ragz4u
04-13 10:52 AM
Will IV be trying to campaign/lobby against the 180 day delay?
90 days is a US law for every bill. Again, I don't see what IV has to do with that!
The other 90 days is because of amendment. Unfortunately this amendment was unanimously approved by the SJC. Can't see how IV can campaign against something like this too! And I think its prudent to wait 3 more months than rankle some lawmaker about this. We need publicity, but not negative publicity!
In any case, we will stick ONLY to our agenda.
90 days is a US law for every bill. Again, I don't see what IV has to do with that!
The other 90 days is because of amendment. Unfortunately this amendment was unanimously approved by the SJC. Can't see how IV can campaign against something like this too! And I think its prudent to wait 3 more months than rankle some lawmaker about this. We need publicity, but not negative publicity!
In any case, we will stick ONLY to our agenda.
wallpaper amor japones similitude
pappu
02-15 08:22 PM
ivuser very good ideas. I was waiting for others to respond to your post whole day to help with the tasks but nobody responded to even join you in a conference call. We get lot of people everyday on the forum, email and sometimes on the phone asking us to do xyz but very few actually volunteer to take it up upon themselves to execute their ideas.
Let us discuss these ideas offline. Thanks again for your interest.
Let us discuss these ideas offline. Thanks again for your interest.
waltz
08-24 02:05 PM
I'm sorry if this has been posted before, but the show is based on the following study:
************************************************
Kauffman Foundation Study Points to �Brain-Drain� of Skilled U.S. Immigrant Entrepreneurs to Home Country
Contacts:
Barbara Pruitt, 816-932-1288, bpruitt@kauffman.org, Kauffman Foundation
Tom Phillips, 212-935-4655, comptwp@aol.com, Communication Partners
More than a million skilled foreign nationals in the United States, including doctors and scientists, face mounting visa backlog
(KANSAS CITY, Mo.) Aug. 22, 2007 � More than one million skilled immigrant workers, including scientists, engineers, doctors and researchers and their families, are competing for 120,000 permanent U.S. resident visas each year, creating a sizeable imbalance likely to fuel a �reverse brain-drain� with skilled workers returning to their home country, according to a new report released today by the Ewing Marion Kauffman Foundation.
The situation is even bleaker as the number of employment visas issued to immigrants from any single country is less than 10,000 per year with a wait time of several years.
�The United States benefits from having foreign-born innovators create their ideas in this country,� said Vivek Wadhwa, Wertheim fellow with the Harvard Law School and executive in residence at Duke University. �Their departures would be detrimental to U.S. economic well-being. And, when foreigners come to the United States, collaborate with Americans in developing and patenting new ideas, and employ those ideas in business in ways they could not readily do in their home countries, the world benefits.�
Conducted by researchers at Duke University, New York University and Harvard University, the study is the third in a series of studies focusing on immigrants� contributions to the competitiveness of the U.S. economy. Earlier research revealed a dramatic increase in the contributions of foreign nationals to U.S. intellectual property over an eight-year period.
In this study, "Intellectual Property, the Immigration Backlog, and a Reverse Brain-Drain," researchers offer a more refined measure of this rise in contributions of foreign nationals to U.S. intellectual property and seek to explain this increase with an analysis of the immigrant-visa backlog for skilled workers. The key finding from this research is that the number of skilled workers waiting for visas is significantly larger than the number that can be admitted to the United States. This imbalance creates the potential for a sizeable reverse brain-drain from the United States to the skilled workers� home countries.
The earlier studies, �America�s New Immigrant Entrepreneurs� and �Entrepreneurship, Education and Immigration: America�s New Immigrant Entrepreneurs, Part II,� documented that one in four engineering and technology companies founded between 1995 and 2005 had an immigrant founder. Researchers found that these companies employed 450,000 workers and generated $52 billion in revenue in 2006. Indian immigrants founded more companies than the next four groups (from the United Kingdom, China, Taiwan and Japan) combined.
Furthermore, these companies� founders tended to be highly educated in science, technology, math and engineering-related disciplines, with 96 percent holding bachelor�s degrees and 75 percent holding master�s or PhD degrees.
Among key findings in the most recent report:
Foreign nationals residing in the United States were named as inventors or co-inventors in 25.6 percent of international patent applications filed from the United States in 2006. This represents an increase from 7.6 percent in 1998.
Foreign nationals contributed to more than half of the international patents filed by a number of large, multi-national companies, including Qualcomm (72 percent), Merck & Co. (65 percent), General Electric (64 percent), Siemens (63 percent) and Cisco (60 percent). Forty-one percent of the patents filed by the U.S. government had foreign nationals as inventors or co-inventors.
In 2006, 16.8 percent of international patent applications from the United States had an inventor or co-inventor with a Chinese-heritage name, representing an increase from 11.2 percent in 1998. The contribution of inventors with Indian-heritage names increased to 13.7 percent from 9.5 percent in the same period.
The total number of employment-based principals in the employment-based categories and their family members waiting for legal permanent residence in the United States in 2006 was estimated at 1,055,084. Additionally, there are an estimated 126,421 residents abroad also waiting for employment-based U.S. legal permanent residence, adding up to a worldwide total of 1,181,505.
Using data from the New Immigrant Survey, the authors find that, in 2003, approximately one in five new legal immigrants in the United States and about one in three employment-based new legal immigrants either planned to leave the United States or were uncertain about remaining. The authors had no data on how many foreign nationals have actually returned to their homelands.
�Given that the U.S. comparative advantage in the global economy is in creating knowledge and applying it to business, it behooves the country to consider how we might adjust policies to reduce the immigration backlog, encourage innovative foreign minds to remain in the country, and entice new innovators to come,� said Robert Litan, vice president of Research and Policy at the Kauffman Foundation.
About the research team
For more information about the Global Engineering and Entrepreneurship research at Duke University, visit http://www.globalizationresearch.com; visit http://www.law.harvard.edu/programs/lwp/ to learn about Harvard Law�s Labor and Worklife Program; and visit http://www.nyu.edu/ for more information about New York University.
Read the report
************************************************
Kauffman Foundation Study Points to �Brain-Drain� of Skilled U.S. Immigrant Entrepreneurs to Home Country
Contacts:
Barbara Pruitt, 816-932-1288, bpruitt@kauffman.org, Kauffman Foundation
Tom Phillips, 212-935-4655, comptwp@aol.com, Communication Partners
More than a million skilled foreign nationals in the United States, including doctors and scientists, face mounting visa backlog
(KANSAS CITY, Mo.) Aug. 22, 2007 � More than one million skilled immigrant workers, including scientists, engineers, doctors and researchers and their families, are competing for 120,000 permanent U.S. resident visas each year, creating a sizeable imbalance likely to fuel a �reverse brain-drain� with skilled workers returning to their home country, according to a new report released today by the Ewing Marion Kauffman Foundation.
The situation is even bleaker as the number of employment visas issued to immigrants from any single country is less than 10,000 per year with a wait time of several years.
�The United States benefits from having foreign-born innovators create their ideas in this country,� said Vivek Wadhwa, Wertheim fellow with the Harvard Law School and executive in residence at Duke University. �Their departures would be detrimental to U.S. economic well-being. And, when foreigners come to the United States, collaborate with Americans in developing and patenting new ideas, and employ those ideas in business in ways they could not readily do in their home countries, the world benefits.�
Conducted by researchers at Duke University, New York University and Harvard University, the study is the third in a series of studies focusing on immigrants� contributions to the competitiveness of the U.S. economy. Earlier research revealed a dramatic increase in the contributions of foreign nationals to U.S. intellectual property over an eight-year period.
In this study, "Intellectual Property, the Immigration Backlog, and a Reverse Brain-Drain," researchers offer a more refined measure of this rise in contributions of foreign nationals to U.S. intellectual property and seek to explain this increase with an analysis of the immigrant-visa backlog for skilled workers. The key finding from this research is that the number of skilled workers waiting for visas is significantly larger than the number that can be admitted to the United States. This imbalance creates the potential for a sizeable reverse brain-drain from the United States to the skilled workers� home countries.
The earlier studies, �America�s New Immigrant Entrepreneurs� and �Entrepreneurship, Education and Immigration: America�s New Immigrant Entrepreneurs, Part II,� documented that one in four engineering and technology companies founded between 1995 and 2005 had an immigrant founder. Researchers found that these companies employed 450,000 workers and generated $52 billion in revenue in 2006. Indian immigrants founded more companies than the next four groups (from the United Kingdom, China, Taiwan and Japan) combined.
Furthermore, these companies� founders tended to be highly educated in science, technology, math and engineering-related disciplines, with 96 percent holding bachelor�s degrees and 75 percent holding master�s or PhD degrees.
Among key findings in the most recent report:
Foreign nationals residing in the United States were named as inventors or co-inventors in 25.6 percent of international patent applications filed from the United States in 2006. This represents an increase from 7.6 percent in 1998.
Foreign nationals contributed to more than half of the international patents filed by a number of large, multi-national companies, including Qualcomm (72 percent), Merck & Co. (65 percent), General Electric (64 percent), Siemens (63 percent) and Cisco (60 percent). Forty-one percent of the patents filed by the U.S. government had foreign nationals as inventors or co-inventors.
In 2006, 16.8 percent of international patent applications from the United States had an inventor or co-inventor with a Chinese-heritage name, representing an increase from 11.2 percent in 1998. The contribution of inventors with Indian-heritage names increased to 13.7 percent from 9.5 percent in the same period.
The total number of employment-based principals in the employment-based categories and their family members waiting for legal permanent residence in the United States in 2006 was estimated at 1,055,084. Additionally, there are an estimated 126,421 residents abroad also waiting for employment-based U.S. legal permanent residence, adding up to a worldwide total of 1,181,505.
Using data from the New Immigrant Survey, the authors find that, in 2003, approximately one in five new legal immigrants in the United States and about one in three employment-based new legal immigrants either planned to leave the United States or were uncertain about remaining. The authors had no data on how many foreign nationals have actually returned to their homelands.
�Given that the U.S. comparative advantage in the global economy is in creating knowledge and applying it to business, it behooves the country to consider how we might adjust policies to reduce the immigration backlog, encourage innovative foreign minds to remain in the country, and entice new innovators to come,� said Robert Litan, vice president of Research and Policy at the Kauffman Foundation.
About the research team
For more information about the Global Engineering and Entrepreneurship research at Duke University, visit http://www.globalizationresearch.com; visit http://www.law.harvard.edu/programs/lwp/ to learn about Harvard Law�s Labor and Worklife Program; and visit http://www.nyu.edu/ for more information about New York University.
Read the report
2011 amor japones | Flickr - Photo
desi3933
02-18 06:57 PM
Child born abroad to Lawful Permanent Resident (LPR) may be boarded if child was born during the temporary visit abroad of a mother who is a lawful permanent resident alien, or a national, of the United States, provided that the child's application for admission to the United States is made within 2 years of birth and the child is accompanied by the parent who is applying for readmission as a permanent resident upon the first return of the parent.
Link for the document (http://www.cbp.gov/linkhandler/cgov/travel/inspections_carriers_facilities/carrier_info_guide/carrier_info_guide.ctt/carrier_info_guide.pdf)
_______________________
Not a legal advice.
US citizen of Indian origin
Link for the document (http://www.cbp.gov/linkhandler/cgov/travel/inspections_carriers_facilities/carrier_info_guide/carrier_info_guide.ctt/carrier_info_guide.pdf)
_______________________
Not a legal advice.
US citizen of Indian origin
more...
nmdial
04-21 09:36 AM
Friends,
I will be relocating to Houston soon. I am new to the area. I would really appreciate if you can give your inputs on good neighborhoods, cost of living, etc.
Thanks,
nmdial
I will be relocating to Houston soon. I am new to the area. I would really appreciate if you can give your inputs on good neighborhoods, cost of living, etc.
Thanks,
nmdial
anindya1234
07-17 10:34 PM
You are OK. This is taken from the 485 instructions.
File all employment-based AOS applications at the following address:
USCIS Nebraska Service Center
P.O. Box 87485
Lincoln, NE 68501-7485
This includes an employment-based Form I-485 filed concurrently with a Form I-140, Immigrant Petition for Alien Worker, and an employment-based Form I-485 filed based on a pending or an approved Form I-140. To facilitate acceptance and processing of Form I-485 when Form I-140 has already been approved, submit a copy of the I-140 approval notice.
Actually my I-140 was approved from TSC; 485 was sent to TSC..but the employment letter in the package was addressed to NSC....will that be a problem?
File all employment-based AOS applications at the following address:
USCIS Nebraska Service Center
P.O. Box 87485
Lincoln, NE 68501-7485
This includes an employment-based Form I-485 filed concurrently with a Form I-140, Immigrant Petition for Alien Worker, and an employment-based Form I-485 filed based on a pending or an approved Form I-140. To facilitate acceptance and processing of Form I-485 when Form I-140 has already been approved, submit a copy of the I-140 approval notice.
Actually my I-140 was approved from TSC; 485 was sent to TSC..but the employment letter in the package was addressed to NSC....will that be a problem?
more...
tikka
06-22 09:40 AM
http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/showthread.php?t=5470
We are running a small funding drive as a gesture of support IV for answering each other's questions in times of need.
If your question is answered by a fellow member, do make a point to contribute some amount. It will help continue this effort.
We understand everyone is busy with I485 filing and have put everything on hold. But we have not put our efforts on hold in the interest of this communty and this cause. Core is working on this issue despite being busy on their own I485 filing.
We are also working with our lobbyists on CIR and as soon as there is an action item we will post it on the forum for all to participate.
At this time, do take out a couple of minutes off your busy schedule with I485 filing and contribute towards Immigrationvoice.
Thanks
We are running a small funding drive as a gesture of support IV for answering each other's questions in times of need.
If your question is answered by a fellow member, do make a point to contribute some amount. It will help continue this effort.
We understand everyone is busy with I485 filing and have put everything on hold. But we have not put our efforts on hold in the interest of this communty and this cause. Core is working on this issue despite being busy on their own I485 filing.
We are also working with our lobbyists on CIR and as soon as there is an action item we will post it on the forum for all to participate.
At this time, do take out a couple of minutes off your busy schedule with I485 filing and contribute towards Immigrationvoice.
Thanks
2010 amor japones
GotGC??
02-20 04:48 PM
This is useful, but I doubt its accuracy because some of the cases I know - including mine - are missing !!
Here is the link to database:
http://www.flcdatacenter.com/CasePerm.aspx
Here is the link to database:
http://www.flcdatacenter.com/CasePerm.aspx
more...
asdqwe2k
01-21 05:52 PM
http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20070121/pl_nm/usa_immigration_dc
U.S. companies are also clamoring for more H1B visas to allow foreign software engineers and other skilled workers into the country.
The 65,000 visas allotted for 2007 were taken by the end of May last year, months before the end of the fiscal year in September, said Jack Krumholtz, the head of Microsoft Corp.'s government affairs office. It is also difficult to get permanent U.S. residency for foreign workers who would like to stay, he said.
"This is becoming for high-tech companies a huge retention issue," Krumholtz said. "We will start to see highly valued tech employees emigrate back to their home countries."
U.S. companies are also clamoring for more H1B visas to allow foreign software engineers and other skilled workers into the country.
The 65,000 visas allotted for 2007 were taken by the end of May last year, months before the end of the fiscal year in September, said Jack Krumholtz, the head of Microsoft Corp.'s government affairs office. It is also difficult to get permanent U.S. residency for foreign workers who would like to stay, he said.
"This is becoming for high-tech companies a huge retention issue," Krumholtz said. "We will start to see highly valued tech employees emigrate back to their home countries."
hair hair Meu amor pelo japonês
jetflyer
06-10 09:09 AM
Long History
Mix of Visa Types
Labor Sub
These might have pulled the trigger for RFE
Received RFE for primary applicant (myself) and spouse.
Please submit evidence of lawful presence from October 1998 until August 17, 2007.
The documents may include the following:
A) a photo copy of form I-797 for all extensions and change of status
B) photo copy of form I-20 or IAP66 school records (front and back) including all school annotations
c) Photocopy (front and back) of applicant's Form I-94 Arrival/Departure Record
Below is my immigration timeline
CLASS ------ VALID FROM ------ VALID TO ------ Comments
H1-B -------- 5/16/1995 -------- 5/17/1998
H1-B -------- 5/17/1998 -------- 5/17/2001
H1-B -------- 12/23/1999 ------- 6/30/2001
H1-B -------- 7/1/2001 --------- 9/30/2001
0-1 --------- 10/3/2001 ------ 10/1/2004 ------ Stamped in Chennai
EAD --------- 8/4/2004 -------- 8/3/2005 ------- EB1 denied 1/15/2005
0-1 --------- 5/13/2005 ------- 5/12/2008 ------ Stamped in Chennai
0-1 --------- 4/3/2007 --------- 3/13/2010
0-1 ---------- 5/2/2207 --------- 5/12/2009
After 1/15/05 (EB-1 denial)
- Left the country on 6/15/05 (less than 6 months)
- During this time, applied for O-1 visa and got approved
- Got visa stamping in Chennai with O-1 visa
Do you see any issues with my response ?
Mix of Visa Types
Labor Sub
These might have pulled the trigger for RFE
Received RFE for primary applicant (myself) and spouse.
Please submit evidence of lawful presence from October 1998 until August 17, 2007.
The documents may include the following:
A) a photo copy of form I-797 for all extensions and change of status
B) photo copy of form I-20 or IAP66 school records (front and back) including all school annotations
c) Photocopy (front and back) of applicant's Form I-94 Arrival/Departure Record
Below is my immigration timeline
CLASS ------ VALID FROM ------ VALID TO ------ Comments
H1-B -------- 5/16/1995 -------- 5/17/1998
H1-B -------- 5/17/1998 -------- 5/17/2001
H1-B -------- 12/23/1999 ------- 6/30/2001
H1-B -------- 7/1/2001 --------- 9/30/2001
0-1 --------- 10/3/2001 ------ 10/1/2004 ------ Stamped in Chennai
EAD --------- 8/4/2004 -------- 8/3/2005 ------- EB1 denied 1/15/2005
0-1 --------- 5/13/2005 ------- 5/12/2008 ------ Stamped in Chennai
0-1 --------- 4/3/2007 --------- 3/13/2010
0-1 ---------- 5/2/2207 --------- 5/12/2009
After 1/15/05 (EB-1 denial)
- Left the country on 6/15/05 (less than 6 months)
- During this time, applied for O-1 visa and got approved
- Got visa stamping in Chennai with O-1 visa
Do you see any issues with my response ?
more...
maximus777
09-16 03:20 PM
done
hot amor em japones. japoneses,
smsthss
07-05 12:36 PM
anybody on this !!
more...
house wallpaper Pingente Amor Em Japones . amor em japones. kanji bem estar
arihant
12-02 10:54 AM
I dont think you can amend the labor petition's job description. You may have to file new labor again for new description.
If I may ask, why are you so worried about job desc of labor and your everyday duties. Really, if they have changed a little bit, its not a big deal.
There is a lot of overlap between what programmers do, what programmers/analysts do and what Business analysts do. I know a lot of business analysts who at times write their own code and a lot of programmers who document stuff - kind of documentation that BAs do.
People who adjudicate cases at USCIS are not really IT guys who can differentiate between fine nuances like BA, programmers etc.
Then again, we dont know much about your case, better talk to a lawyer if you are still not comfortable with your situation. Forums are not an alternate to professional legal advice. Be careful before you act on advice from forums. No one here is lawyer and no one here knows the full case. Spending 200 dollars to get the right legal advice when making important decisions is worth every penny.
You can also submit your question for the free legal advice program we have (see the homepage) and your question would be taken up.
Well, my case is pending at BEC in TR queue. After the RIR conversion rule became available, my lawyer is converting mine to RIR. Well, when she sent for wage determination, TWC is classifying my wage scale at a higher rate than anticipated. This is because one of the lines in my job description refers to the job involving "technical supervision..". As a result this job is being classified as a supervisory position. The lawyer sent a letter clarifying that it is not a supervisory position, but no luck. However, the lawyer says she can change the wordage slightly while submitting in RIR and reprase it to clarify that it is NOT a supervisory position. Has anybody come across such a scenario? The lawyer seems to think that it is ok to make such a change and all I can do is hope and pray that she is right.
If I may ask, why are you so worried about job desc of labor and your everyday duties. Really, if they have changed a little bit, its not a big deal.
There is a lot of overlap between what programmers do, what programmers/analysts do and what Business analysts do. I know a lot of business analysts who at times write their own code and a lot of programmers who document stuff - kind of documentation that BAs do.
People who adjudicate cases at USCIS are not really IT guys who can differentiate between fine nuances like BA, programmers etc.
Then again, we dont know much about your case, better talk to a lawyer if you are still not comfortable with your situation. Forums are not an alternate to professional legal advice. Be careful before you act on advice from forums. No one here is lawyer and no one here knows the full case. Spending 200 dollars to get the right legal advice when making important decisions is worth every penny.
You can also submit your question for the free legal advice program we have (see the homepage) and your question would be taken up.
Well, my case is pending at BEC in TR queue. After the RIR conversion rule became available, my lawyer is converting mine to RIR. Well, when she sent for wage determination, TWC is classifying my wage scale at a higher rate than anticipated. This is because one of the lines in my job description refers to the job involving "technical supervision..". As a result this job is being classified as a supervisory position. The lawyer sent a letter clarifying that it is not a supervisory position, but no luck. However, the lawyer says she can change the wordage slightly while submitting in RIR and reprase it to clarify that it is NOT a supervisory position. Has anybody come across such a scenario? The lawyer seems to think that it is ok to make such a change and all I can do is hope and pray that she is right.
tattoo Un dorema de amor japones que
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
more...
pictures amor em japones. beijo-japones
glus
10-09 01:12 PM
Sorry to scare you in my previous reply....I did not read your question properly....
Since you are from a Non-Retrogressed Country, you may be eligible to apply for AOS. As you mentioned, you may apply I-140, I-485, I-131, and I-765 all together without any hassle. Make sure your attorney files all your applications with the right fee, since the fee structure has changed recently.
Sorry about my previous post though...
Good Luck!!
Please be careful giving such advises. The person in question was out-of-status because he never worked for company A, so it is not certain if he is in valid status at this point. I would not generalize saying he could file without any hassles. He should speak to a qualified attorney before doing that.
Since you are from a Non-Retrogressed Country, you may be eligible to apply for AOS. As you mentioned, you may apply I-140, I-485, I-131, and I-765 all together without any hassle. Make sure your attorney files all your applications with the right fee, since the fee structure has changed recently.
Sorry about my previous post though...
Good Luck!!
Please be careful giving such advises. The person in question was out-of-status because he never worked for company A, so it is not certain if he is in valid status at this point. I would not generalize saying he could file without any hassles. He should speak to a qualified attorney before doing that.
dresses tatuagem amor em japonês e
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.
more...
makeup house amor japones. captura de
cox
October 23rd, 2005, 04:48 PM
A couple more from the job finish today. I liked the backdrop - looks like ricepaper, which really pleased the Japanese-born client. This was taken vertically. I hung the wreath with a thread and then cloned it out :) I wasn't really happy with the backdrop lighting in the second one. Guess I need to invest in some lights. I used natural light from the right and a reflector card on the left of the subject.
http://www.dphoto.us/forumphotos/data/933/wreath_blue_102305_JP8X5706.jpg
http://www.dphoto.us/forumphotos/data/933/red_rose_tea_setting_102305_JP8X5748.jpg
http://www.dphoto.us/forumphotos/data/933/wreath_blue_102305_JP8X5706.jpg
http://www.dphoto.us/forumphotos/data/933/red_rose_tea_setting_102305_JP8X5748.jpg
girlfriend amor japones. amor em japones.
anindya1234
07-17 10:34 PM
You are OK. This is taken from the 485 instructions.
File all employment-based AOS applications at the following address:
USCIS Nebraska Service Center
P.O. Box 87485
Lincoln, NE 68501-7485
This includes an employment-based Form I-485 filed concurrently with a Form I-140, Immigrant Petition for Alien Worker, and an employment-based Form I-485 filed based on a pending or an approved Form I-140. To facilitate acceptance and processing of Form I-485 when Form I-140 has already been approved, submit a copy of the I-140 approval notice.
Actually my I-140 was approved from TSC; 485 was sent to TSC..but the employment letter in the package was addressed to NSC....will that be a problem?
File all employment-based AOS applications at the following address:
USCIS Nebraska Service Center
P.O. Box 87485
Lincoln, NE 68501-7485
This includes an employment-based Form I-485 filed concurrently with a Form I-140, Immigrant Petition for Alien Worker, and an employment-based Form I-485 filed based on a pending or an approved Form I-140. To facilitate acceptance and processing of Form I-485 when Form I-140 has already been approved, submit a copy of the I-140 approval notice.
Actually my I-140 was approved from TSC; 485 was sent to TSC..but the employment letter in the package was addressed to NSC....will that be a problem?
hairstyles hot amor japones amor em
maxy
10-16 01:19 PM
sounds good...thanks
look at your labor app... it states your proffered wage, job description etc. those are the terms and conditions... you can still get an EVL from your employer and have your lawyer (or have yourself) write a letter explaining how the EVL covers terms and conditions on the labor cert. in any case, this is a really stupid and unenforceable rfe... i mean how can the new employer even know whats in the labor and i-140? and without knowing that how can an employer "indicate" any compliance with t&c of labor and 140? i think you should be fine with just a plain evl that matches your job description and salary... at most, you can write a letter saying that "yeah the t&c continues to be valid".
my 2 cents.
look at your labor app... it states your proffered wage, job description etc. those are the terms and conditions... you can still get an EVL from your employer and have your lawyer (or have yourself) write a letter explaining how the EVL covers terms and conditions on the labor cert. in any case, this is a really stupid and unenforceable rfe... i mean how can the new employer even know whats in the labor and i-140? and without knowing that how can an employer "indicate" any compliance with t&c of labor and 140? i think you should be fine with just a plain evl that matches your job description and salary... at most, you can write a letter saying that "yeah the t&c continues to be valid".
my 2 cents.
vin13
09-30 04:47 PM
She has no clue on what she is talking or probably she misses the whole point about PD, so she says look at RD and processing timeframe
I thought the same...these people have no clue what they are doing.
I thought the same...these people have no clue what they are doing.
maddipati1
02-03 02:27 PM
thank you veni, that is very informative and solid reference.
looks like under 'advanced degree' category, just having a US Masters or foreign equivalent (4+2) is enough. lot of people are under the impression, its MS+3yrs. but the description in USCIS link states just an advanced degree (higher than baccalaureate) is enough. am i reading this right?
BS+5years is equivalent to having an Advanced degree.
But, I think its BS+5yrs, not BS Equivalent + 5 yrs.
I think it can be, but when the job requirement Bachelor Equivalent+ 5Year then it opens up for a wide range.
You can show BS equivalence by 3 yr degree+1 yr degree or 3yr degree + 2 yr degree.....etc
For additional info Please click here (http://www.uscis.gov/portal/site/uscis/menuitem.eb1d4c2a3e5b9ac89243c6a7543f6d1a/?vgnextoid=816a83453d4a3210VgnVCM100000b92ca60aRCR D&vgnextchannel=816a83453d4a3210VgnVCM100000b92ca60a RCRD) or here (http://www.murthy.com/eb2.html)
looks like under 'advanced degree' category, just having a US Masters or foreign equivalent (4+2) is enough. lot of people are under the impression, its MS+3yrs. but the description in USCIS link states just an advanced degree (higher than baccalaureate) is enough. am i reading this right?
BS+5years is equivalent to having an Advanced degree.
But, I think its BS+5yrs, not BS Equivalent + 5 yrs.
I think it can be, but when the job requirement Bachelor Equivalent+ 5Year then it opens up for a wide range.
You can show BS equivalence by 3 yr degree+1 yr degree or 3yr degree + 2 yr degree.....etc
For additional info Please click here (http://www.uscis.gov/portal/site/uscis/menuitem.eb1d4c2a3e5b9ac89243c6a7543f6d1a/?vgnextoid=816a83453d4a3210VgnVCM100000b92ca60aRCR D&vgnextchannel=816a83453d4a3210VgnVCM100000b92ca60a RCRD) or here (http://www.murthy.com/eb2.html)
No comments:
Post a Comment