralized Web site, accessible to the public, where businesses must post notice of the intent to hire H-1B workers. Such notices should continue to specify the job category and worksite location noted on the LCA and required by statute on current noncentralized postings.
Agency Affected: Department of Labor
Status: In process
Comments: When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.
Recommendation: To improve the efficiency and effectiveness of its investigations of employer compliance with H-1B requirements, the Employment and Training Administration should provide Labor's Wage and Hour Division searchable access to the LCA database.
Agency Affected: Department of Labor
Status: In process
Comments: When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.
VIEW FULL REPORT (http://www.gao.gov/new.items/d1126.pdf)
More... (http://ashwinsharma.com/2011/01/25/h-1b-visa-program-reforms-are-needed-to-minimize-the-risks-and-costs-of-current-program.aspx?ref=rss)
wallpaper Rihanna+eat+up+face+
RattuRani
06-10 09:34 PM
The USCIS cannot be blamed for the quota mess. That is set by Congress. Now you can legitimately accuse them of sloth and indifference. But not greed. They're not a profit center for the US.
The right place to lobby for change is in Congress. As I've stated in other posts, the appetite doesn't seem to be there right this instant. Maybe if the economy comes roaring back in a couple years, then the political tide will once again turn in favor of reform.
The right place to lobby for change is in Congress. As I've stated in other posts, the appetite doesn't seem to be there right this instant. Maybe if the economy comes roaring back in a couple years, then the political tide will once again turn in favor of reform.
BPforGC
08-11 05:44 PM
Dear Friends
One of the USCIS IO at NSC told me today that processing date of August 10 2007 for I-485 is nothing but a guess work. She said, in reality the processing date is far behind that. When I said I may have better luck predicting Power Ball numbers, she said that could be very much true than predicting what USCIS does.
Remember, in 2004 then USCIS director along with Bush unveiled a grandose plan in which they said by 2006, they will reduce I-140 petition processing times (for that matter any petition processing time) to 180 days. Four years later, things have became worse. Did anyone take responsibility? No. They give excuses.
For example, for my I-140 under EB2-NIW, NSC processing date shows February 27, 2007; and I filed in April 2007. But, I got approved. (no complaints). Technically, they shouldn't have picked up mine.
My friend applied in June 2007 and his I-140 got approved in December 2007 when their online processing date shows November 2006. So, they processed a petition that was filed 11 months ahead of their processing time. Great....
My colleague who shares office with me applied in October 2006 and still waiting to hear until today. Service requests did not do any good to him. Infopass is a pass. They all said he need to have patience... (lots of it).
Many many instances like this. Online processing dates or what the customer service tells you doesn't mean a shit.
The only thing that is good about online posting of processing dates is, we can file a service request which in many cases, after secondary request, tend to accelerate your case. You still need luck.
How many of you hear "your case is with in normal processing time"... I have been waiting for 18 months for my I-140... what the hell in the world normal about it? Only USCIS seem to understand it.
In the nutshell, its a funny and most idiotic agency and you cannot predict what it does. Do the same treatment to US Citizens, USCIS will be dragged into courts and torn apart in talk shows. Since we are non-citizens who are suffering, no body cares.
See, quasi-citizens i.e., people applying for Naturalization have better luck because their local congressman will be making calls and putting fire under USCIS ass because these are potential voters in November. So, they have some leverage. But people who are waiting for green card are no good now... wait for 5 years after you get it, you may have luck in getting their attention.
If you apply for 485, you get finger prints done. After a month, if you apply for EAD, you go again. What? Are your finger prints going to change every one month? What a waste of resources and time? USCIS do these kinds boneheaded things all the time.
Only thing that will get you green card faster is "Luck".
Good luck to all of us.
One of the USCIS IO at NSC told me today that processing date of August 10 2007 for I-485 is nothing but a guess work. She said, in reality the processing date is far behind that. When I said I may have better luck predicting Power Ball numbers, she said that could be very much true than predicting what USCIS does.
Remember, in 2004 then USCIS director along with Bush unveiled a grandose plan in which they said by 2006, they will reduce I-140 petition processing times (for that matter any petition processing time) to 180 days. Four years later, things have became worse. Did anyone take responsibility? No. They give excuses.
For example, for my I-140 under EB2-NIW, NSC processing date shows February 27, 2007; and I filed in April 2007. But, I got approved. (no complaints). Technically, they shouldn't have picked up mine.
My friend applied in June 2007 and his I-140 got approved in December 2007 when their online processing date shows November 2006. So, they processed a petition that was filed 11 months ahead of their processing time. Great....
My colleague who shares office with me applied in October 2006 and still waiting to hear until today. Service requests did not do any good to him. Infopass is a pass. They all said he need to have patience... (lots of it).
Many many instances like this. Online processing dates or what the customer service tells you doesn't mean a shit.
The only thing that is good about online posting of processing dates is, we can file a service request which in many cases, after secondary request, tend to accelerate your case. You still need luck.
How many of you hear "your case is with in normal processing time"... I have been waiting for 18 months for my I-140... what the hell in the world normal about it? Only USCIS seem to understand it.
In the nutshell, its a funny and most idiotic agency and you cannot predict what it does. Do the same treatment to US Citizens, USCIS will be dragged into courts and torn apart in talk shows. Since we are non-citizens who are suffering, no body cares.
See, quasi-citizens i.e., people applying for Naturalization have better luck because their local congressman will be making calls and putting fire under USCIS ass because these are potential voters in November. So, they have some leverage. But people who are waiting for green card are no good now... wait for 5 years after you get it, you may have luck in getting their attention.
If you apply for 485, you get finger prints done. After a month, if you apply for EAD, you go again. What? Are your finger prints going to change every one month? What a waste of resources and time? USCIS do these kinds boneheaded things all the time.
Only thing that will get you green card faster is "Luck".
Good luck to all of us.
2011 there for Chris Brown to
InTheMoment
04-09 08:58 PM
I take it the program you applied for is not in the NRMP match and/or you are given a pre-match.
In any case if you want the program you desire and you are fortunate to have the EAD in hand ...what should stop you ! In my opinion just use the EAD and make the best.
I am using AC21 and my spouse is also going in for fellowship. We did not blink a moment to make the best out of the EAD.
So go for it ! (after consulting a reputable attorney if that would make you feel better)
In any case if you want the program you desire and you are fortunate to have the EAD in hand ...what should stop you ! In my opinion just use the EAD and make the best.
I am using AC21 and my spouse is also going in for fellowship. We did not blink a moment to make the best out of the EAD.
So go for it ! (after consulting a reputable attorney if that would make you feel better)
more...
glus
03-19 11:40 AM
Hello
I have substituted a Labor in 2004, My priority date is 4/4/2002. My I-140 is pending since May 2004 and i renew my EAD every year, EAD expires in July 2008. I got my 9th year H1 extensions till july 2007 from the same company/employer.
I tried to change the employer and file a new H1 which was denied this month. The reason for denial is USCIS is not satisfied with the place of work, I have re-applied H1 again on the same company. Now can i apply another NEW H1 from a different company.
I am tensed as my I-140 has been pending since so long....can someone please help me in this matter and suggest me what to do.
Thanks
Raghu
OK,
I am sorry to hear your I140 is pending for so long. You have 2 options. 1 - wait. 2-act. If you select the latter, do this:
-contact your senator
-if you receive a letter stating (pending security/background check), contact a good imm. lawyer and do a writ of mandamus.
USCIS does not have to complete FBI checks on I-140. If they argue that they are doing FBI check, you have a case and a period of 3 years if way over unreasonable. USCIS completes internal checks within a few months max. So, your pending I140 for 3 years can't possibly be due to internal uscis checks. I bet they lost your folder; if you want email me privately and I will give you more details on such cases.
If you follow my advise, and go through a goooood lawyer, your I140 will be DECIDED within a few weeks.
I have substituted a Labor in 2004, My priority date is 4/4/2002. My I-140 is pending since May 2004 and i renew my EAD every year, EAD expires in July 2008. I got my 9th year H1 extensions till july 2007 from the same company/employer.
I tried to change the employer and file a new H1 which was denied this month. The reason for denial is USCIS is not satisfied with the place of work, I have re-applied H1 again on the same company. Now can i apply another NEW H1 from a different company.
I am tensed as my I-140 has been pending since so long....can someone please help me in this matter and suggest me what to do.
Thanks
Raghu
OK,
I am sorry to hear your I140 is pending for so long. You have 2 options. 1 - wait. 2-act. If you select the latter, do this:
-contact your senator
-if you receive a letter stating (pending security/background check), contact a good imm. lawyer and do a writ of mandamus.
USCIS does not have to complete FBI checks on I-140. If they argue that they are doing FBI check, you have a case and a period of 3 years if way over unreasonable. USCIS completes internal checks within a few months max. So, your pending I140 for 3 years can't possibly be due to internal uscis checks. I bet they lost your folder; if you want email me privately and I will give you more details on such cases.
If you follow my advise, and go through a goooood lawyer, your I140 will be DECIDED within a few weeks.
vivekm1309
08-13 01:11 AM
looks like vldrao got his GC and took a hike ;)
Vdlrao may be helping DOS/USCIS to finalise the Visa Bulletin for September, must have been invited by Michael Chertoff seeing his grip on the visa numbers...:p
Vdlrao may be helping DOS/USCIS to finalise the Visa Bulletin for September, must have been invited by Michael Chertoff seeing his grip on the visa numbers...:p
more...
fromnaija
07-20 05:32 PM
Thank you!
http://www.insvisa.com/faq/department_state.htm#15
not an authoritative source but if both of you are in USA right now then you need to bring the kid now before GC approval on dependent visa
http://www.insvisa.com/faq/department_state.htm#15
not an authoritative source but if both of you are in USA right now then you need to bring the kid now before GC approval on dependent visa
2010 +eat+up+by+chris+rown+
sapota
02-27 11:49 AM
http://www.foreignlaborcert.doleta.gov/pdf/PERM_Data_FY07_Announcement.pdf
Quite interesting statistics. Now we can predict visa bulletins going forward with better accuracy.
Quite interesting statistics. Now we can predict visa bulletins going forward with better accuracy.
more...
neodyn55
07-30 01:57 AM
"Funny reply:
Way to use your reproductive system to get ahead in line bro? If your father had had this idea, you wouldn't be here on these forums, but surfing on laguna beach with a cold martini and semi white chick.
another way of saying.. "stand in line & wait your turn""
*I've* done that. Maybe you guys need to get out more :p
Way to use your reproductive system to get ahead in line bro? If your father had had this idea, you wouldn't be here on these forums, but surfing on laguna beach with a cold martini and semi white chick.
another way of saying.. "stand in line & wait your turn""
*I've* done that. Maybe you guys need to get out more :p
hair Rihanna has said she regrets
avi101
05-19 04:10 AM
Here's my 2c
- I guess you may already be aware that you can file I485 only if your PD is current.
- Don't delay applying for your I140. Atleast get that going. The more you delay, the more things may change, rules may change at USCIS.. you never know. Plus, once you get your I40 approved and if you decide to quit your current employer you should be able to port your Priority Date. (There are conflicting opinions on what happens should the employer revoke your I140, so research more on that.) If DOL comes out with rule to end labor substitution, then your employer wont have any benefit in revoking your I140. A decision on labor substitution may be coming soon.
- Beside the I140 application notice, you also need employment support letter from your employer for your I485 as yours is an employment based GC. Your employer can delay all they want. My suggestion would be get in good terms with him\her (I know its difficult but suck up for some time), see if you can work out an NON-WRITTEN agreement on continuing to work for an extended period of time. If you put something in writing saying that you wont work afte r x number of months, it could potentially hurt you. GC needs good faith intent from both employer and beneficiary. Your employer can use that against you. Also, if there are any I140 RFEs you may still need your employer's help.
So don't burn bridges if you can. If you can't tolerate your employer any more, atleast try to get your I140 applied and approved so that you have a shot at retaining your PD.
- I guess you may already be aware that you can file I485 only if your PD is current.
- Don't delay applying for your I140. Atleast get that going. The more you delay, the more things may change, rules may change at USCIS.. you never know. Plus, once you get your I40 approved and if you decide to quit your current employer you should be able to port your Priority Date. (There are conflicting opinions on what happens should the employer revoke your I140, so research more on that.) If DOL comes out with rule to end labor substitution, then your employer wont have any benefit in revoking your I140. A decision on labor substitution may be coming soon.
- Beside the I140 application notice, you also need employment support letter from your employer for your I485 as yours is an employment based GC. Your employer can delay all they want. My suggestion would be get in good terms with him\her (I know its difficult but suck up for some time), see if you can work out an NON-WRITTEN agreement on continuing to work for an extended period of time. If you put something in writing saying that you wont work afte r x number of months, it could potentially hurt you. GC needs good faith intent from both employer and beneficiary. Your employer can use that against you. Also, if there are any I140 RFEs you may still need your employer's help.
So don't burn bridges if you can. If you can't tolerate your employer any more, atleast try to get your I140 applied and approved so that you have a shot at retaining your PD.
more...
varshadas
02-17 12:43 AM
A total of 39 people were in the conference call tonight including the core members(2) and the NJ state chapter members(2). I think this was really really good. Let's continue our efforts with this energy and momentum. Thank you everyone for attending the call tonight.
I just want to go over what we discussed in the call in brief:
Goals of the state chapters
Increasing the membership
Meeting the law makers
Methods to increase membership
Take a print out of the flyer made by NJ state chapter. (Vineet, can you out this under Resources. I am unable to upload)
Distribute the flyers in the local train stations where traffic is maximum.
Distribute the flyers in the local temples.
Try to participate in local community events.
Try to get onto the local Indian/Chinese radio channels.
Try to connect with people at work and school.
Try to get stories in the local newspaper.
Any other methods can be explored by the individual state chapters.
Meet the law makers
Go to www.immigrationvoice.org
Click on Resources on the left
Click on Resources for "Meet Your Local Maker"
There are a number of things here that would help you in this.
People from the local constituency should set up an appointment with the
Congressmen. Congressmen do not talk to people outside their constituency. Once the appointment is set, not more than 3 people should go to meet the
Congressmen. Out of those 3 people, one of the persons should be the one who set up the appointment. Also, schedule the appointment with them, the way they want. For example, if they want a letter, send them a letter, if they want fax, send them fax.
For setting up the appointment, we used the following letter format provided by the core team:
************************************************** ******
Date: 01/24/2007
Dear Congressman XXXX,
I am a concerned constituent writing to you on behalf of ImmigrationVoice, a
non profit organization working to get the problems of Employment based Legal Immigration to the attention of lawmakers. I would like to request for a
meeting to discuss the problems that the legal high skilled immigrant community is facing. Employment Based Legal immigration is currently facing some of the worst waiting periods in the recent past. Applicants have to wait to finish their final phase of immigration for as many as 6-7 years because of the lack of employment based green card numbers which is also called Green Card Retrogression. The reasons for these are certain bureaucratic delays, flawed practices and procedures and arcane laws which are not in tune with reality at all.
Please also note that there are more than 350,000 Labor applications pending at the Labor department to be processed. Some of them are as old as from year 2000. These applicants are waiting for certification from the US Department of Labor as high-skilled workers who are not displacing existing American workers in the market.
Subsequent to rigorous but unfruitful recruitment efforts by our employers and other processing stages by USCIS, we still have to face prolonged wait times. It is also to be noted that most of us are already working in the U.S. for the past 5-6 years and are contributing to the U.S. economy in the form of taxes etc - some of which we do not derive any benefit from. This also hurts the businesses in your constituency like my employer because they have to wait indefinitely to hire talented applicants on a permanent basis. This is a very important issue and will determine whether the United States of America remains competitive in the fields of science and technology and retains the best talent from around the world.
ImmigrationVoice is a nonprofit organization comprised of volunteers who are
suffering due to these delays and wish to bring this important issue in front
of their lawmakers. Hence I would request an appointment so that I can explain these problems and ask for support for some of the legislative measures that have been introduced to alleviate these problems.
I look forward to hearing back from you.
Thank you.
Sincerely,
(Place holder for your signature)
Your name:
Your address:
Your email:
************************************************** ******
Once the appointment is set up, take 3 or 4 copies of the presentation and the brochure neatly clipped in a file. You will find these documents under the
heading called Materials for the meeting in Resources->Meet Your Local Maker.
If possible, take your laptop for the presentation.
Begin by introducing yourself and that you are a member of IV which is a
national non-profit organization that is working towards providing relief to
skilled legal immigrants and that there is no other organization like
immigration voice in the USA.
Talk about the good things that the Congressman has done for the community (Research in advance).
More information can be found under headings During The Meeting and Post Meeting under Meeting your Local Maker->Resources.
If anyone has any questions, please contact IV or you can contact me too at
varshadas@hotmail.com.
I just want to go over what we discussed in the call in brief:
Goals of the state chapters
Increasing the membership
Meeting the law makers
Methods to increase membership
Take a print out of the flyer made by NJ state chapter. (Vineet, can you out this under Resources. I am unable to upload)
Distribute the flyers in the local train stations where traffic is maximum.
Distribute the flyers in the local temples.
Try to participate in local community events.
Try to get onto the local Indian/Chinese radio channels.
Try to connect with people at work and school.
Try to get stories in the local newspaper.
Any other methods can be explored by the individual state chapters.
Meet the law makers
Go to www.immigrationvoice.org
Click on Resources on the left
Click on Resources for "Meet Your Local Maker"
There are a number of things here that would help you in this.
People from the local constituency should set up an appointment with the
Congressmen. Congressmen do not talk to people outside their constituency. Once the appointment is set, not more than 3 people should go to meet the
Congressmen. Out of those 3 people, one of the persons should be the one who set up the appointment. Also, schedule the appointment with them, the way they want. For example, if they want a letter, send them a letter, if they want fax, send them fax.
For setting up the appointment, we used the following letter format provided by the core team:
************************************************** ******
Date: 01/24/2007
Dear Congressman XXXX,
I am a concerned constituent writing to you on behalf of ImmigrationVoice, a
non profit organization working to get the problems of Employment based Legal Immigration to the attention of lawmakers. I would like to request for a
meeting to discuss the problems that the legal high skilled immigrant community is facing. Employment Based Legal immigration is currently facing some of the worst waiting periods in the recent past. Applicants have to wait to finish their final phase of immigration for as many as 6-7 years because of the lack of employment based green card numbers which is also called Green Card Retrogression. The reasons for these are certain bureaucratic delays, flawed practices and procedures and arcane laws which are not in tune with reality at all.
Please also note that there are more than 350,000 Labor applications pending at the Labor department to be processed. Some of them are as old as from year 2000. These applicants are waiting for certification from the US Department of Labor as high-skilled workers who are not displacing existing American workers in the market.
Subsequent to rigorous but unfruitful recruitment efforts by our employers and other processing stages by USCIS, we still have to face prolonged wait times. It is also to be noted that most of us are already working in the U.S. for the past 5-6 years and are contributing to the U.S. economy in the form of taxes etc - some of which we do not derive any benefit from. This also hurts the businesses in your constituency like my employer because they have to wait indefinitely to hire talented applicants on a permanent basis. This is a very important issue and will determine whether the United States of America remains competitive in the fields of science and technology and retains the best talent from around the world.
ImmigrationVoice is a nonprofit organization comprised of volunteers who are
suffering due to these delays and wish to bring this important issue in front
of their lawmakers. Hence I would request an appointment so that I can explain these problems and ask for support for some of the legislative measures that have been introduced to alleviate these problems.
I look forward to hearing back from you.
Thank you.
Sincerely,
(Place holder for your signature)
Your name:
Your address:
Your email:
************************************************** ******
Once the appointment is set up, take 3 or 4 copies of the presentation and the brochure neatly clipped in a file. You will find these documents under the
heading called Materials for the meeting in Resources->Meet Your Local Maker.
If possible, take your laptop for the presentation.
Begin by introducing yourself and that you are a member of IV which is a
national non-profit organization that is working towards providing relief to
skilled legal immigrants and that there is no other organization like
immigration voice in the USA.
Talk about the good things that the Congressman has done for the community (Research in advance).
More information can be found under headings During The Meeting and Post Meeting under Meeting your Local Maker->Resources.
If anyone has any questions, please contact IV or you can contact me too at
varshadas@hotmail.com.
hot Chris Brown Beats Rihanna.
yabadaba
06-22 10:05 AM
To Hemasar
No- You better get you act straight.
Your post heading said "TB skin test is not mandatry"
So that implies it is not required. also the correct spelling is mandatory.
The solid evidence is the number of RFEs that have been issued by USCIS if you do not have a skin test.
http://www.murthy.com/news/n_tbtest.html
Don't come around here with your 27 posts with absolutely no basis telling people this or that is not mandatory. If you have an ulterior motive in people getting RFEs, then shame on you.
No- You better get you act straight.
Your post heading said "TB skin test is not mandatry"
So that implies it is not required. also the correct spelling is mandatory.
The solid evidence is the number of RFEs that have been issued by USCIS if you do not have a skin test.
http://www.murthy.com/news/n_tbtest.html
Don't come around here with your 27 posts with absolutely no basis telling people this or that is not mandatory. If you have an ulterior motive in people getting RFEs, then shame on you.
more...
house Why Did Chris Brown Beat Up
knowDOL
05-19 10:22 AM
I agree with GCBy3000. You can't be so straight forward with your employer that you will not work with him after this contract, after all he is sponsoring your future permanent job in United States. That said, you can always act smart and leave company after 6 months filing of I485. Tell him that you will be with him and if your PD is current you should file your I140 and I485 both now. If you are not in good terms with him, there is every possibility that you lose everything you gained including your PD.
If he is not wiling to file I485 even though your PD is current, talk to him and be in good terms with his so he files it, because it is worth it. PD current means a lot. Even if you I140 is approved and if you change company, you can keep the PD but only if he does not use that LC for some one else. Don't create an opening for him to make more money for your position replacing you.
If he is not wiling to file I485 even though your PD is current, talk to him and be in good terms with his so he files it, because it is worth it. PD current means a lot. Even if you I140 is approved and if you change company, you can keep the PD but only if he does not use that LC for some one else. Don't create an opening for him to make more money for your position replacing you.
tattoo Rihanna Pretty in Blue
bfadlia
02-21 12:31 PM
your browser might be getting the old one from cashe
more...
pictures he#39;ll eat up Chris Brown
keerthi
04-03 11:01 AM
I work as a software engineer in India and the US branch of my company has filed a L1-B petition by September 2008. The petition got denied by Nov 18, 2008 stating that I don't possess "specialized knowledge". Knowing that I am the only person who possesses knowledge of one of the company's product, we filed an appeal to re-consider by Dec 18, 2008.
The USCIS moved the case to AAO by Feb 9, 2009. After which there is no status change. The status of the case as reported by the USCIS web site is:
Application Type: I290B, NOTICE OF APPEAL TO THE COMMISSIONER
Current Status: Appeal/Motion/Certification sent to Administrative Appeals Office for review.
Two months have passed by and I don't know how much more time it is going to take. Can someone please tell me how long this process is going to take?
Should we just withdraw this appeal and re-file again? In the meantime can I opt a B1 and work there a few months until the L1-B is approved?
The USCIS moved the case to AAO by Feb 9, 2009. After which there is no status change. The status of the case as reported by the USCIS web site is:
Application Type: I290B, NOTICE OF APPEAL TO THE COMMISSIONER
Current Status: Appeal/Motion/Certification sent to Administrative Appeals Office for review.
Two months have passed by and I don't know how much more time it is going to take. Can someone please tell me how long this process is going to take?
Should we just withdraw this appeal and re-file again? In the meantime can I opt a B1 and work there a few months until the L1-B is approved?
dresses Rihanna Beat Up
sanjay02
10-15 04:38 PM
moneyreallymatters.com
more...
makeup eaten up by Chris Brown
Illuminae
05-27 05:00 PM
lmao... this is great. :beam:
girlfriend Chris Brown attacked and eat
sareesh
04-21 12:12 PM
I understand your problem with moving dates slowly but did not follow your problem with porting.
Thanks,
SG.
There was lot of talk in the past about lawsuit against USCIS against Porting and moving dates slowly etc.
Has anything been done yet?
Thanks,
SG.
There was lot of talk in the past about lawsuit against USCIS against Porting and moving dates slowly etc.
Has anything been done yet?
hairstyles Rihanna Smacked-Up By Chris
ak27
03-27 08:59 AM
I had checked it with our Attorney and it is fine to work on Volunteer basis. However, there are very few oraganizations which will let you work. Working of the books is illegal...
GC20??
08-17 12:25 PM
go exact same reply..please let me know if you hear anything about your case
I got the same reply when contacted through two Texas senators.
I got the same reply when contacted through two Texas senators.
Tshelar
07-23 09:03 AM
I would always recommend choosing Career over GC. I am guessing you'll are a young couple. Most of us take risk of jumping jobs and carriers before we are married or before one starts a family. Believe me once you start a family and are raising kids all your drive to look for better prospect will start diminishing. You will be happy with you a 9 to 5 job.
So my 2 cents go for a better career now.
I understand it is a tough call but I am sure you will make a right one and whatever happens in future do not repent on your decision as future is unpredictable and one can only make decisions based on the current facts.
So my 2 cents go for a better career now.
I understand it is a tough call but I am sure you will make a right one and whatever happens in future do not repent on your decision as future is unpredictable and one can only make decisions based on the current facts.
No comments:
Post a Comment