iptel
02-14 01:21 PM
Chapter 2: Skills for the U.S. Workforce.
http://www.whitehouse.gov/cea/ch2-erp06.pdf
covers great deal of importance of H1B and Green Card. May be we can consider it to be part of our presentation.
Part of the report says
Caps on employment-based green cards limit the number of high-skilled
foreigners who can become permanent residents. The cap is set at 140,000
visas per year, including visas for the workers� spouses and children. Each
country�s nationals can make up no more than 7 percent of total immigrant
visas. These caps have led to long delays for applicants, especially for workers
from over-represented countries. For instance, some workers who became
eligible in January 2006 for EB-2 employment-based green cards (for workers
with advanced degrees or persons of exceptional ability) had applied for
permanent residence five years earlier.
A variety of proposals have been advanced for permanent employmentbased
immigration to allow for more high-skilled workers and to reduce wait
times. Any changes to the cap on the number of employment-based green
cards would require legislative action. First, workers� spouses and children
could be exempted from the cap, as is currently done for the H-1B program.
Spouses and children make up about half of the recipients of employmentbased
green cards, so this change would roughly double the number of
workers able to get employment-based green cards. Second, the fixed 140,000
cap could be replaced with a flexible market-based cap that would increase or
decrease with demand for workers eligible for employment-based green cards.
Finally, under current policy, nationals of no single country can receive more
than 7 percent of green cards. This share could be raised to reduce the long
delays for employment-based green cards for applicants from countries with
large numbers of desirable, high-skilled workers. Careful enforcement of
limits on foreign nationals� access to sensitive technology would provide
continued protection for our national security.
http://www.whitehouse.gov/cea/ch2-erp06.pdf
covers great deal of importance of H1B and Green Card. May be we can consider it to be part of our presentation.
Part of the report says
Caps on employment-based green cards limit the number of high-skilled
foreigners who can become permanent residents. The cap is set at 140,000
visas per year, including visas for the workers� spouses and children. Each
country�s nationals can make up no more than 7 percent of total immigrant
visas. These caps have led to long delays for applicants, especially for workers
from over-represented countries. For instance, some workers who became
eligible in January 2006 for EB-2 employment-based green cards (for workers
with advanced degrees or persons of exceptional ability) had applied for
permanent residence five years earlier.
A variety of proposals have been advanced for permanent employmentbased
immigration to allow for more high-skilled workers and to reduce wait
times. Any changes to the cap on the number of employment-based green
cards would require legislative action. First, workers� spouses and children
could be exempted from the cap, as is currently done for the H-1B program.
Spouses and children make up about half of the recipients of employmentbased
green cards, so this change would roughly double the number of
workers able to get employment-based green cards. Second, the fixed 140,000
cap could be replaced with a flexible market-based cap that would increase or
decrease with demand for workers eligible for employment-based green cards.
Finally, under current policy, nationals of no single country can receive more
than 7 percent of green cards. This share could be raised to reduce the long
delays for employment-based green cards for applicants from countries with
large numbers of desirable, high-skilled workers. Careful enforcement of
limits on foreign nationals� access to sensitive technology would provide
continued protection for our national security.
wallpaper I hate i miss you poems family
retropain
09-01 11:08 AM
What's particularly interesting is the number of 'scare words' used in this selected testimony on aspects of the CIR bill. Its a lot like Loo Dobbs "War" on the middle class. Its clear CIS, Nusa, FAIR provide the script to him on immigration matters. I knew Loo wasn't that creative in the first place
=---
TESTIMONY OF MICHAEL W. CUTLER
SEPTEMBER 1, 2006
HOUSE JUDICIARY COMMITTEE
Chairmen Sensenbrenner and Hostettler, Ranking Members Conyers and Jackson Lee, members of Congress, distinguished members of the panel, ladies and gentlemen. It is a distinct honor and privilege to provide testimony at this hearing because the topic of the hearing is of truly critical significance. We are here to avert what I believe would be a catastrophe for the United States. The United States Senate passed a bill, S. 2611, that would provide incentives for a massive influx of illegal aliens, aided, abetted and induced to violate our nation’s immigration laws at a time that our nation is confronting the continuing threat of terrorism and the increasing involvement of violent gangs, comprised predominantly of deportable aliens, in a wide variety of violent crimes committed against our nation’s citizens. It is of critical importance that this hearing and others like it, illuminate why S. 2611 would expose our nation to unreasonable vulnerabilities especially in the post-9/11 world.
A nation’s primary responsibility is to provide for the safety and security of its citizens and yet, for reasons I cannot begin to fathom, the members of the Senate who voted for S. 2611 are seemingly oblivious to the lessons that the disastrous amnesty of the Immigration Reform and Control Act of 1986 (IRCA) should have taught us. That piece of legislation lead to the greatest influx of illegal aliens in the history of our nation. Fraud and a lack of integrity of the immigration system not only flooded our nation with illegal aliens who ran our borders, hoping that what had been billed as a “one time” amnesty would be repeated, but it also enabled a number of terrorists and many criminals to enter the United States and then embed themselves in the United States.
A notable example of such a terrorist can be found in a review of the facts concerning Mahmud Abouhalima, a citizen of Egypt who entered the United States on a tourist visa, overstayed his authorized period of admission and then applied for amnesty under the agricultural worker provisions of IRCA. He succeeded in obtaining resident alien status through this process. During a 5 year period he drove a cab and had his license suspended numerous times for violations of law and ultimately demonstrated his appreciation for our nation’s generosity by participating in the first attack on the World Trade Center in 1993 that left 6 people dead, hundreds of people injured and an estimated one half billion dollars in damage inflicted, on that iconic, ill-fated complex. America had opened its doors to him so that he might participate in the “American Dream.” He turned that dream into our worst nightmare. The other terrorists who attacked our nation on subsequent attacks, including the attacks of September 11, 2001, similarly exploited our generosity, seeing in our nation’s kindness, weakness, gaming the immigration system to enter our country and then, hide in plain sight, among us.
As I recall, when IRCA was proposed, one of the selling points was that along with amnesty for what was believed to have been a population of some 1.5 million illegal aliens would be a new approach to turn off what has been described as the “magnet” that draws the majority of illegal aliens into the United States in the first place, the prospect of securing employment in the United States. In order to accomplish this important goal, IRCA imposed penalties against those unscrupulous employers who knowingly hired illegal aliens. My former colleagues and I were pleased to see that under the employer sanctions of IRCA, the unscrupulous employers of illegal aliens would be made accountable, or so we thought. We were frustrated that we had seen all too many employers hire illegal aliens and treat them horrendously They paid them sub-standard wages and created unsafe, indeed hazardous working conditions for the illegal aliens they hired, knowing full well that these aliens would not complain because they feared being reported to the INS. Meanwhile the employer would not face any penalty for his outrageous conduct. Finally, it seemed that the employer sanctions provisions of IRCA would discourage employers from hiring illegal aliens and would also make it less likely they would treat their employees as miserably as some of these employers did.
Of course, we now know that the relative handful of special agents who were assigned to conduct investigations of employers who hired illegal aliens made it unlikely that employers would face a significant risk of being caught violating these laws and that they would face an even smaller chance of being seriously fined. Furthermore, the way that the amnesty provisions of the law were enacted simply created a cottage industry of fraud document vendors who provided illegal aliens with counterfeit or altered identity documents and supporting documents to enable the illegal alien population to circumvent the immigration laws. Ultimately approximately 3.5 million illegal aliens emerged from the infamous shadows to participate in the amnesty program of 1986. I have never seen an explanation for the reason that more than twice as many aliens took advantage of the 1986 amnesty than was initially believed would but I believe that two factors came into play. It may well be that the number of illegal aliens in the country was underestimated. I also believe, however, that a large number of illegal aliens were able to gain entry into the United States long after the cutoff point and succeeded in making false claims that they had been present in the country for the requisite period of time.
To put this in perspective, I have read various estimates about the number of illegal aliens who are currently present in the United States. These estimates range from a low of 12 million to a high of 20 million. If, for argument sake, we figure on a number of 15 million illegal aliens, or ten times the number that had been estimated prior to the amnesty of 1986, and if the same sort of under counting occurs and if a comparable percentage of aliens succeed in racing into the United States and making a false claims that they had been here for the necessary period of time to be eligible to participate in the amnesty program that the Reid-Kennedy provisions would reward illegal aliens with, then we might expect some 35 million illegal aliens will ultimately participate in this insane program. Once they become citizens they would then be eligible to file applications to bring their family members to the United States, flooding our nation with tens of millions of additional new lawful immigrations while our nation’s porous borders, visa waiver program and extreme lack of resources to enforce the immigration laws from within the interior of the United States would allow many millions of illegal aliens to continue to enter the United States in violation of law.
The utterly inept and incompetent USCIS, which is now unable to carry out it’s most basic missions with even a modicum of integrity would undoubtedly disintegrate. The system would simply implode, crushed by the burden of its vicious cycle of attempting to deal with an ever increasing spiral of rampant fraud thereby encouraging still more fraudulent applications to be filed. Terrorists would not find gaming this system the least bit challenging and our government will have become their unwitting ally, providing them with official identity documents in false names and then, ultimately, providing them with the keys to the kingdom by conferring resident aliens status and then, United States citizenship upon those who would destroy our nation and slaughter our citizens.
I hope that this doomsday scenario will not be permitted to play out.
Insanity has been described as doing the same things the same way and expecting a different result. Where our nation’s security is concerned it would be indeed, insane to ignore the lessons of IRCA.
When I was a boy my dad used to tell me that there were no mistakes in life, only lessons, provided we learn from what goes wrong and make the appropriate changes in the way we do things. However, to repeat the same mistakes was to him and to me, simply unforgivable.
Chairmen Sensenbrenner and Hostettler, I commend your leadership in calling this hearing to make certain that these concerns are made public and are taken into account, especially as we approach the anniversary of the fifth anniversary of the attacks of September 11 and our nation continues to grapple with the immigration crisis.
America is at historic crossroads at this moment in time. Courageous decisions need to be made by our nation’s leaders. If our nation fails to select the proper path, there will be no going back. If our nation decides to provide amnesty to millions of undocumented and illegal aliens, I fear that our national security will suffer irreparable harm as we aid and abet alien terrorists who seek to enter our country and embed themselves within it in preparation for the deadly attacks they would carry out. The priority must be clear, national security must be given the highest consideration and priority where the security of our nation’s borders and the integrity of the immigration system are concerned.
=---
TESTIMONY OF MICHAEL W. CUTLER
SEPTEMBER 1, 2006
HOUSE JUDICIARY COMMITTEE
Chairmen Sensenbrenner and Hostettler, Ranking Members Conyers and Jackson Lee, members of Congress, distinguished members of the panel, ladies and gentlemen. It is a distinct honor and privilege to provide testimony at this hearing because the topic of the hearing is of truly critical significance. We are here to avert what I believe would be a catastrophe for the United States. The United States Senate passed a bill, S. 2611, that would provide incentives for a massive influx of illegal aliens, aided, abetted and induced to violate our nation’s immigration laws at a time that our nation is confronting the continuing threat of terrorism and the increasing involvement of violent gangs, comprised predominantly of deportable aliens, in a wide variety of violent crimes committed against our nation’s citizens. It is of critical importance that this hearing and others like it, illuminate why S. 2611 would expose our nation to unreasonable vulnerabilities especially in the post-9/11 world.
A nation’s primary responsibility is to provide for the safety and security of its citizens and yet, for reasons I cannot begin to fathom, the members of the Senate who voted for S. 2611 are seemingly oblivious to the lessons that the disastrous amnesty of the Immigration Reform and Control Act of 1986 (IRCA) should have taught us. That piece of legislation lead to the greatest influx of illegal aliens in the history of our nation. Fraud and a lack of integrity of the immigration system not only flooded our nation with illegal aliens who ran our borders, hoping that what had been billed as a “one time” amnesty would be repeated, but it also enabled a number of terrorists and many criminals to enter the United States and then embed themselves in the United States.
A notable example of such a terrorist can be found in a review of the facts concerning Mahmud Abouhalima, a citizen of Egypt who entered the United States on a tourist visa, overstayed his authorized period of admission and then applied for amnesty under the agricultural worker provisions of IRCA. He succeeded in obtaining resident alien status through this process. During a 5 year period he drove a cab and had his license suspended numerous times for violations of law and ultimately demonstrated his appreciation for our nation’s generosity by participating in the first attack on the World Trade Center in 1993 that left 6 people dead, hundreds of people injured and an estimated one half billion dollars in damage inflicted, on that iconic, ill-fated complex. America had opened its doors to him so that he might participate in the “American Dream.” He turned that dream into our worst nightmare. The other terrorists who attacked our nation on subsequent attacks, including the attacks of September 11, 2001, similarly exploited our generosity, seeing in our nation’s kindness, weakness, gaming the immigration system to enter our country and then, hide in plain sight, among us.
As I recall, when IRCA was proposed, one of the selling points was that along with amnesty for what was believed to have been a population of some 1.5 million illegal aliens would be a new approach to turn off what has been described as the “magnet” that draws the majority of illegal aliens into the United States in the first place, the prospect of securing employment in the United States. In order to accomplish this important goal, IRCA imposed penalties against those unscrupulous employers who knowingly hired illegal aliens. My former colleagues and I were pleased to see that under the employer sanctions of IRCA, the unscrupulous employers of illegal aliens would be made accountable, or so we thought. We were frustrated that we had seen all too many employers hire illegal aliens and treat them horrendously They paid them sub-standard wages and created unsafe, indeed hazardous working conditions for the illegal aliens they hired, knowing full well that these aliens would not complain because they feared being reported to the INS. Meanwhile the employer would not face any penalty for his outrageous conduct. Finally, it seemed that the employer sanctions provisions of IRCA would discourage employers from hiring illegal aliens and would also make it less likely they would treat their employees as miserably as some of these employers did.
Of course, we now know that the relative handful of special agents who were assigned to conduct investigations of employers who hired illegal aliens made it unlikely that employers would face a significant risk of being caught violating these laws and that they would face an even smaller chance of being seriously fined. Furthermore, the way that the amnesty provisions of the law were enacted simply created a cottage industry of fraud document vendors who provided illegal aliens with counterfeit or altered identity documents and supporting documents to enable the illegal alien population to circumvent the immigration laws. Ultimately approximately 3.5 million illegal aliens emerged from the infamous shadows to participate in the amnesty program of 1986. I have never seen an explanation for the reason that more than twice as many aliens took advantage of the 1986 amnesty than was initially believed would but I believe that two factors came into play. It may well be that the number of illegal aliens in the country was underestimated. I also believe, however, that a large number of illegal aliens were able to gain entry into the United States long after the cutoff point and succeeded in making false claims that they had been present in the country for the requisite period of time.
To put this in perspective, I have read various estimates about the number of illegal aliens who are currently present in the United States. These estimates range from a low of 12 million to a high of 20 million. If, for argument sake, we figure on a number of 15 million illegal aliens, or ten times the number that had been estimated prior to the amnesty of 1986, and if the same sort of under counting occurs and if a comparable percentage of aliens succeed in racing into the United States and making a false claims that they had been here for the necessary period of time to be eligible to participate in the amnesty program that the Reid-Kennedy provisions would reward illegal aliens with, then we might expect some 35 million illegal aliens will ultimately participate in this insane program. Once they become citizens they would then be eligible to file applications to bring their family members to the United States, flooding our nation with tens of millions of additional new lawful immigrations while our nation’s porous borders, visa waiver program and extreme lack of resources to enforce the immigration laws from within the interior of the United States would allow many millions of illegal aliens to continue to enter the United States in violation of law.
The utterly inept and incompetent USCIS, which is now unable to carry out it’s most basic missions with even a modicum of integrity would undoubtedly disintegrate. The system would simply implode, crushed by the burden of its vicious cycle of attempting to deal with an ever increasing spiral of rampant fraud thereby encouraging still more fraudulent applications to be filed. Terrorists would not find gaming this system the least bit challenging and our government will have become their unwitting ally, providing them with official identity documents in false names and then, ultimately, providing them with the keys to the kingdom by conferring resident aliens status and then, United States citizenship upon those who would destroy our nation and slaughter our citizens.
I hope that this doomsday scenario will not be permitted to play out.
Insanity has been described as doing the same things the same way and expecting a different result. Where our nation’s security is concerned it would be indeed, insane to ignore the lessons of IRCA.
When I was a boy my dad used to tell me that there were no mistakes in life, only lessons, provided we learn from what goes wrong and make the appropriate changes in the way we do things. However, to repeat the same mistakes was to him and to me, simply unforgivable.
Chairmen Sensenbrenner and Hostettler, I commend your leadership in calling this hearing to make certain that these concerns are made public and are taken into account, especially as we approach the anniversary of the fifth anniversary of the attacks of September 11 and our nation continues to grapple with the immigration crisis.
America is at historic crossroads at this moment in time. Courageous decisions need to be made by our nation’s leaders. If our nation fails to select the proper path, there will be no going back. If our nation decides to provide amnesty to millions of undocumented and illegal aliens, I fear that our national security will suffer irreparable harm as we aid and abet alien terrorists who seek to enter our country and embed themselves within it in preparation for the deadly attacks they would carry out. The priority must be clear, national security must be given the highest consideration and priority where the security of our nation’s borders and the integrity of the immigration system are concerned.
girishvar
09-17 07:25 PM
Being a consular processing 6 months is a goog time. If you are already working for your existing employer for more than 6 months, even on H1 then you can take a risk. Basically you need to prove an intent. No body expects anyone needs to be a slave to any employer.
2011 i miss you poems for a
nixstor
09-25 04:39 PM
Guys,
While thinking proactively to get businesses support is a great, but this point is way tooo long for having any shot. I agree that 20% of the US economy runs on housing. How ever, There are no verbal assurances that can pass over from IV members to NAHB who inturn will push for some sort of bill or do monetary help to IV.
How will it sound if some one said lets convert the 12 miliion ILL legal and they will buy atleast 5 mil homes.
On the flip side, I have noticed so many people who are on H1B and bought houses when the mortage interests were low. ( both double and single income families )
While thinking proactively to get businesses support is a great, but this point is way tooo long for having any shot. I agree that 20% of the US economy runs on housing. How ever, There are no verbal assurances that can pass over from IV members to NAHB who inturn will push for some sort of bill or do monetary help to IV.
How will it sound if some one said lets convert the 12 miliion ILL legal and they will buy atleast 5 mil homes.
On the flip side, I have noticed so many people who are on H1B and bought houses when the mortage interests were low. ( both double and single income families )
more...
munnu77
04-06 09:35 PM
i am sorry..i couldnt follow todays proceedings..whn i cam to iv site in the evening..everyone says bill is dead
whn i went to immigration-law.com, they say the following
cud someone tell me which one is true??????????
We reported earlier the Senate Republican Members Agreement last night. Today, the Democratic Minority Leader and other Democractic leaders agreed to the proposal, turning the Republican agreement into the Bi-Partisan Agreement. This dramatic break-through opens a door to the possibility of passing the Senate version of Comprehensive Immigration Reform bill, S. 2454, as amended before this week is over and before the Congress goes into the recess next two weeks.
The development is accompanied by three other developments:
President released statement supporting the bi-partisan agreement;
Senate rejected the Democrat's motion to cloture for the Specter amendments to S.2454;
Senate also relected the Republican Kyl' motion for his amendments.
Now we see the light at the end of the tunnel!!
whn i went to immigration-law.com, they say the following
cud someone tell me which one is true??????????
We reported earlier the Senate Republican Members Agreement last night. Today, the Democratic Minority Leader and other Democractic leaders agreed to the proposal, turning the Republican agreement into the Bi-Partisan Agreement. This dramatic break-through opens a door to the possibility of passing the Senate version of Comprehensive Immigration Reform bill, S. 2454, as amended before this week is over and before the Congress goes into the recess next two weeks.
The development is accompanied by three other developments:
President released statement supporting the bi-partisan agreement;
Senate rejected the Democrat's motion to cloture for the Specter amendments to S.2454;
Senate also relected the Republican Kyl' motion for his amendments.
Now we see the light at the end of the tunnel!!
eb3retro
04-17 04:44 PM
I didnt sign this petition.
more...
pd_recapturing
02-09 08:39 AM
NCR Region
Sr Developer / Lead Developer (7-15yrs exp) - 8 - 15 lakhs
Project Manager (10-15yrs exp) - 10-20 lakhs
Above this level, the jobs are far and few, but some are
Principal Consultant / Program Manager (in cos like Wipro, Infy, HP) (12- 18 yrs exp) - 18-28 lakhs
Also note, just because someone has worked in US for a few years does not get any advantage above Project Manager level.
Information based on many well placed contacts at these levels.
This is absolutely correct. I also was told the same from a few of my friends who are working in NCR.
Sr Developer / Lead Developer (7-15yrs exp) - 8 - 15 lakhs
Project Manager (10-15yrs exp) - 10-20 lakhs
Above this level, the jobs are far and few, but some are
Principal Consultant / Program Manager (in cos like Wipro, Infy, HP) (12- 18 yrs exp) - 18-28 lakhs
Also note, just because someone has worked in US for a few years does not get any advantage above Project Manager level.
Information based on many well placed contacts at these levels.
This is absolutely correct. I also was told the same from a few of my friends who are working in NCR.
2010 i miss you poems for a
chanduv23
06-12 11:31 AM
Because Mahatma Gandhi was born on october.:):)
His 6years end in oct 2010.
ds
I was born in Oct too :) :)
His 6years end in oct 2010.
ds
I was born in Oct too :) :)
more...
EB3June03
06-17 10:08 AM
Thanks yganreddy for your input. It might help.
In my case, the X Ray shows nothing - so I am all clear on that.
My concern is I don't how big the thing became after the test was done (twice). Once in 1997 when I first came from India and next in 1998 (when i worked in NY Preysbeterian Hosptal and they mandatorily tested for TB via skin test). I have asked for the reports from NY hospital and am hoping that it is less than 10 mm as the civil surgeon says that if the size is bigger than 10 mm, I will have to go through the treatment for TB (even though i have no evidence of active TB). I hope he is wrong.
I had another question. Can I get the reports from India, when i got the TB test done? I might have the papers at home and will have to search for it or does USCIS not consider the papers from India? I hear a sealed envelope is what is needed from a doctor. In that case, we might be able to try to get in touch with the doctor that did the test and ask for a sealed envelope (showing him the papers he gave us when we got the test done).
In my case, the X Ray shows nothing - so I am all clear on that.
My concern is I don't how big the thing became after the test was done (twice). Once in 1997 when I first came from India and next in 1998 (when i worked in NY Preysbeterian Hosptal and they mandatorily tested for TB via skin test). I have asked for the reports from NY hospital and am hoping that it is less than 10 mm as the civil surgeon says that if the size is bigger than 10 mm, I will have to go through the treatment for TB (even though i have no evidence of active TB). I hope he is wrong.
I had another question. Can I get the reports from India, when i got the TB test done? I might have the papers at home and will have to search for it or does USCIS not consider the papers from India? I hear a sealed envelope is what is needed from a doctor. In that case, we might be able to try to get in touch with the doctor that did the test and ask for a sealed envelope (showing him the papers he gave us when we got the test done).
hair i miss you poems for a
branpaul_guiao
06-09 03:09 AM
I
Applied for a Waiver with the DOS: 4/22/10
Received by DOS: 4/30/2010
Response: Favorable Recommendation 05/04/2010
Received by the USCIS @ VSC: 05/07/2010
Waiver Approved by USCIS: 05/15/2010
is there a premium processing for waiver application?
I applied for J-1 waiver 3 months ago through No Objection Statement. My home country has already confirmed that they sent the NOS letter to State Dept Waiver Review Division last month, but until now the State Dept hasn't given any update. I checked online and it says documents pending.
Applied for a Waiver with the DOS: 4/22/10
Received by DOS: 4/30/2010
Response: Favorable Recommendation 05/04/2010
Received by the USCIS @ VSC: 05/07/2010
Waiver Approved by USCIS: 05/15/2010
is there a premium processing for waiver application?
I applied for J-1 waiver 3 months ago through No Objection Statement. My home country has already confirmed that they sent the NOS letter to State Dept Waiver Review Division last month, but until now the State Dept hasn't given any update. I checked online and it says documents pending.
more...
nomorelogins
11-08 03:18 PM
The statistics they have provided might be correct but useless for any PD date information. Applications include all kinds of 485s, AP, EAD and renewals.
If USCIS really wanted to provide statistics they should have provided how many EB based 485s they have (further dividing them by PD year and country), and same thing for family based. Clubbing these two together is stupid.
I agree. given that they process close to 600K green cards per year, we should all be current by this report.
If USCIS really wanted to provide statistics they should have provided how many EB based 485s they have (further dividing them by PD year and country), and same thing for family based. Clubbing these two together is stupid.
I agree. given that they process close to 600K green cards per year, we should all be current by this report.
hot i miss you boyfriend poems.
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.
more...
house i miss you poems for a oyfriend. miss you poems for oyfriend
franklin
06-15 02:52 AM
H1 B extension under current laws (if on H1B for 6 years)
3 years extension if I140 approved and PD NOT current
1 year extension if LC approved and PD IS CURRENT
EAD or H1B - both RIGHT NOW are only 1 year extensions...
As I understand it, as long as you don't travel using your EAD, you can maintain H1B status. If you use EAD, you lose H1B
btw - as a side note, having multiple questions in 1 thread is almost impossible to track and answer. Ever heard of thread hijacking?!
3 years extension if I140 approved and PD NOT current
1 year extension if LC approved and PD IS CURRENT
EAD or H1B - both RIGHT NOW are only 1 year extensions...
As I understand it, as long as you don't travel using your EAD, you can maintain H1B status. If you use EAD, you lose H1B
btw - as a side note, having multiple questions in 1 thread is almost impossible to track and answer. Ever heard of thread hijacking?!
tattoo I Miss You Poems For A
Humhongekamyab
11-10 03:04 PM
By volunteering she is taking away a job of a US worker so the answer is no.
more...
pictures miss you boyfriend poems.
nixstor
06-28 02:13 PM
I am not sure if I am reading this right or not, go this page
http://www.imminfo.com/resources/cis-sop-aos/3-7.html
and read the first para. It says G-325A has to be processed only if the applicant has entered the US in non immigrant status less than one year prior to current calendar date of review.
So any one who has entered US before (07/02/07) will have their G-325A trashed? I was under the impression that USCIS does use the biographic information to check with local law enforcement for the the past 5 years as stated in the G-325A. Any ideas?
http://www.imminfo.com/resources/cis-sop-aos/3-7.html
and read the first para. It says G-325A has to be processed only if the applicant has entered the US in non immigrant status less than one year prior to current calendar date of review.
So any one who has entered US before (07/02/07) will have their G-325A trashed? I was under the impression that USCIS does use the biographic information to check with local law enforcement for the the past 5 years as stated in the G-325A. Any ideas?
dresses i miss you boyfriend poems. i
txh1b
08-06 07:36 PM
hi,
I came to US 5 years back in H4. My husband processed GC and 140 is cleared and 485 pending. I got my EAD and now working. My husband and I have problems and he is threatening to ruin my life.
Can I know a few things
1. Can he take me out of the GC ?
2. Can he revoke my EAD ?
3. Can my employee extend my EAD which is expiring in 2010 and continue my GC.
please help...
If you are on a H4, you can be taken out of the pending 485 if you go through a divorce.
1. Possibly can with a divorce.
2. #1, can be considered automatically revoked if divorced.
3. No
I came to US 5 years back in H4. My husband processed GC and 140 is cleared and 485 pending. I got my EAD and now working. My husband and I have problems and he is threatening to ruin my life.
Can I know a few things
1. Can he take me out of the GC ?
2. Can he revoke my EAD ?
3. Can my employee extend my EAD which is expiring in 2010 and continue my GC.
please help...
If you are on a H4, you can be taken out of the pending 485 if you go through a divorce.
1. Possibly can with a divorce.
2. #1, can be considered automatically revoked if divorced.
3. No
more...
makeup i miss you boyfriend poems.
morchu
08-01 12:09 AM
There is nothing complicated here.
Put your wifes status as of the 485 filing date. Means if you are filing in July/August this will be H4.
You can travel in H4. Also no problem in changing status to H1 after october 1st. (She have an H1 approval doesnt mean she is NOW in H1 status. Her change of status is approved from Oct 1st). Please remember that if she doesnt start working in H1 on October 1st, technically, she will Neither be in H1 / H4 status on October 1st. Means she might fall under "adjustee" status.
Assuming that your wife starts in H1 status from Oct 1st, there is no problem in travelling in H1. (she might need to get an H1 visa stamp though).
The other option is she can fall under adjustee status and travel in AP, work in EAD.
Also after 485 approval H4 status doesnt get "illegal" it just gets adjusted.
(Well...... nobody can have two statuses at the same time anyway).
Better check with your lawyer. Becuase when you apply for 485 and get approved your wife's H4 status becomes illegal. So don't know exactly about H1 or H4 on advanced parole. Lawyer is the best person for your case.
Put your wifes status as of the 485 filing date. Means if you are filing in July/August this will be H4.
You can travel in H4. Also no problem in changing status to H1 after october 1st. (She have an H1 approval doesnt mean she is NOW in H1 status. Her change of status is approved from Oct 1st). Please remember that if she doesnt start working in H1 on October 1st, technically, she will Neither be in H1 / H4 status on October 1st. Means she might fall under "adjustee" status.
Assuming that your wife starts in H1 status from Oct 1st, there is no problem in travelling in H1. (she might need to get an H1 visa stamp though).
The other option is she can fall under adjustee status and travel in AP, work in EAD.
Also after 485 approval H4 status doesnt get "illegal" it just gets adjusted.
(Well...... nobody can have two statuses at the same time anyway).
Better check with your lawyer. Becuase when you apply for 485 and get approved your wife's H4 status becomes illegal. So don't know exactly about H1 or H4 on advanced parole. Lawyer is the best person for your case.
girlfriend i miss you poems for
mundram
04-20 12:03 PM
Recently, I was in the similar situation but with H4 dependents.
Here was the response from my lawyer:
"the I-94 card should reflect that date. What I would like them to do is go to their local port of entry (probably airport), to have the I-94 cards corrected. It does not need to be the same airport that they entered through."
The airport authorities easily updated the "until" date. However, they told me that the system recognizes the exit date based on the visa validity date. But safe to get it updated from your local airport.
Here was the response from my lawyer:
"the I-94 card should reflect that date. What I would like them to do is go to their local port of entry (probably airport), to have the I-94 cards corrected. It does not need to be the same airport that they entered through."
The airport authorities easily updated the "until" date. However, they told me that the system recognizes the exit date based on the visa validity date. But safe to get it updated from your local airport.
hairstyles girlfriend i miss you poems
maine_gc
02-01 12:48 PM
Thank you all.
PD is Nov 2004 - EB2
PD is Nov 2004 - EB2
chapper
11-08 01:57 PM
Yes - I agree with andy garcia
hydboy77
10-07 06:19 PM
Yes things are really bad. You are lucky that your company is even willing to consider filing eb2 other companies are not even filling willing to file eb3 perm. They dont want to apply any perm at all. On an average DOL is taking 9 months to approve perm, if it eb2 there is a good chace of getting audited and that will takes a couple of years.
As far as I know the business necessity statement is required whenever you apply for a Eb2 requirement (MS or bachelors+5) when according to DOL the job does not require a EB2 (basically the position you are applying for perm does not require EB2 but requires eb3 according to DOL but you are saying this position requires eb2 and not eb3). almost all jobs in IT according to DOL do not fall under EB2 they fall under Eb3, so every eb2 perm has a very good chance of getting audited. This situation has been further worsened by the economy and also the line cutters who try to jump from eb3 to eb2 by reapplying. DOL has caught on to this abuse just like they caught up with the labor sale(labor substitution) and abolished labor substitution. Similarly DOL is cracking down on any eb2 perm especially those who are reapplying. Before someone asks how does dol know you are trying to jump line by reapplying in Eb2, DOL knows because of the following information they ask in ETA form
"1. Are you seeking to utilize the filing date for a previously submitted application for Alien Employemnt Certification (ETA 750)?"
"1-A. If Yes, enter the previous filing date"
"2-A. "Indicate the previous SWA or local offiice case number OR, if not available, specify the state where case was originally filed:"
I would really love to hear comments from ppl who can relate to this possibly with some first-hand experience in going through this stage!
My labor cert was filed just this February (been about 8 months now). The application was put in as EB2 with the minimum requirements being - Masters + 3 yrs, or alternatively, a Bachelors + 5 yrs.
Now the law firm has contacted my manager asking her to prepare a "Business Necessity Statement" for a "POSSIBLE" audit! (note the word "possible", its not really an audit yet). They want my manager to explain why a Masters and 3 years is better than a Bachelors + 5 yrs for this job, and stuff like that.
Preparing a business necessity statement if there was really an audit is understandable, but this request from the law firm makes it look like they're more than certain that there will be an audit on my application. Have things gotten that bad really? Or is our law firm just pre-emptively preparing for the worst? Just to let you know, there are other ppl at my office with my similar job profile, whose labor cert has also been applied for as an EB3 (requiring only a Bachelors and work experience).
How scared should I be realistically about the possibility of an audit? And how realistic is it in this day and age to actually get an approved labor cert after responding to a business necessity audit.
Also, here's an excerpt from the email that the law firm sent to my manager. Can anyone of you suggest what kind of "additional documentation" they are talking about including with all the explanation for business necessity?
"All business necessity arguments must be evidenced via supporting documentation. Please note that the DOL prefers �independent� forms of documentation to statements from or information created by <companyname>. Make sure to be reasonably specific and identify the sources and bases for your assertions in the context of <companyname>'s business. Independent documentation that contains financial justification(s) to substantiate the business necessity argument will be particularly helpful."
As far as I know the business necessity statement is required whenever you apply for a Eb2 requirement (MS or bachelors+5) when according to DOL the job does not require a EB2 (basically the position you are applying for perm does not require EB2 but requires eb3 according to DOL but you are saying this position requires eb2 and not eb3). almost all jobs in IT according to DOL do not fall under EB2 they fall under Eb3, so every eb2 perm has a very good chance of getting audited. This situation has been further worsened by the economy and also the line cutters who try to jump from eb3 to eb2 by reapplying. DOL has caught on to this abuse just like they caught up with the labor sale(labor substitution) and abolished labor substitution. Similarly DOL is cracking down on any eb2 perm especially those who are reapplying. Before someone asks how does dol know you are trying to jump line by reapplying in Eb2, DOL knows because of the following information they ask in ETA form
"1. Are you seeking to utilize the filing date for a previously submitted application for Alien Employemnt Certification (ETA 750)?"
"1-A. If Yes, enter the previous filing date"
"2-A. "Indicate the previous SWA or local offiice case number OR, if not available, specify the state where case was originally filed:"
I would really love to hear comments from ppl who can relate to this possibly with some first-hand experience in going through this stage!
My labor cert was filed just this February (been about 8 months now). The application was put in as EB2 with the minimum requirements being - Masters + 3 yrs, or alternatively, a Bachelors + 5 yrs.
Now the law firm has contacted my manager asking her to prepare a "Business Necessity Statement" for a "POSSIBLE" audit! (note the word "possible", its not really an audit yet). They want my manager to explain why a Masters and 3 years is better than a Bachelors + 5 yrs for this job, and stuff like that.
Preparing a business necessity statement if there was really an audit is understandable, but this request from the law firm makes it look like they're more than certain that there will be an audit on my application. Have things gotten that bad really? Or is our law firm just pre-emptively preparing for the worst? Just to let you know, there are other ppl at my office with my similar job profile, whose labor cert has also been applied for as an EB3 (requiring only a Bachelors and work experience).
How scared should I be realistically about the possibility of an audit? And how realistic is it in this day and age to actually get an approved labor cert after responding to a business necessity audit.
Also, here's an excerpt from the email that the law firm sent to my manager. Can anyone of you suggest what kind of "additional documentation" they are talking about including with all the explanation for business necessity?
"All business necessity arguments must be evidenced via supporting documentation. Please note that the DOL prefers �independent� forms of documentation to statements from or information created by <companyname>. Make sure to be reasonably specific and identify the sources and bases for your assertions in the context of <companyname>'s business. Independent documentation that contains financial justification(s) to substantiate the business necessity argument will be particularly helpful."
No comments:
Post a Comment