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 shiva god shiva wallpaper
GCard_Dream
01-31 01:09 PM
Hmmm.. I wonder if that's really the case. H1B extensions past 6 years is only allowed if the petitioner :
1. has a approved labor and 365 days have passed. OR
2. has a approved I-140
Now if the underlying I-140 is revoked which was the basis for the H1B extension then I would think that H1B itself would be invalid. However, if that's not the case and USCIS doesn't invalidate the H1B then it's really great. The only other remaining issue I can see is how do you further extend your H1B after the current on expires because you won't have a approved 140 to support it. Are you just out of luck?
As per the law, your H1B will still be valid even in if I-140 is revoked. However, the only flip side is one will lose the old priority date.
For sure, this is exactly outlined in the law. I have known some cases who are working successfully and legally on H1Bs even after their I-140s revoked (by the way one of them is in 8th year of H1B)
Im 100% sure about what i said. For better clarification, one can contact murthy.com or rajiv.s.khanna
1. has a approved labor and 365 days have passed. OR
2. has a approved I-140
Now if the underlying I-140 is revoked which was the basis for the H1B extension then I would think that H1B itself would be invalid. However, if that's not the case and USCIS doesn't invalidate the H1B then it's really great. The only other remaining issue I can see is how do you further extend your H1B after the current on expires because you won't have a approved 140 to support it. Are you just out of luck?
As per the law, your H1B will still be valid even in if I-140 is revoked. However, the only flip side is one will lose the old priority date.
For sure, this is exactly outlined in the law. I have known some cases who are working successfully and legally on H1Bs even after their I-140s revoked (by the way one of them is in 8th year of H1B)
Im 100% sure about what i said. For better clarification, one can contact murthy.com or rajiv.s.khanna
drirshad
11-16 09:24 PM
Guys whoever planning to use EAD going forward get ready for $700- per head out of pocket every year. That is the cost of renewal for EAD & AP without attorney involvement. Add additional family members and you can understand why was July bulletin made current.
Lots of revenue at our expense .......
Lots of revenue at our expense .......
2011 2011 wallpaper god shiv.
deepimpact
09-22 08:20 PM
Next thing....H1 program only once in 3 years or only when "needed".....
Cut the number of GCs by half...So that people will go back to their origin when their H1 expires.....
Attach huge price tag to GC... and...
Well, the message is clear...Isn't it?
Well instead of going back after H1 expires, the people can chose to be illegals. Then their Kids will get GC under the DREAM ACT.:D
Cut the number of GCs by half...So that people will go back to their origin when their H1 expires.....
Attach huge price tag to GC... and...
Well, the message is clear...Isn't it?
Well instead of going back after H1 expires, the people can chose to be illegals. Then their Kids will get GC under the DREAM ACT.:D
more...
makemygc
07-18 12:12 PM
There's no need for you to be negative.
Obviously you have benefitted already from what's happened. Think about people who are stuck (just as you were up until recently) and want to 'try' to make things work for them too....
wish people were more understanding of others also. Why is it people forget what it was like for them when they were in same boat?
I edited my previous message as I do agree I sounded negative but that's not what I mean.
Some of my suggestions:-
1. Creating a petition and getting it signed by more than 10000 victims stuck in BEC and sending it to relevant people in congress and USCIS.
2. Doing a rally in NY, Sanjose etc.
3. Working closely with USCIS and IV core and see how we can improve the situation.
Obviously you have benefitted already from what's happened. Think about people who are stuck (just as you were up until recently) and want to 'try' to make things work for them too....
wish people were more understanding of others also. Why is it people forget what it was like for them when they were in same boat?
I edited my previous message as I do agree I sounded negative but that's not what I mean.
Some of my suggestions:-
1. Creating a petition and getting it signed by more than 10000 victims stuck in BEC and sending it to relevant people in congress and USCIS.
2. Doing a rally in NY, Sanjose etc.
3. Working closely with USCIS and IV core and see how we can improve the situation.
bbenhill
09-18 02:56 PM
Hi, I believe you can only use EAD and AC21 after I140 is approved and 180 days of filing I-485.
Guru(s) : Please let me know if I am mistaken but by using EAD before above conditions will abandon GC application because labor certification is being violated.
PS : I am not a lawyer/attorney. please use this information for your own risk.
Thx
Guru(s) : Please let me know if I am mistaken but by using EAD before above conditions will abandon GC application because labor certification is being violated.
PS : I am not a lawyer/attorney. please use this information for your own risk.
Thx
more...
HeeKwan
02-01 08:44 PM
Congrats
2010 Lord Shiv Wallpapers
Berkeleybee
04-03 07:29 PM
All,
We were trying to keep this fact sheet to 2-3 pages, but it would be great to compile a list of immigrant overachievers anyway. :)
We were trying to keep this fact sheet to 2-3 pages, but it would be great to compile a list of immigrant overachievers anyway. :)
more...
sandy_anand
11-09 03:27 PM
Filled out the form...
hair God Shiva lord wallpaper.
Jeff Wheeler
11-27 04:36 AM
Hmm... I didn't know about AIR issues you mentioned.. ;( On PC it works great, and people at Adobe (as I can see on videos) use Mac OS as their primary OS.
AIR on Linux is in beta, and it�s no question why. It�s a second-class citizen.
btw considering Mono... We had an ASP.NET app that had to be ported to Linux.. We did it with Mono, but... there were huge problems with memory leaks.. So colleague had to rewrite it completely in PHP.. So, my (bad) experience tells me not to use .NET on Linux... Perhaps they fixed it though? Ugh, somehow I don't believe that Microsoft cares for any other OS but its own.. ?
ASP.NET may be different from normal .NET apps, but there are many first-class C# apps that run in Mono�s runtime environment that can be ported from *nix to even OS X.
I can�t speak for your experiences, but if you rewrote it in PHP, it probably wasn�t intended to a normal GUI app in the first place. PHP is an odd replacement, if so.
AIR on Linux is in beta, and it�s no question why. It�s a second-class citizen.
btw considering Mono... We had an ASP.NET app that had to be ported to Linux.. We did it with Mono, but... there were huge problems with memory leaks.. So colleague had to rewrite it completely in PHP.. So, my (bad) experience tells me not to use .NET on Linux... Perhaps they fixed it though? Ugh, somehow I don't believe that Microsoft cares for any other OS but its own.. ?
ASP.NET may be different from normal .NET apps, but there are many first-class C# apps that run in Mono�s runtime environment that can be ported from *nix to even OS X.
I can�t speak for your experiences, but if you rewrote it in PHP, it probably wasn�t intended to a normal GUI app in the first place. PHP is an odd replacement, if so.
more...
sameer2730
05-15 08:24 AM
You are faking!!!
Here are the reasons...
1) First up there is no candidate name on the LCA. When H-1B is filed, a location specific LCA is sent along with the application/ petition.
2) On subsequent change of location, a location specific LCA is taken out and kept for office records (after displaying on the office notice boards) and copy is given to you. This LCA never has any name(s) on it. A single LCA can be taken for 10 positions. This LCA is never sent to USCIS. USCIS does not keep track of an individual's projects/ clients after the initial approval of H-1B (unless they make a site visit to your employers office and go through each and every work orders and ascertain them against existing valid LCAs, which is very unlikely considering the timeline you are quoting).
3) Yes it is a violation if an LCA is not pulled out for the new location. But that is the problem of the employer not yours and it is highly unlikely the individual will be penalized even if USCIS were to find out the violation after making a site visit.
4) If you suddenly got a nightmare, please state that in your post rather than stating it as a fact. Honest nightmares will still be discussed on this forum.
So Stop faking!!!
Thank you sir for finally putting into words what I always suspected. This is shit to attract attention to their site. That was the first place this nonsense came up and just watch how active that thread is . Everywhere else the thread dies quickly.
Other signs these threads are bull. They either give too much info (All tax returns info for the past 10 years) or too little (I got a one line RFE). Secondly look at the id of this guy "Mishras" - How many S Mishra's got this RFE. Where is the effing anonimity. Just a bunch of amateurs trying too hard to make up believe they are authentic.
The other anti's I see here posing as good guys
"GCFORMEORNOT" - Always digging up fear mongering threads to distract from our main goal
"EASTINDIA" - Real first class asshole posing as someone who is a crusader of playing by the rules.
Another reason I feel the above too are rouge is because they change their RED - GREEN status like the markets of 2008. One day they are bright red and the next day they are bright green. Basically they have teamed up each other or maybe other anti's to get the greens just to look authentic.
May those who indulge in this classless activity burn in effing hell.
Here are the reasons...
1) First up there is no candidate name on the LCA. When H-1B is filed, a location specific LCA is sent along with the application/ petition.
2) On subsequent change of location, a location specific LCA is taken out and kept for office records (after displaying on the office notice boards) and copy is given to you. This LCA never has any name(s) on it. A single LCA can be taken for 10 positions. This LCA is never sent to USCIS. USCIS does not keep track of an individual's projects/ clients after the initial approval of H-1B (unless they make a site visit to your employers office and go through each and every work orders and ascertain them against existing valid LCAs, which is very unlikely considering the timeline you are quoting).
3) Yes it is a violation if an LCA is not pulled out for the new location. But that is the problem of the employer not yours and it is highly unlikely the individual will be penalized even if USCIS were to find out the violation after making a site visit.
4) If you suddenly got a nightmare, please state that in your post rather than stating it as a fact. Honest nightmares will still be discussed on this forum.
So Stop faking!!!
Thank you sir for finally putting into words what I always suspected. This is shit to attract attention to their site. That was the first place this nonsense came up and just watch how active that thread is . Everywhere else the thread dies quickly.
Other signs these threads are bull. They either give too much info (All tax returns info for the past 10 years) or too little (I got a one line RFE). Secondly look at the id of this guy "Mishras" - How many S Mishra's got this RFE. Where is the effing anonimity. Just a bunch of amateurs trying too hard to make up believe they are authentic.
The other anti's I see here posing as good guys
"GCFORMEORNOT" - Always digging up fear mongering threads to distract from our main goal
"EASTINDIA" - Real first class asshole posing as someone who is a crusader of playing by the rules.
Another reason I feel the above too are rouge is because they change their RED - GREEN status like the markets of 2008. One day they are bright red and the next day they are bright green. Basically they have teamed up each other or maybe other anti's to get the greens just to look authentic.
May those who indulge in this classless activity burn in effing hell.
hot house wallpaper god shiv.
.jpg "pictures lord shiva wallpaper.")
ameryki
03-17 10:47 PM
Hi,
My wife, who is the primary green card applicant is planning to change job from desi consulting company to a fortune 500 company. The fortune 500 company wants to invoke AC21 as 180 days have passed from received date and I140 is approved.
Please let me know if someone has similar experience with the following:
1. Is there any salary restriction on increase from current salary percentage wise?
2. Has anyone used sucessfully AC21 in the past and had no issues with EAD renewals and Green card?
Thanks
ans 1. it is a fairly gray area. ofcourse salary increase is part of every development and change but if it over the board i.e 50% increase in salary then it might raise a flag (I have read this here in the forum) anything between 20 to 30% is acceptable.
ans2. AC21 is a fairly common option and has been used by many in this forum and outside after 180 days of filing 485. you should have no problems in renewals etc.
My wife, who is the primary green card applicant is planning to change job from desi consulting company to a fortune 500 company. The fortune 500 company wants to invoke AC21 as 180 days have passed from received date and I140 is approved.
Please let me know if someone has similar experience with the following:
1. Is there any salary restriction on increase from current salary percentage wise?
2. Has anyone used sucessfully AC21 in the past and had no issues with EAD renewals and Green card?
Thanks
ans 1. it is a fairly gray area. ofcourse salary increase is part of every development and change but if it over the board i.e 50% increase in salary then it might raise a flag (I have read this here in the forum) anything between 20 to 30% is acceptable.
ans2. AC21 is a fairly common option and has been used by many in this forum and outside after 180 days of filing 485. you should have no problems in renewals etc.
more...
house http shiv-shanker-god shiv
theperm
05-07 01:11 PM
bumping up~
tattoo God Shiv Shankar Wallpaper
Humhongekamyab
05-21 12:46 PM
The example he has given is a special case. The guy needs H1, because his son was out of status. Something is missing in the case. The child came to US 10 years back on B2 and stayed on B2 forever without extending or changing the status???
We need H1 only when we are not married or we have not filed I-485 for the dependants.
I agree. This was a special case and the attorney initially filling the 485 should have caught this error.
We need H1 only when we are not married or we have not filed I-485 for the dependants.
I agree. This was a special case and the attorney initially filling the 485 should have caught this error.
more...
pictures wallpaper god shiv.
jliechty
June 6th, 2005, 07:07 PM
Would the 20D or D1MkII have greater tolerances i.e. wider range algorithms in the camera?
Not noticeably... I'd almost say that there would be no difference at all between the 350D and 20D, but don't own both (let alone either) so I can't say for sure. In theory, the 1DmkII should have slightly more DR due to its larger photosites, but I can't remember anything from the reviews to make a positive statement on this.
Not noticeably... I'd almost say that there would be no difference at all between the 350D and 20D, but don't own both (let alone either) so I can't say for sure. In theory, the 1DmkII should have slightly more DR due to its larger photosites, but I can't remember anything from the reviews to make a positive statement on this.
dresses pictures lord shiva wallpaper.
hpandey
06-02 03:16 PM
you are right, but isnt that found only when you are travelling outside of the USA? If I am in USA till i get a gc and then add my wife, how will anyone know if she is out of status ?
As people have said above as soon as you move from H1 to EAD your H1 would be no longer be valid and hence the corresponding H-4 status will no longer be valid and since you cannot file for AOS for your wife now , your wife will be out of status.
This information will come up in future when you apply for I-485 for your wife.It does not matter if your wife is still in the US or not. She will be out of status if you lose your H1 status ( just like anyone who loses his H1 status the dependent also loses his status ).
As people have said above as soon as you move from H1 to EAD your H1 would be no longer be valid and hence the corresponding H-4 status will no longer be valid and since you cannot file for AOS for your wife now , your wife will be out of status.
This information will come up in future when you apply for I-485 for your wife.It does not matter if your wife is still in the US or not. She will be out of status if you lose your H1 status ( just like anyone who loses his H1 status the dependent also loses his status ).
more...
makeup photos wallpaper jan vcds
tcsonly
09-07 11:13 AM
Sent email yesterday with the details to lobbyday@immigrationvoice.org, and IV-Socal co-ordinators: Drona & Ramesh.
-C.
-C.
girlfriend wallpaper wallpaper god shiv.
josecuervo
07-15 02:54 PM
My Priority date is Feb 1st 2006. I got my 140 approved some time in May 2006 and Here I am today..
Congratulations. !!!
my pd is close to yours. see my signature. good luck
Congratulations. !!!
my pd is close to yours. see my signature. good luck
hairstyles wallpapers, God Shiv
sandy_anand
11-06 04:38 PM
I did not want to start a new thread for this. But I had earlier last month contacted many senators with the official I-485 pending inventory as proof and asking them whether it was humane, ethical and moral to ask someone wait more than 15 years for a green card! And what they are doing to remedy the situation.
This is the reply I received today from Sen. Frank Lautenberg. May be this is very standard format, I am not sure but it does mention specific bill and recapture provision.
In Response to Your Message
From: Senator Frank R. Lautenberg (senator@lautenberg.senate.gov)
Sent: Fri 11/06/09 1:00 PM
To:
1 attachment
0A953776.gif (2.8 KB)
Dear Mr. Mundada:
Thank you for contacting me about employment-based immigrant visas. I appreciate hearing from you on this issue.
Under current immigration law, employment-based immigration is limited to 140,000 visas, or green cards, per year. The process for obtaining employment-based visas can take years to complete, causing many of these visas to go unused. There is also an annual per-country limit that caps at seven percent the number of employment-based immigrants that can come from any one country. In some instances, this per-country cap causes employers to consider country of origin, not talent, when hiring foreign workers.
A bill has been introduced in the Senate that would address some of these delays and caps. The �Reuniting American Families Act� (S. 1085) would recapture unused employment-based visas from prior years. This bill would allow the Department of Homeland Security to issue any unused visas from Fiscal Years 1992-2007 and in the future roll over any unused visas from one year to the next. It would also increase the per-country cap for employment-based visas to ten percent of the annual total.
This bill is currently pending before the Senate Judiciary Committee, of which I am not a member. Please be assured that I will keep your views in mind should this or other relevant legislation come before the full Senate. Thank you again for contacting me.
Sincerely,
FRL: mts
Thanks for posting this information! Gave you green!:D
This is the reply I received today from Sen. Frank Lautenberg. May be this is very standard format, I am not sure but it does mention specific bill and recapture provision.
In Response to Your Message
From: Senator Frank R. Lautenberg (senator@lautenberg.senate.gov)
Sent: Fri 11/06/09 1:00 PM
To:
1 attachment
0A953776.gif (2.8 KB)
Dear Mr. Mundada:
Thank you for contacting me about employment-based immigrant visas. I appreciate hearing from you on this issue.
Under current immigration law, employment-based immigration is limited to 140,000 visas, or green cards, per year. The process for obtaining employment-based visas can take years to complete, causing many of these visas to go unused. There is also an annual per-country limit that caps at seven percent the number of employment-based immigrants that can come from any one country. In some instances, this per-country cap causes employers to consider country of origin, not talent, when hiring foreign workers.
A bill has been introduced in the Senate that would address some of these delays and caps. The �Reuniting American Families Act� (S. 1085) would recapture unused employment-based visas from prior years. This bill would allow the Department of Homeland Security to issue any unused visas from Fiscal Years 1992-2007 and in the future roll over any unused visas from one year to the next. It would also increase the per-country cap for employment-based visas to ten percent of the annual total.
This bill is currently pending before the Senate Judiciary Committee, of which I am not a member. Please be assured that I will keep your views in mind should this or other relevant legislation come before the full Senate. Thank you again for contacting me.
Sincerely,
FRL: mts
Thanks for posting this information! Gave you green!:D
getgreensoon1
01-26 02:57 PM
2 people from Andhra get into top positions in IIT exams. 1600 people get caught going to fake universities in the US. That is a disgrace. People fron Andhra show desperation in the US and affect the diginity of every Indian in the US.
perm2gc
09-18 12:12 PM
Folks,
I need some guidance from experienced folks particularly those who hold MBBS degree from India and are already in US in medical profession.
My brother has received MBBS about 5 years go and he is doing his practice in rural area. His wife is also MBBS and also holds a diploma on OB/GYN area.
My question is if they want to immigrate to US what are various paths they can follow to get here?
Thanks in advance.
PAN123 Hi PAN123..
is it you or your brother want to come to US... ? If you want to know various paths ask your friends in the medical colleges who will explain you everything or goto ECFMG website to get more info.
I need some guidance from experienced folks particularly those who hold MBBS degree from India and are already in US in medical profession.
My brother has received MBBS about 5 years go and he is doing his practice in rural area. His wife is also MBBS and also holds a diploma on OB/GYN area.
My question is if they want to immigrate to US what are various paths they can follow to get here?
Thanks in advance.
PAN123 Hi PAN123..
is it you or your brother want to come to US... ? If you want to know various paths ask your friends in the medical colleges who will explain you everything or goto ECFMG website to get more info.
No comments:
Post a Comment