JazzByTheBay
07-11 10:03 PM
Thanks to the person who posted the link to the Ombundsman report earlier - this is beginning to make sense now.
USCIS Ombundsman report from JUNE 2007 says:
"For example, when employment-based visas are not used during the year they are authorized, they are lost and are not available for future use without special legislation. In FY 06, over 10,000 employment-based visas were lost, even though USCIS had an estimated 100,000 to 150,000 pending applications for employment-based green cards.36 - Based on USCIS use of visa numbers as of May 2007, at present consumption rates approximately 40,000 visas will be lost in FY 07 without a dramatic increase in USCIS requests of visa numbers.37
- As illustrated below, since 1994 there have been over 218,000 un-recaptured employment-based visas lost due to underutilization of the employment-based visas."
Dept of State: Sees visa numbers not being used, chances of visas going unutilized/unused/wasted/lost again this year. Makes July visa bulletin CURRENT for all countries & categories.
USCIS: Scrambles to approve as many visas as possible to 1) Prove they're working hard, in light of the Ombundsman Report from June 2) Save themselves from the avalanche of I-485s, EADs and AP filings in June, knowing 3) Filing fees go up like crazy on 30th July.
End Result: More visa numbers requested (but they didn't complete issuing all of them, even over the weekend).
As things stand, if they approved stuff on 1st July, it means visa numbers were in fact available on 1st July.
If they approved without completing FBI check - that's going to raise a stink and isn't entirely legal anyways.
If they *still had visa numbers available on July 2* - request from DoS but not approved, they're in bigger trouble, imho.
Anybody thinks the above makes sense?
jazz
USCIS Ombundsman report from JUNE 2007 says:
"For example, when employment-based visas are not used during the year they are authorized, they are lost and are not available for future use without special legislation. In FY 06, over 10,000 employment-based visas were lost, even though USCIS had an estimated 100,000 to 150,000 pending applications for employment-based green cards.36 - Based on USCIS use of visa numbers as of May 2007, at present consumption rates approximately 40,000 visas will be lost in FY 07 without a dramatic increase in USCIS requests of visa numbers.37
- As illustrated below, since 1994 there have been over 218,000 un-recaptured employment-based visas lost due to underutilization of the employment-based visas."
Dept of State: Sees visa numbers not being used, chances of visas going unutilized/unused/wasted/lost again this year. Makes July visa bulletin CURRENT for all countries & categories.
USCIS: Scrambles to approve as many visas as possible to 1) Prove they're working hard, in light of the Ombundsman Report from June 2) Save themselves from the avalanche of I-485s, EADs and AP filings in June, knowing 3) Filing fees go up like crazy on 30th July.
End Result: More visa numbers requested (but they didn't complete issuing all of them, even over the weekend).
As things stand, if they approved stuff on 1st July, it means visa numbers were in fact available on 1st July.
If they approved without completing FBI check - that's going to raise a stink and isn't entirely legal anyways.
If they *still had visa numbers available on July 2* - request from DoS but not approved, they're in bigger trouble, imho.
Anybody thinks the above makes sense?
jazz
wallpaper SIKHISM KHANDA WALLPAPER - 3d,
vxg
09-03 01:43 PM
I am in the same boat as you.. See SLUD on both bases on 09/01/09 with EAC08** pending at TSC. Waiting.
Will add companionship i am at TSC with an EAC receipt no and still waiting wherein i see that they are approving cases with Dec 04 priority while folks with Jul 04 are still waiting. The RD and ND is useless too as i am seeing aprovals for folks who mailed there apps after me one guy posted on IV that he filed I-485 in 2008 with Dec 04 PD and got approval. This seems like last year where they completely ignored 2004 folks and approved 2005 and 2006 cases. I do not have much hope this month either.
Will add companionship i am at TSC with an EAC receipt no and still waiting wherein i see that they are approving cases with Dec 04 priority while folks with Jul 04 are still waiting. The RD and ND is useless too as i am seeing aprovals for folks who mailed there apps after me one guy posted on IV that he filed I-485 in 2008 with Dec 04 PD and got approval. This seems like last year where they completely ignored 2004 folks and approved 2005 and 2006 cases. I do not have much hope this month either.
gc_bulgaria
02-23 08:38 PM
If we're forced to see the glass half full, delayed 140 processing may actually be good for some people who are about to be laid off and whose 140 is on shaky grounds. It might just buy'em some more time to switch employers and figure out alternatives.
Maverick_2008
Ummm, how exactly is delayed I 140 good if they are about to be laid off? To be able to use AC21 these guys need need their I 140 approved and have worked for the employer 6 months after receipt date.
I don't see the logic in your statement.
Maverick_2008
Ummm, how exactly is delayed I 140 good if they are about to be laid off? To be able to use AC21 these guys need need their I 140 approved and have worked for the employer 6 months after receipt date.
I don't see the logic in your statement.
2011 vetro khanda wallpaper
ngopikrishnan
07-12 09:47 PM
AP and EAD Renewal Paper filed at TSC - Self Filed
USPS'd AP & EAD apps - 6/2
Reached TSC - 6/3
Receipt Date - 6/4
LUDs on AP & EAD apps - 6/11
AP Approval Email (for myself & spouse) - 6/29
LUDs on AP apps (for myself & spouse) - 6/30
APs (for myself & spouse) received on - 7/4
EAD app for myself is still pending - LUD is still 6/11. I hope TSC approves the EAD as well soon.
USPS'd AP & EAD apps - 6/2
Reached TSC - 6/3
Receipt Date - 6/4
LUDs on AP & EAD apps - 6/11
AP Approval Email (for myself & spouse) - 6/29
LUDs on AP apps (for myself & spouse) - 6/30
APs (for myself & spouse) received on - 7/4
EAD app for myself is still pending - LUD is still 6/11. I hope TSC approves the EAD as well soon.
more...
Jerrome
02-20 05:23 PM
I could not find mine (though i don't know the case number) with the priority date and employer name i could not find mine, by anyway can we find out the category (EB1,EB2 or EB3) from this databases.
I saw some poll happened in IV to get this information.
I saw some poll happened in IV to get this information.
Soul
06-14 08:36 AM
:beam: Thanks for all your votes peoples!
I vow never to design to this standard again :P:P
- Soul :s:
I vow never to design to this standard again :P:P
- Soul :s:
more...
ash0210
06-28 04:15 PM
You already goofed with Independence day of India..Now you are eyeing on Geeta...!!
Oh man, I am enjoying...!!!
Didn't you earn all the dollars in this country? Then where is the pain man? Remember Geeta --- Jo liye Yehin pe liye, Jo diya yahin pe diya (Whatever I got I got here, Whatever I gave, I gave here)....so think that and write checks to Lawyer, Doctor, USCIS. I hope Geeta will reduce your pain.
Oh man, I am enjoying...!!!
Didn't you earn all the dollars in this country? Then where is the pain man? Remember Geeta --- Jo liye Yehin pe liye, Jo diya yahin pe diya (Whatever I got I got here, Whatever I gave, I gave here)....so think that and write checks to Lawyer, Doctor, USCIS. I hope Geeta will reduce your pain.
2010 Khanda wallpaper v2 by
Googler
02-20 03:04 PM
More on this at here (http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/showthread.php?t=17450).
more...
gc28262
04-12 12:45 AM
Since his denial was on March 31st, would the overstay clock starts from March 31st or from original I-94 expiry date? My understanding was that one can work legally using H1B receipt notice. Hence, OP was legal atleast till March 31st, 2009, correct?
-GCisaDawg
Yes OP was in legal status till Mar 31st. ( One is in status while H1B is pending)
-GCisaDawg
Yes OP was in legal status till Mar 31st. ( One is in status while H1B is pending)
hair Hi, this wallpaper is made by
purgan
09-19 11:28 AM
Thanks for posting, manderson.
The line "the group's efforts will be a test of the commonly expressed view that Americans are not opposed to immigration, only to illegal immigration" says it all.
IV should consider adopting this as a byline...
Also, pl.include this in the "IV in the News" section. I did not see it there..
The line "the group's efforts will be a test of the commonly expressed view that Americans are not opposed to immigration, only to illegal immigration" says it all.
IV should consider adopting this as a byline...
Also, pl.include this in the "IV in the News" section. I did not see it there..
more...
thandan
03-15 03:29 PM
Background:
My wife and I are currently working on EADs obtained through my previous employer filing for my green card (eb3 India, pri date: dec 2005), my wife is a dependant on this greencard petition. We last re-entered US using our AP. Two years ago, more than six months after my I-140 got approved, I changed my employer (to a similar position in the IT field itself) and my new (and current) employer filed for AC-21. They have also obtained a I-797 for me as a backup which I have used. Also prior to getting my EAD, my wife worked on an H1 visa for a year and then we got EAD, she has been working on that ever since. Our EAD was recently submitted for renewal and will be valid for the next two years.
I got accepted into a fulltime MBA program in the US, which I am planning to attend. This would mean that I quit my current job and after the two years in MBA I will be joining a different employer in a different field (ie: I will be moving out of IT into something like finance). I am assuming transition to F1 is out of question since I have shown immigration intent
Questions:
1) Will it be legal for me to go fulltime to school on an AOS pending status?
2) Will I have trouble, re-entering the US on an AP if I travel overseas during the time I am enrolled in school?
3) Can I use this EAD card to go for an internship between my first and second year (the job will not be IT)?
4) Can I use this EAD card to work fulltime after MBA graduation, provided it is still valid for a few more months (the job will not be IT)?
5) If my post-MBA employer files for a greencard for me in the new position which is different from IT, will I be able to use my old priority date of Dec 2005?
6) To mitigate risk, my wife is planning to go into H1 so that I can get an H4 if going to school on EAD doesn't work. Is this strategy to use H1 during school time (and travel overseas and re-enter using H4) and use EAD while internship safe?
7) If my wife cannot find a H1 job, can she work on her EAD while I am also using EAD to go to school
8) I am assuming that for any EAD based status to work, I need to have a future job offer in the same category. My current employer will not do that.I can get a future job offer from a small IT consulting firm in the same IT field for which my greencard application was filed for. Will that be good enough to keep my EAD alive while in school?
Thanks SO much for answering. I have this wonderful opportunity in front of me and I really hope immigration will not be a road block to achieve my dreams.
My wife and I are currently working on EADs obtained through my previous employer filing for my green card (eb3 India, pri date: dec 2005), my wife is a dependant on this greencard petition. We last re-entered US using our AP. Two years ago, more than six months after my I-140 got approved, I changed my employer (to a similar position in the IT field itself) and my new (and current) employer filed for AC-21. They have also obtained a I-797 for me as a backup which I have used. Also prior to getting my EAD, my wife worked on an H1 visa for a year and then we got EAD, she has been working on that ever since. Our EAD was recently submitted for renewal and will be valid for the next two years.
I got accepted into a fulltime MBA program in the US, which I am planning to attend. This would mean that I quit my current job and after the two years in MBA I will be joining a different employer in a different field (ie: I will be moving out of IT into something like finance). I am assuming transition to F1 is out of question since I have shown immigration intent
Questions:
1) Will it be legal for me to go fulltime to school on an AOS pending status?
2) Will I have trouble, re-entering the US on an AP if I travel overseas during the time I am enrolled in school?
3) Can I use this EAD card to go for an internship between my first and second year (the job will not be IT)?
4) Can I use this EAD card to work fulltime after MBA graduation, provided it is still valid for a few more months (the job will not be IT)?
5) If my post-MBA employer files for a greencard for me in the new position which is different from IT, will I be able to use my old priority date of Dec 2005?
6) To mitigate risk, my wife is planning to go into H1 so that I can get an H4 if going to school on EAD doesn't work. Is this strategy to use H1 during school time (and travel overseas and re-enter using H4) and use EAD while internship safe?
7) If my wife cannot find a H1 job, can she work on her EAD while I am also using EAD to go to school
8) I am assuming that for any EAD based status to work, I need to have a future job offer in the same category. My current employer will not do that.I can get a future job offer from a small IT consulting firm in the same IT field for which my greencard application was filed for. Will that be good enough to keep my EAD alive while in school?
Thanks SO much for answering. I have this wonderful opportunity in front of me and I really hope immigration will not be a road block to achieve my dreams.
hot Khanda Wallpaper by ~KingS1ngh
lost_in_migration
05-14 08:28 PM
Thats the spirit
I will support IV even i have Gc .GO IV.
I will support IV even i have Gc .GO IV.
more...
house KHANDA WALLPAPER,
vnsriv
11-14 02:32 PM
My wife's EAD has not yet been approved. It has been 92 days since the receive date. We had an infopass appointment today. I did not apply for EAD.
The officer we met with mentioned that the EAD is issued only after the biometrics are done. I highly doubt this is the norm. Our FP is scheduled for Nov 21st. he said that the service center will electronically send the photo/fp to nebraska. Only then can I expect to see any movement on the EAD application.
I have heard that your FP/biometrics does not have anything to with EAD. However, this officer gave us information that is totally contrary to what we have seen in recent times. He mentioned that this is the latest procedure. He suggested that we should schedule another infopass appointment only If we do not get the EAD 3-4 weeks after the biometrics.
Any inputs from people with similar experience?
NO
The officer we met with mentioned that the EAD is issued only after the biometrics are done. I highly doubt this is the norm. Our FP is scheduled for Nov 21st. he said that the service center will electronically send the photo/fp to nebraska. Only then can I expect to see any movement on the EAD application.
I have heard that your FP/biometrics does not have anything to with EAD. However, this officer gave us information that is totally contrary to what we have seen in recent times. He mentioned that this is the latest procedure. He suggested that we should schedule another infopass appointment only If we do not get the EAD 3-4 weeks after the biometrics.
Any inputs from people with similar experience?
NO
tattoo KHANDA WALLPAPER
mdforgc
04-07 08:46 PM
Guys
I think this is the time we have to work on the house conference committee members to the best. This is where we are gonna have probs. Core guys-- Can we step up some campaign for this- what is QGAs take on this? Dont mak eit public if it is sensitive.
I think this is the time we have to work on the house conference committee members to the best. This is where we are gonna have probs. Core guys-- Can we step up some campaign for this- what is QGAs take on this? Dont mak eit public if it is sensitive.
more...
pictures khanda wallpapers.
ImmigrationAnswerMan
07-24 03:42 PM
Sanjay:
Most likely you will not have to do anything further and your application will be approved when the Visa Bulletin reaches your priority date. However it will depend on how long it is before that date is reached. you may have to be fingerprinted again, as the fingerprint checks are only valid for 18 months. Also, if the wait is long enough, USCIS may want you to go for another interview to make sure you are still eligible.
Most likely you will not have to do anything further and your application will be approved when the Visa Bulletin reaches your priority date. However it will depend on how long it is before that date is reached. you may have to be fingerprinted again, as the fingerprint checks are only valid for 18 months. Also, if the wait is long enough, USCIS may want you to go for another interview to make sure you are still eligible.
dresses khanda wallpapers.
Openarms
10-03 10:17 AM
Even PA DMV also adopted more troublesome procedure of giving DL to the LEGAL IMMIGRANTS.
Even after having VALID EAD DOCUMENT, verifying ORIGINAL USCIS documents and ORIGINAL SOCIAL SECURITY CARD why DMV want to check status with USCIS again?
What do they get out of that process?? Seems like another way of harassing LEGAL IMMIGRANTS.
Why redundant procedures???... Why to waste tax payers money with these kinds of redundant policies??
Why individual states like PA, GA and SC adopting these policies??
Please share your experiences from other states if any similar sort.
Even after having VALID EAD DOCUMENT, verifying ORIGINAL USCIS documents and ORIGINAL SOCIAL SECURITY CARD why DMV want to check status with USCIS again?
What do they get out of that process?? Seems like another way of harassing LEGAL IMMIGRANTS.
Why redundant procedures???... Why to waste tax payers money with these kinds of redundant policies??
Why individual states like PA, GA and SC adopting these policies??
Please share your experiences from other states if any similar sort.
more...
makeup khanda wallpaper
buddhaas
02-02 03:57 PM
Why Is H-1B A Dirty Word?
By Eleanor Pelta, AILA First Vice President
H-1B workers certainly seem to be under fire these days on many fronts. A new memo issued by USCIS on the employer-employee relationship imposes new extra-regulatory regulations on the types of activities in which H-1B workers can engage as well as the types of enterprises that can petition for H-1B workers. The memo targets the consulting industry directly, deftly slips in a new concept that seems to prohibit H-1B petitions for employer-owners of businesses, and will surely constitute an open invitation to the Service Centers to hit H-1B petitioners with a new slew of kitchen-sink RFE's. On another front, USCIS continues to make unannounced H-1B site visits, often repeatedly to the same employer. Apart from the "in-terrorem" impact of such visits, I personally cannot see the utility of three different visits to the same employer, particularly after the first one or two visits show that the employer is fully compliant.
But USCIS isn't the only agency that is rigorously targeting H-1B's. An AILA member recently reported that CBP pulled newly-arrived Indian nationals holding H-1B visas out of an immigration inspection line and reportedly placed them in Expedited Removal. The legal basis of those actions is still unclear. However, the tactic is too close to racial profiling for my own comfort.
Finally, recent H-1B "skirmishes" include various U.S. consular posts in India issuing "pink letters" that are, simply put, consular "RFE's" appearing to question the bona fides of the H-1B and requesting information on a host of truly repetitive and/or irrelevant topics. Much of the information that is routinely requested on a pink letter is already in the copy of the H-1B visa petition. Some of the letters request payroll information for all employees of the sponsoring company, a ridiculous request in most instances, particularly for major multi-national companies. One of the most frustrating actions we are seeing from consular officers in this context is the checking off or highlighting of every single category of additional information on the form letter, whether directly applicable or not, in effect a "paper wall" that must be overcome before an applicant can have the H-1B visa issued. Very discouraging to both employer and employee.
How have we come to a point in time where the H-1B category in and of itself is so disdained and mistrusted? Of course I'm aware that instances of fraud have cast this category in a bad light. But I think that vehemence of the administrative attack on the H-1B category is so disproportionate to the actual statistics about fraud. And interestingly, the disproportionate heavy-handed administrative reaction comes not from the agency specifically tasked with H-1B enforcement—the Department of Labor—but from CIS, CBP and State. Sometimes I just have to shake my head and ask myself what makes people so darn angry about a visa category that, at bottom, is designed to bring in relatively tiny number of really smart people to work in U.S. businesses of any size. It has to be a reaction against something else.
Yes, a great number of IT consultants come to the US on H-1B's. It is important to remember that so many of these individuals are extremely well-educated, capable people, working in an industry in which there are a large number of high profile players. And arguably, the high profile consulting companies have the most at stake if they do not focus on compliance, as they are the easiest enforcement target and they need their business model to work in the U.S. in order to survive. Some people may not like the business model, although arguably IT consulting companies provide needed services that allow US businesses, such as banks and insurance companies to focus on their own core strengths. Like it or not, though, this business model is perfectly legal under current law, and the agencies that enforce our immigration laws have no business trying to eviscerate it by policy or a pattern of discretionary actions.
It is true that some IT consulting companies' practices have been the focus of fraud investigations. But DOL has stringent rules in place to deal with the bad guys. Benching H-1B workers without pay, paying below the prevailing wage, sending H-1B workers on long-term assignments to a site not covered by an LCA—these are the practices we most often hear about, and every single one of these is a violation of an existing regulation that could be enforced by the Department of Labor. When an employer violates wage and hour rules, DOL investigates the practices and enforces the regulations against that employer. But no one shuts down an entire industry as a result.
And the IT consulting industry is not the only user of the H-1B visa. Let's not forget how many other critical fields use H-1B workers. In my own career alone, I have seen H-1B petitions for nanoscientists, ornithologists, CEO's of significant not for profit organizations, teachers, applied mathematicians, risk analysts, professionals involved in pharmaceutical research and development, automotive designers, international legal experts, film editors, microimaging engineers. H-1B's are valuable to small and large businesses alike, arguably even more to that emerging business that needs one key expert to develop a new product or service and get the business off the ground.
The assault on H-1B's is not only offensive, it's dangerous. Here's why:
* H-1B's create jobs—statistics show that 5 jobs are created in the U.S. for every H-1B worker hired. An administrative clamp-down in the program will hinder this job creation. And think about the valuable sharing of skills and expertise between H-1B workers and U.S. workers—this is lost when companies are discouraged from using the program.
* The anti-H-1B assault dissuades large businesses from conducting research and development in the US, and encourages the relocation of those facilities in jurisdictions that are friendlier to foreign professionals.
* The anti-H-1B assault chills the formation of small businesses in the US, particularly in emerging technologies. This will most certainly be one of the long-term results of USCIS' most recent memo.
* The attack on H-1B's offends our friends and allies in the world. An example: Earlier this year India –one of the U.S.'s closest allies --announced new visa restrictions on foreign nationals working there. Surely the treatment of Indian national H-1B workers at the hands of our agencies involved in the immigration process would not have escaped the attention of the Indian government as they issued their own restrictions.
* The increasing challenges in the H-1B program may have the effect of encouraging foreign students who were educated in the U.S. to seek permanent positions elsewhere.
Whatever the cause of the visceral reaction against H-1B workers might be—whether it stems from a fear that fraud will become more widespread or whether it is simply a broader reaction against foreign workers that often raises its head during any down economy –I sincerely hope that the agencies are able to gain some perspective on the program that allows them to treat legitimate H-1B employers and employees with the respect they deserve and to effectively enforce against those who are non-compliant, rather than casting a wide net and treating all H-1B users as abusers.
source link : http://ailaleadership.blogspot.com/2010/02/why-is-h-1b-dirty-word.html#comment-form
By Eleanor Pelta, AILA First Vice President
H-1B workers certainly seem to be under fire these days on many fronts. A new memo issued by USCIS on the employer-employee relationship imposes new extra-regulatory regulations on the types of activities in which H-1B workers can engage as well as the types of enterprises that can petition for H-1B workers. The memo targets the consulting industry directly, deftly slips in a new concept that seems to prohibit H-1B petitions for employer-owners of businesses, and will surely constitute an open invitation to the Service Centers to hit H-1B petitioners with a new slew of kitchen-sink RFE's. On another front, USCIS continues to make unannounced H-1B site visits, often repeatedly to the same employer. Apart from the "in-terrorem" impact of such visits, I personally cannot see the utility of three different visits to the same employer, particularly after the first one or two visits show that the employer is fully compliant.
But USCIS isn't the only agency that is rigorously targeting H-1B's. An AILA member recently reported that CBP pulled newly-arrived Indian nationals holding H-1B visas out of an immigration inspection line and reportedly placed them in Expedited Removal. The legal basis of those actions is still unclear. However, the tactic is too close to racial profiling for my own comfort.
Finally, recent H-1B "skirmishes" include various U.S. consular posts in India issuing "pink letters" that are, simply put, consular "RFE's" appearing to question the bona fides of the H-1B and requesting information on a host of truly repetitive and/or irrelevant topics. Much of the information that is routinely requested on a pink letter is already in the copy of the H-1B visa petition. Some of the letters request payroll information for all employees of the sponsoring company, a ridiculous request in most instances, particularly for major multi-national companies. One of the most frustrating actions we are seeing from consular officers in this context is the checking off or highlighting of every single category of additional information on the form letter, whether directly applicable or not, in effect a "paper wall" that must be overcome before an applicant can have the H-1B visa issued. Very discouraging to both employer and employee.
How have we come to a point in time where the H-1B category in and of itself is so disdained and mistrusted? Of course I'm aware that instances of fraud have cast this category in a bad light. But I think that vehemence of the administrative attack on the H-1B category is so disproportionate to the actual statistics about fraud. And interestingly, the disproportionate heavy-handed administrative reaction comes not from the agency specifically tasked with H-1B enforcement—the Department of Labor—but from CIS, CBP and State. Sometimes I just have to shake my head and ask myself what makes people so darn angry about a visa category that, at bottom, is designed to bring in relatively tiny number of really smart people to work in U.S. businesses of any size. It has to be a reaction against something else.
Yes, a great number of IT consultants come to the US on H-1B's. It is important to remember that so many of these individuals are extremely well-educated, capable people, working in an industry in which there are a large number of high profile players. And arguably, the high profile consulting companies have the most at stake if they do not focus on compliance, as they are the easiest enforcement target and they need their business model to work in the U.S. in order to survive. Some people may not like the business model, although arguably IT consulting companies provide needed services that allow US businesses, such as banks and insurance companies to focus on their own core strengths. Like it or not, though, this business model is perfectly legal under current law, and the agencies that enforce our immigration laws have no business trying to eviscerate it by policy or a pattern of discretionary actions.
It is true that some IT consulting companies' practices have been the focus of fraud investigations. But DOL has stringent rules in place to deal with the bad guys. Benching H-1B workers without pay, paying below the prevailing wage, sending H-1B workers on long-term assignments to a site not covered by an LCA—these are the practices we most often hear about, and every single one of these is a violation of an existing regulation that could be enforced by the Department of Labor. When an employer violates wage and hour rules, DOL investigates the practices and enforces the regulations against that employer. But no one shuts down an entire industry as a result.
And the IT consulting industry is not the only user of the H-1B visa. Let's not forget how many other critical fields use H-1B workers. In my own career alone, I have seen H-1B petitions for nanoscientists, ornithologists, CEO's of significant not for profit organizations, teachers, applied mathematicians, risk analysts, professionals involved in pharmaceutical research and development, automotive designers, international legal experts, film editors, microimaging engineers. H-1B's are valuable to small and large businesses alike, arguably even more to that emerging business that needs one key expert to develop a new product or service and get the business off the ground.
The assault on H-1B's is not only offensive, it's dangerous. Here's why:
* H-1B's create jobs—statistics show that 5 jobs are created in the U.S. for every H-1B worker hired. An administrative clamp-down in the program will hinder this job creation. And think about the valuable sharing of skills and expertise between H-1B workers and U.S. workers—this is lost when companies are discouraged from using the program.
* The anti-H-1B assault dissuades large businesses from conducting research and development in the US, and encourages the relocation of those facilities in jurisdictions that are friendlier to foreign professionals.
* The anti-H-1B assault chills the formation of small businesses in the US, particularly in emerging technologies. This will most certainly be one of the long-term results of USCIS' most recent memo.
* The attack on H-1B's offends our friends and allies in the world. An example: Earlier this year India –one of the U.S.'s closest allies --announced new visa restrictions on foreign nationals working there. Surely the treatment of Indian national H-1B workers at the hands of our agencies involved in the immigration process would not have escaped the attention of the Indian government as they issued their own restrictions.
* The increasing challenges in the H-1B program may have the effect of encouraging foreign students who were educated in the U.S. to seek permanent positions elsewhere.
Whatever the cause of the visceral reaction against H-1B workers might be—whether it stems from a fear that fraud will become more widespread or whether it is simply a broader reaction against foreign workers that often raises its head during any down economy –I sincerely hope that the agencies are able to gain some perspective on the program that allows them to treat legitimate H-1B employers and employees with the respect they deserve and to effectively enforce against those who are non-compliant, rather than casting a wide net and treating all H-1B users as abusers.
source link : http://ailaleadership.blogspot.com/2010/02/why-is-h-1b-dirty-word.html#comment-form
girlfriend comments wallpapersikh
solaris27
02-24 12:04 PM
its depends ...
my CPA deducted below expenses
1) my and wife air ticket to india for visa stamping.
2) All visa fees
3) all hotel exp.
4) All attorney and USCIS fees .
but check with your CPA .
my CPA deducted below expenses
1) my and wife air ticket to india for visa stamping.
2) All visa fees
3) all hotel exp.
4) All attorney and USCIS fees .
but check with your CPA .
hairstyles KHANDA WALLPAPER,
vinayskadam
11-24 01:22 PM
@lj_rr:
Thanks a lot for the quick reply, its really helpful.
Thanks a lot for the quick reply, its really helpful.
webm
03-19 02:32 PM
RD is also not a reliable predictor since there are people who have been approved who applied for AOS in July 2007 while those who had applied prior to this are still waiting to see the light.
It is a random process for sure.
yes looks like its a random pick..
There are guys which got and not got (waiting) even PD is current and RD not fall under processing dates.Its kind of mixed possibles!!
It is a random process for sure.
yes looks like its a random pick..
There are guys which got and not got (waiting) even PD is current and RD not fall under processing dates.Its kind of mixed possibles!!
spulapa
02-02 12:26 PM
Congratulations maine_gc...!!!
Have fun...!!
Have fun...!!
No comments:
Post a Comment