gc_chahiye
12-16 05:45 PM
One more AC21 question -
Does the original I 140 stays with the employer or employee? Any other document that I need to get from my employer before switching?
Thanks,
If you cant get a copy of everything (if you ask the attorney directly you should be able ot get a copy of the complete filing) try to get:
- copy of LC or atleast the section that describes the skills
- copy of employment verification letter which describes skills
original I-140 typically stays with employer. trhey might give youa copy of the approval notice...
Does the original I 140 stays with the employer or employee? Any other document that I need to get from my employer before switching?
Thanks,
If you cant get a copy of everything (if you ask the attorney directly you should be able ot get a copy of the complete filing) try to get:
- copy of LC or atleast the section that describes the skills
- copy of employment verification letter which describes skills
original I-140 typically stays with employer. trhey might give youa copy of the approval notice...
wallpaper Technorati Tags: Black Swan
bekugc
04-16 01:05 PM
endlesswait;
there is a definite procedure, we follow it with appropriate paperwork and itll get done.
only thing is after ur date becomes current. YOU may have to WAKE up the application by using lotta phone calls/infopass/congressman etc.
a colleague of mine got this done last year. his case was like this. its eb2 to eb2...but
i think it wud be similar to eb3-eb2
OLD eb2 labor applied - dec 2002
eb2 perm labor approved - july 2005
140/485 for perm labor filed - sept 2005
140 perm approved nov 2005
old eb2 labor backlog approved - dec 2006
140 for old labor approved - jan 2007 ( premium pr)
succesfully Ported the PD from old to new - feb 2007 ***lawyer charged him 1200 bucks for this effort; i have his details, if u need it***
then he spent a month or so running around to infopass, ph calls, congresman etc ...in an effort to Wake up the appln.. its like telling, "hey guys, i ported date to old date, so now my PD is current, im right now elig for 485 approval, can u pls do it???"...
in april, he got appproval for 485, no RFE, card arrived direct in mail.
thx
there is a definite procedure, we follow it with appropriate paperwork and itll get done.
only thing is after ur date becomes current. YOU may have to WAKE up the application by using lotta phone calls/infopass/congressman etc.
a colleague of mine got this done last year. his case was like this. its eb2 to eb2...but
i think it wud be similar to eb3-eb2
OLD eb2 labor applied - dec 2002
eb2 perm labor approved - july 2005
140/485 for perm labor filed - sept 2005
140 perm approved nov 2005
old eb2 labor backlog approved - dec 2006
140 for old labor approved - jan 2007 ( premium pr)
succesfully Ported the PD from old to new - feb 2007 ***lawyer charged him 1200 bucks for this effort; i have his details, if u need it***
then he spent a month or so running around to infopass, ph calls, congresman etc ...in an effort to Wake up the appln.. its like telling, "hey guys, i ported date to old date, so now my PD is current, im right now elig for 485 approval, can u pls do it???"...
in april, he got appproval for 485, no RFE, card arrived direct in mail.
thx
Santosh_gc
06-26 09:44 PM
I will ignore your familiarity in calling me your "buddy". Find something constructive to say in regards to our IV goals instead of attacking. To begin with, this is not the place for me to explain to you the details of difference between Purchasing Power Parity (PPP) GDP (that you quote) and the market exchange rate GDP which I quoted. But since you raised the subject, PPP GDP is adjusted to accomodate for different inflation and consumption rates in different countries. Without the PPT adjustment, India's GDP is equal to Mexico's, even though India has 11 times the population of Mexico. The reason India comes in 4th with the PPP adjustment in the world is because the ruppee is undervalued and Indians have a purchasing power that is 4 times smaller than Mexicans. So, to humor you and use your method of calculation, the Per Capita GDP (PPP) Of India is $3,344 in 2006 and Mexico's is $12,886. "Where are all the Mexican doctores, computer scientists, economists and professors?" you ask. The answer is: They are IN MEXICO making huge salaries, when the Indian ones have to come here because their salaries in India don't give them enough money to eat. Why aren't all the construction workers and lawn workers in the U.S. Indian? Because they cannot affor the airfare. The Mexicans just walk accross the border. Any you know what? All those Indian Professors at Harvard etc are teaching class to all those rich Mexican kids. Get your facts straight before you confront me and make fun of my MBA (which I got in the U.S. incidentally, not Mexico, but if I had wanted I could have gotten a top 20 MBA back home). I just recated to people's racist attacks here. So now, if you have anything to contribute to our IV common cause, welcome! If all you are about is attacking other forum members then please leave and do not come back. Thanks.
Jamie:
I had decided not to post anyhting about this illegal immigrant/racism thing. But cant help making one comment. You called others racist. But I wonder if you are doing the same by trying to show using numbers etc. how Mexicans are better than Indians. Would that not be racism? Its strange how we are blind to our own biases.
Moderator, sorry I broke my promise. But this is the last I will say on this.
Anyway, moving forward...It will be nice to make a list of desirable points in a bill that is independent of any cause for illegal immigrants. I will start with two points. You can add more if you like. If there is enough momentum and support for these points, then in a truly democratic environment, we may want to modify the core IV goals to reflect that (Ideally I would prefer that there be a vote for what should be the core goals...after all most people here have contributed something towards the cause...and only those who have contributed should be allowed to vote...no free lunch).
1. Allow people to file for 485 and get EAD even if visa numbers are not available
2. Allow EAD to be FULLY portable without restrictons (i.e., irrespective of job description or job title or job location or salary).
The above two dont ask for sweeping changes in immigration laws such as increase visa numbers etc. etc. and are easy for the average American person to understand. And so can hopefuly be passed easily.
With the above two passed, I dont think many people will complain if it takes another 5 years to get their GC. Agree?
By the way, I have got my EAD card and my PD is also current. So the above two goals will be redundant for me. My story is that I am stuck in FBI namecheck. But the moderators have already indicated that it cant be one of the core goals. So I would not list that even if I would like that to be one of the core goals.
Santosh
Jamie:
I had decided not to post anyhting about this illegal immigrant/racism thing. But cant help making one comment. You called others racist. But I wonder if you are doing the same by trying to show using numbers etc. how Mexicans are better than Indians. Would that not be racism? Its strange how we are blind to our own biases.
Moderator, sorry I broke my promise. But this is the last I will say on this.
Anyway, moving forward...It will be nice to make a list of desirable points in a bill that is independent of any cause for illegal immigrants. I will start with two points. You can add more if you like. If there is enough momentum and support for these points, then in a truly democratic environment, we may want to modify the core IV goals to reflect that (Ideally I would prefer that there be a vote for what should be the core goals...after all most people here have contributed something towards the cause...and only those who have contributed should be allowed to vote...no free lunch).
1. Allow people to file for 485 and get EAD even if visa numbers are not available
2. Allow EAD to be FULLY portable without restrictons (i.e., irrespective of job description or job title or job location or salary).
The above two dont ask for sweeping changes in immigration laws such as increase visa numbers etc. etc. and are easy for the average American person to understand. And so can hopefuly be passed easily.
With the above two passed, I dont think many people will complain if it takes another 5 years to get their GC. Agree?
By the way, I have got my EAD card and my PD is also current. So the above two goals will be redundant for me. My story is that I am stuck in FBI namecheck. But the moderators have already indicated that it cant be one of the core goals. So I would not list that even if I would like that to be one of the core goals.
Santosh
2011 TAGS natalie portman, lack
franklin
07-11 12:49 PM
http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/showthread.php?t=6365
Admins, can we close this thread and replace the action item link with the thread above for this coming Saturday's rally.
Admins, can we close this thread and replace the action item link with the thread above for this coming Saturday's rally.
more...
caydee
05-23 07:25 PM
I like this as it gives a personal touch.
Dear Senator ____;
Subject: Treating the currently backlogged legal skilled immigrants at parity with undocumented immigrants and family-based applicants in the Immigration Reform bill S. 1348.
I am a member of Immigration Voice (www.immigrationvoice.org). Immigration Voice represents the interest of 500,000 legal skilled immigrants in the United States on the path to green cards who have been stuck in enormous backlogs and delays in immigration process.
The career growth, job mobility and quality of life of a half a million legal skilled immigrants is subverted by the bill in its current form.
Specifically, the restrictions on employment mobility of current applicants affected by this bill, limit improvements in all wage rates. This is because when the market for highly skilled staff improves (as it is doing today), we have significant bureaucratic barriers placed that prevent us from changing jobs. This creates a mis-allocation of scarce talent and limits the growth of the high tech industry as a whole.
The permanent residency process currently takes a great many years, but technologies change fast. Staying in the same job can make a tech career stagnant. Few Americans in the technology field are willing to stay in the same position within their current company for that many years. So, Again, this limits growth in the technology industry because scarce skills are being miss-allocated.
It is not just about changing jobs: I also get requests from friends that want me to improve their website or even join a start-up. They are dumbfounded when I tell them I may not because it is illegal for me to do so. Nor may I volunteer my time. Nor may I start my own company because I may not work for myself. The economic cost of a half-million highly skilled people not being able to start a business must be staggering.
Personally, since moving to the "land of the free", I find it ironic that I lost my economic freedom. It is also heartbreaking to see the rug pulled out from beneath us when we've been such law-abiding and dedicated participants in the current system all these years. In terms of years, in terms of opportunity lost, and in terms of money wasted on lawyers, we humbly request an equitable solution for all skilled, law-abiding immigrants.
Here are some specific reasons why the current CIR bill fails us, and fails the US economy. Also suggestions on improvements that can be made:
1. Section 501(b) reduces the number of green cards to legal skilled immigrants from the current 140,000/year to 90,000/year and diverts the major portion of those green cards to future low-skills guest workers under the Y visa program. Instead of increasing that number to reduce the backlogs this section take a step backwards and would exacerbate the backlogs. On the other hand, 503(f)(2) of this act would allocate an estimated 11 million green cards over a time frame of 5 years � 2.2 million a year � to undocumented immigrants. Immigration Voice requests congress to treat legal skilled immigrants at parity with undocumented immigrants and increase the number of green cards to at least 250,000 for 5 years for currently backlogged applicants defined under Sec. 502(d)(2) in order to reduce to current backlog before the untested points based merit system is functional.
2. Immigration Voice requests congress to waive per-country ceilings on backlogged petitions to be processed under Sec. 502(d)(2) in order to make the backlog reduction more efficient. The bill provides a very similar waiver from per-country ceilings to family based pending petitions in section 508(b).
3. Immigration Voice requests congress to allow legal skilled immigrants to file for adjustment of status for those applicants who have been certified by DOL to be doing jobs no US citizen is willing, qualified or able to do. This would be at parity with provisions for undocumented immigrants who would qualify for instant work permit (probationary card) that allows them to work without employer sponsor and without department of labor�s certification simply by registering.
We at Immigration Voice strongly opposes the bill S 1348 in its current form and requests congress to amend this bill and treat the legal skilled immigrants at parity with undocumented immigrants, future guest-workers and pending family-based applicants.
Sincerely,
David Chappel
Dear Senator ____;
Subject: Treating the currently backlogged legal skilled immigrants at parity with undocumented immigrants and family-based applicants in the Immigration Reform bill S. 1348.
I am a member of Immigration Voice (www.immigrationvoice.org). Immigration Voice represents the interest of 500,000 legal skilled immigrants in the United States on the path to green cards who have been stuck in enormous backlogs and delays in immigration process.
The career growth, job mobility and quality of life of a half a million legal skilled immigrants is subverted by the bill in its current form.
Specifically, the restrictions on employment mobility of current applicants affected by this bill, limit improvements in all wage rates. This is because when the market for highly skilled staff improves (as it is doing today), we have significant bureaucratic barriers placed that prevent us from changing jobs. This creates a mis-allocation of scarce talent and limits the growth of the high tech industry as a whole.
The permanent residency process currently takes a great many years, but technologies change fast. Staying in the same job can make a tech career stagnant. Few Americans in the technology field are willing to stay in the same position within their current company for that many years. So, Again, this limits growth in the technology industry because scarce skills are being miss-allocated.
It is not just about changing jobs: I also get requests from friends that want me to improve their website or even join a start-up. They are dumbfounded when I tell them I may not because it is illegal for me to do so. Nor may I volunteer my time. Nor may I start my own company because I may not work for myself. The economic cost of a half-million highly skilled people not being able to start a business must be staggering.
Personally, since moving to the "land of the free", I find it ironic that I lost my economic freedom. It is also heartbreaking to see the rug pulled out from beneath us when we've been such law-abiding and dedicated participants in the current system all these years. In terms of years, in terms of opportunity lost, and in terms of money wasted on lawyers, we humbly request an equitable solution for all skilled, law-abiding immigrants.
Here are some specific reasons why the current CIR bill fails us, and fails the US economy. Also suggestions on improvements that can be made:
1. Section 501(b) reduces the number of green cards to legal skilled immigrants from the current 140,000/year to 90,000/year and diverts the major portion of those green cards to future low-skills guest workers under the Y visa program. Instead of increasing that number to reduce the backlogs this section take a step backwards and would exacerbate the backlogs. On the other hand, 503(f)(2) of this act would allocate an estimated 11 million green cards over a time frame of 5 years � 2.2 million a year � to undocumented immigrants. Immigration Voice requests congress to treat legal skilled immigrants at parity with undocumented immigrants and increase the number of green cards to at least 250,000 for 5 years for currently backlogged applicants defined under Sec. 502(d)(2) in order to reduce to current backlog before the untested points based merit system is functional.
2. Immigration Voice requests congress to waive per-country ceilings on backlogged petitions to be processed under Sec. 502(d)(2) in order to make the backlog reduction more efficient. The bill provides a very similar waiver from per-country ceilings to family based pending petitions in section 508(b).
3. Immigration Voice requests congress to allow legal skilled immigrants to file for adjustment of status for those applicants who have been certified by DOL to be doing jobs no US citizen is willing, qualified or able to do. This would be at parity with provisions for undocumented immigrants who would qualify for instant work permit (probationary card) that allows them to work without employer sponsor and without department of labor�s certification simply by registering.
We at Immigration Voice strongly opposes the bill S 1348 in its current form and requests congress to amend this bill and treat the legal skilled immigrants at parity with undocumented immigrants, future guest-workers and pending family-based applicants.
Sincerely,
David Chappel
anzerraja
07-19 09:45 PM
Thanks !
Please post your pledge amount. Easier for us to keep track of the total amount.
Count me in...
Please post your pledge amount. Easier for us to keep track of the total amount.
Count me in...
more...
gc_bulgaria
09-21 10:49 AM
Hi
I have also files on the same day, how do you guys make out that your file have been trabsfered to texas and CSC, because my 140 was approved in texas and my attorney has sent the 485 to NSC , Thanks for you reply.
Because it has SRC as the starting alphabets (Southern Regional Center):p
I have also files on the same day, how do you guys make out that your file have been trabsfered to texas and CSC, because my 140 was approved in texas and my attorney has sent the 485 to NSC , Thanks for you reply.
Because it has SRC as the starting alphabets (Southern Regional Center):p
2010 Doing a sex scene with Natalie
h1techSlave
07-26 10:42 AM
I agree with you 100%.
If you or any one else is planning to move forward with some plans for helping EB3 folks, expect some serious opposition to your efforts. Many EB3 folks themselves do not see any need for EB3 only actions.
A bunch of us talked to a lawyer regarding the INA and the initial reaction was not very encouraging. The lawyer was suggesting us to convert to EB2.
We EB3 guys have to work together. In a couple of year you will not find a single EB2 guy here as they will have their GC's. I hope some senior member can give some guidance on how we should proceed to take up our cause.
If you or any one else is planning to move forward with some plans for helping EB3 folks, expect some serious opposition to your efforts. Many EB3 folks themselves do not see any need for EB3 only actions.
A bunch of us talked to a lawyer regarding the INA and the initial reaction was not very encouraging. The lawyer was suggesting us to convert to EB2.
We EB3 guys have to work together. In a couple of year you will not find a single EB2 guy here as they will have their GC's. I hope some senior member can give some guidance on how we should proceed to take up our cause.
more...
485Mbe4001
03-26 02:07 PM
i know for a fact that 2 of my friends who were stuck in namecheck and had current PD got their GC approval emails 3-4 days after the rule was passed. I have EB3 PD of mid 2002 and was stuck in NC for 3+ years, i got a soft LUD one week after the rule was passed. it was the first LUD after 2 years.
NC was hell and i hope people dont go through what we went.
It is on main web page of IV.. How come I can be ignorant even if I wanted to be?:)
Yes, it would "improve" Name Check with coparision to what we have observed so far. But it still have following loop holes and flaws.
Reference:
http://blogs.ilw.com/gregsiskind/files/Mocanu_New_USCIS_NC_Procedures.pdf
Now I generally read and analyze. Do not just read.:)
(1)180 days period is from the "Date of FBI Name Check initiation. It is not
from 485 receipt date. Nobody knows when USCIS will initiate FBI Name
Check. So I see a big playground for USCIS to play if it decides to play.
What if uSCIS sends FBI name check initiation after 2 years of 485 receipt?
Do we have a way to know or keep an eye on USCIS about this? At least I
do not know and if somebody has the information please share it.
(2) "If 485 Otherwise is processable" then USCIS can go ahead without
waiting for NC check... What if USCIS decides to keep 100000 cases on
rack eating dust just by not moving the processing date for particular
service center? This you can see right now.. USCIS is making Texas slow
day by day not moving processing date. I remember Texas was ahead
with comparison to Nebraska around May to August 2007. If this happens your case is no more "processable".. Yes you can say that you are not stuck in NC queue but you will be stuck. USCIS may come up with altogether different startegy... To align processing times with FBI processing and FBI NC initiation. That may screw the things further.
NC was hell and i hope people dont go through what we went.
It is on main web page of IV.. How come I can be ignorant even if I wanted to be?:)
Yes, it would "improve" Name Check with coparision to what we have observed so far. But it still have following loop holes and flaws.
Reference:
http://blogs.ilw.com/gregsiskind/files/Mocanu_New_USCIS_NC_Procedures.pdf
Now I generally read and analyze. Do not just read.:)
(1)180 days period is from the "Date of FBI Name Check initiation. It is not
from 485 receipt date. Nobody knows when USCIS will initiate FBI Name
Check. So I see a big playground for USCIS to play if it decides to play.
What if uSCIS sends FBI name check initiation after 2 years of 485 receipt?
Do we have a way to know or keep an eye on USCIS about this? At least I
do not know and if somebody has the information please share it.
(2) "If 485 Otherwise is processable" then USCIS can go ahead without
waiting for NC check... What if USCIS decides to keep 100000 cases on
rack eating dust just by not moving the processing date for particular
service center? This you can see right now.. USCIS is making Texas slow
day by day not moving processing date. I remember Texas was ahead
with comparison to Nebraska around May to August 2007. If this happens your case is no more "processable".. Yes you can say that you are not stuck in NC queue but you will be stuck. USCIS may come up with altogether different startegy... To align processing times with FBI processing and FBI NC initiation. That may screw the things further.
hair Natalie Portman looked
dingudi
11-06 02:48 PM
dingudi,
I tend to disagree from you on your comment regarding a possible link between name check and FP. I think they are seperate processes and run in parallel - one does not depend on another. I've read somewhere that a guy's name check was initiated like a month before he went for his FP. He got that info from infopass appointment. Also, wouldn't the IOs mention about the pending name check if it was related to FP notice?
Regarding reaching a non TSC IO, I think is impossible since the call gets directed to TSC or NSC based on the receipt number that you key in when you call.
I agree with you that we'll end up getting the same damn letter as our friend about no appointment availabality at local ASC for our SR response. It seems to me that we have to try either the Infopass or just wait it out.
Has anyone thought about writing to ombdusman (if I spelled it correctly) about this FP notice issue or will that be not worth it?
Maybe we should mention to IOs next time we call that others who applied weeks after us have gotten their FP notices from our local ASC. I am not sure if it will help but worth giving it a try. There is another way I thought we can bypass the TSC IO. I am not sure if this will work but I am thinking of giving it a try if I do not get FP in the next couple of weeks.
I tend to disagree from you on your comment regarding a possible link between name check and FP. I think they are seperate processes and run in parallel - one does not depend on another. I've read somewhere that a guy's name check was initiated like a month before he went for his FP. He got that info from infopass appointment. Also, wouldn't the IOs mention about the pending name check if it was related to FP notice?
Regarding reaching a non TSC IO, I think is impossible since the call gets directed to TSC or NSC based on the receipt number that you key in when you call.
I agree with you that we'll end up getting the same damn letter as our friend about no appointment availabality at local ASC for our SR response. It seems to me that we have to try either the Infopass or just wait it out.
Has anyone thought about writing to ombdusman (if I spelled it correctly) about this FP notice issue or will that be not worth it?
Maybe we should mention to IOs next time we call that others who applied weeks after us have gotten their FP notices from our local ASC. I am not sure if it will help but worth giving it a try. There is another way I thought we can bypass the TSC IO. I am not sure if this will work but I am thinking of giving it a try if I do not get FP in the next couple of weeks.
more...
desi3933
07-13 09:06 AM
....
Self-employment is possible only on 1099. If you're on W2, you're *not* self-employed. Pls see IRS guidelines
Here is DoL link. In the example, Mr. Smith owns LLC company, but still is considered Self-Employed.
http://wdr.doleta.gov/directives/attach/UIPL/UIPL26-08.pdf
For immigration purposes, only USCIS/DoL interpretation counts.
.
Self-employment is possible only on 1099. If you're on W2, you're *not* self-employed. Pls see IRS guidelines
Here is DoL link. In the example, Mr. Smith owns LLC company, but still is considered Self-Employed.
http://wdr.doleta.gov/directives/attach/UIPL/UIPL26-08.pdf
For immigration purposes, only USCIS/DoL interpretation counts.
.
hot Natalie Portman in Black Swan.
rc0878
08-13 02:01 PM
Sent to NSC (Lincoln, Nebraska) ...reached on July20th. No action yet.
more...
house Quotables: Natalie Portman on
TeddyKoochu
09-11 11:43 AM
Dear friends we are all in this long and arduous journey together! So let�s channelize and focus our energies to achieve our goals & not scoring goals / points over each other. Iam new to this forum. I see this as an excellent place to get information and hear different points of view. I highly respect comments / suggestions from other members, I know this journey has taken a toll on everybody, however cheer up and never loose hope, each one of us will have our day, persistence and hard work always pays, merit must rule and may it overrule ! The silver lining is that several people got their GC�s this month so lets be happy for them, people are crossing the tunnel and seeing light, so will we one day.
tattoo a scene from quot;Black Swan.
Rajeev
11-18 09:56 AM
My wife and I sent the email.
more...
pictures we opted for Black Swan.
jonty_11
05-23 01:22 PM
Send emails..
Cornyns' website just goes into a loop on that validation question...how do i get past that?
Cornyns' website just goes into a loop on that validation question...how do i get past that?
dresses Natalie Portman amp; Mila
neverbefore
08-30 02:52 PM
My wife and i got emails from USCIS and we checked our status online and it is now CPO. The approval is based on my wife's applicatiion ( EB2 India, Dec 2005). I had two applications one as her dependent and another my own that is EB3 I, Jan 2004.
Great news. Congratulations
Great news. Congratulations
more...
makeup lack swan ending video
ho_gaya_kaya_?
12-16 06:42 PM
Been in the US since 1998, have an EB-2 PD of 2001, have played by the rules all along. Still no GC... And, the dates are going back to 2000 from the new year.. I've lost hopes...
I'm pretty close to getting clinical depression because of this game played by USCIS, Labor Dept, FBI and my own bad luck.
SKILL bill, OMNIBUS, etc. comes and goes. IV does seem to be doing things to lobby for the community, but let's face one reality. Like a news article said, no one in congress or senate wants to touch immigration even with a long pole until 2009.
The US has been very good to me (other than the GC part), more than my home country (India) which is why I'm still here.
Have invested too much of time in this country to just pack up and go. Just curious if any of you feel this way? How do you handle such depressing feelings?
Think Positive- that's the first prerequisite for positive things to happen.
I am quote content with what I have at this point
8 months ago- everything looked hopeless.
it seemed I was ages away from being able to change a job or ever get a GC
but here I am - few weeks ago (fingers crossed) from being able to change jobs on AC21.
So I thank God for the small mercies and carry on
Would I like to get a GC? yes. Of course !!!
But I do pause to thank for what I have and try to make the most of it.
I am sure you too have lots to be grateful for.
Chin up- and try not to think about GC so much...that works for me at least...
I'm pretty close to getting clinical depression because of this game played by USCIS, Labor Dept, FBI and my own bad luck.
SKILL bill, OMNIBUS, etc. comes and goes. IV does seem to be doing things to lobby for the community, but let's face one reality. Like a news article said, no one in congress or senate wants to touch immigration even with a long pole until 2009.
The US has been very good to me (other than the GC part), more than my home country (India) which is why I'm still here.
Have invested too much of time in this country to just pack up and go. Just curious if any of you feel this way? How do you handle such depressing feelings?
Think Positive- that's the first prerequisite for positive things to happen.
I am quote content with what I have at this point
8 months ago- everything looked hopeless.
it seemed I was ages away from being able to change a job or ever get a GC
but here I am - few weeks ago (fingers crossed) from being able to change jobs on AC21.
So I thank God for the small mercies and carry on
Would I like to get a GC? yes. Of course !!!
But I do pause to thank for what I have and try to make the most of it.
I am sure you too have lots to be grateful for.
Chin up- and try not to think about GC so much...that works for me at least...
girlfriend Natalie Portman Dives Into
neverbefore
08-25 12:37 PM
Folks
Can anyone advise on what docs to take along for an Infopass appointment?
The result of my SR was a recommendation by them to set up an Infopass. Going there this Friday.
Thanks for any advise and guidance.
Can anyone advise on what docs to take along for an Infopass appointment?
The result of my SR was a recommendation by them to set up an Infopass. Going there this Friday.
Thanks for any advise and guidance.
hairstyles Black Swan Portman Kunis Scene
DallasBlue
08-25 12:00 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by unitednations
If companies used h-1b the way it is supposed to be written then really the only people who would get one would be OPT candidates who joined while they are on OPT.
That is not true - those who are qualified and for whom a job is available in the US will eventually make it here. If the requirement is genuine, then the company will go to India and get that skilled labor. Big companies have been known to hire talent internationally.
No way; would an H-1b get filed for a person who is outside the country. Consulting companies would like to adhere to the laws. However; when their existing employees keep referring friends or friends of friends then as a protective measure they are forced to file the H-1b; or they risk losing the existing employee to someone else.
Your argument that some consulting companies would like to adhere to laws, but are forced not to because they fear the employee will leave is sufficient reason for those companies to be shut down. There is no excuse for breaking the law, and that too intentionally. It is obvious from your argument these companies are greedy and give the rest of the H-1B visa holders a bad name.
Keep in mind; the big problem currently is "transfers" and "extensions". Not so much quota cases. USCIS is not keeping up with the business norms. Many of the consulting companies do not have agreements with end clients and end clients will generally not give letters to consulatants to verify that they are actually working there.
The only time I have seen a consulting company file an H-1b for a person (transfer) and they are not on project; is that the employee has lost the current job or their company wants them to go back home and they do not want to go back home. Employee will do everything possible not to go back.
It is understandable that an individual will do whatever he can to better his social and economic situation. But it has to be done within the limits of the law. In your example, the consulting company should just say no. However, the company is greedy and wants to make money from the unfortunate situation of the poor guy who just lost his job.
I always go back through an example I used to see in the work place. Two people at the same level and one has a bigger cubicle. Other person with smaller cubicle complains. End result is that they don't make his cubicle bigger but make the other persons smaller.
Complaining or pointing fingers at one subsection of people using h-1b or greencards and getting uscis/lawmakers to fix it; it doesn't stop there. Eventually; it will come onto you. Many people on these forums/threads don't care about h-1b but only greencards. Do all of you think that it will only stop at H-1b's and won't spill over to greencards?
Are you are asking the immigrant community to condone the abusive/illegal practice of a subsection of people because the USCIS will come after everybody? On the contrary, I would rather they looked at every case closely to ensure that there is a valid job offer and no abuse. And it seems that they are now doing just that. This would ensure a smooth process those who follow the law - so there is nothing to fear whether it is H-1B or Green card application.
Having said that, the immigrant community should try to request the USCIS with some administrative fixes where the H-1B visa holder is not immediately out of status when he loses his job. If they give a grace period of three months or so, then one cae join either look for a new job, or wrap things up and go home. In the absence of such pressure, H-1B visa holders are less likely to find themselves in the hands of abusive consulting companies. The changes to H-1B proposed by Dick Durban and Co. only focussed on protecting american workers (which is all good). BUT, there was nothing in there that would protect the foreign worker's interest if he lost his job. We need to impress upon the congress or USCIS to give some grace period (which to my mind should be an easy administrative fix).
Maybe we are getting off the topic.
USCIS is giving a hard time for h-1b's.
If vemont service center:
ensure LCA is for client location and company location.
ensure that you can get a legitimate letter/contract from place you are actually working. ensure letter/contract says that the terms (duration) is extendable (under the law; uscis only has to approve the h-1b until the PO finishes if it is less then three years).
For companies: Cancel h-1b for people who have left. Cancel h-1b's for people who have not joined (uscis in their rfe's are frequently quoting number of h-1b's filed and comparing to current head count).
for california service center:
companies need to analyze their DE-6 and look to see who hasn't been paid the lca wage for all four quarters. Give proper/proactive explanations for people where it is not obvious why they weren't paid proper lca wage.
get legitimate client letter/purchase order from end client. Ensure that when filing H-1b; the LCA covers the client location. USCIS will generally not accept a new LCA covering the location after the h-1b has been filed.
Ensure the numbrer of active h-1b's is close to your headcount. If people haven't joined or aren't going to join; cancel h-1b's immediately.
For consulate: do not ever give fake purchase order/client letter. Consulates are very smart that they know major companies do not give such letters. They are frequently referring cases to department of state in kentucky to contact clients who wrote the letters. If client doesn't confrm (ie., HR at client company) then it is a very, very big problem for all people concerned.
For extensions; file as early as possible so you don't have issues with your drivers license, etc.
USCIS relies on a lot of case precdece to deny cases. many times they are misapplying these cases and going outside the law what is really required. In motion to reopens; california is very quick in givingin another decision. However; vermont sits on it for many, many months and they very rarely change their decisions.
When changing client locations then as a minimum get a new LCA but if you really want to cover yourself then consider amending h-1b for new location.
UN,
am always puzzled how H1B is valid also for outsourcing the h1b-employee to another company (like sub-sub-.....sub-contracting) ?
wasnt h1b intended for a inhouse job rather than a job at a client company ?
Originally Posted by unitednations
If companies used h-1b the way it is supposed to be written then really the only people who would get one would be OPT candidates who joined while they are on OPT.
That is not true - those who are qualified and for whom a job is available in the US will eventually make it here. If the requirement is genuine, then the company will go to India and get that skilled labor. Big companies have been known to hire talent internationally.
No way; would an H-1b get filed for a person who is outside the country. Consulting companies would like to adhere to the laws. However; when their existing employees keep referring friends or friends of friends then as a protective measure they are forced to file the H-1b; or they risk losing the existing employee to someone else.
Your argument that some consulting companies would like to adhere to laws, but are forced not to because they fear the employee will leave is sufficient reason for those companies to be shut down. There is no excuse for breaking the law, and that too intentionally. It is obvious from your argument these companies are greedy and give the rest of the H-1B visa holders a bad name.
Keep in mind; the big problem currently is "transfers" and "extensions". Not so much quota cases. USCIS is not keeping up with the business norms. Many of the consulting companies do not have agreements with end clients and end clients will generally not give letters to consulatants to verify that they are actually working there.
The only time I have seen a consulting company file an H-1b for a person (transfer) and they are not on project; is that the employee has lost the current job or their company wants them to go back home and they do not want to go back home. Employee will do everything possible not to go back.
It is understandable that an individual will do whatever he can to better his social and economic situation. But it has to be done within the limits of the law. In your example, the consulting company should just say no. However, the company is greedy and wants to make money from the unfortunate situation of the poor guy who just lost his job.
I always go back through an example I used to see in the work place. Two people at the same level and one has a bigger cubicle. Other person with smaller cubicle complains. End result is that they don't make his cubicle bigger but make the other persons smaller.
Complaining or pointing fingers at one subsection of people using h-1b or greencards and getting uscis/lawmakers to fix it; it doesn't stop there. Eventually; it will come onto you. Many people on these forums/threads don't care about h-1b but only greencards. Do all of you think that it will only stop at H-1b's and won't spill over to greencards?
Are you are asking the immigrant community to condone the abusive/illegal practice of a subsection of people because the USCIS will come after everybody? On the contrary, I would rather they looked at every case closely to ensure that there is a valid job offer and no abuse. And it seems that they are now doing just that. This would ensure a smooth process those who follow the law - so there is nothing to fear whether it is H-1B or Green card application.
Having said that, the immigrant community should try to request the USCIS with some administrative fixes where the H-1B visa holder is not immediately out of status when he loses his job. If they give a grace period of three months or so, then one cae join either look for a new job, or wrap things up and go home. In the absence of such pressure, H-1B visa holders are less likely to find themselves in the hands of abusive consulting companies. The changes to H-1B proposed by Dick Durban and Co. only focussed on protecting american workers (which is all good). BUT, there was nothing in there that would protect the foreign worker's interest if he lost his job. We need to impress upon the congress or USCIS to give some grace period (which to my mind should be an easy administrative fix).
Maybe we are getting off the topic.
USCIS is giving a hard time for h-1b's.
If vemont service center:
ensure LCA is for client location and company location.
ensure that you can get a legitimate letter/contract from place you are actually working. ensure letter/contract says that the terms (duration) is extendable (under the law; uscis only has to approve the h-1b until the PO finishes if it is less then three years).
For companies: Cancel h-1b for people who have left. Cancel h-1b's for people who have not joined (uscis in their rfe's are frequently quoting number of h-1b's filed and comparing to current head count).
for california service center:
companies need to analyze their DE-6 and look to see who hasn't been paid the lca wage for all four quarters. Give proper/proactive explanations for people where it is not obvious why they weren't paid proper lca wage.
get legitimate client letter/purchase order from end client. Ensure that when filing H-1b; the LCA covers the client location. USCIS will generally not accept a new LCA covering the location after the h-1b has been filed.
Ensure the numbrer of active h-1b's is close to your headcount. If people haven't joined or aren't going to join; cancel h-1b's immediately.
For consulate: do not ever give fake purchase order/client letter. Consulates are very smart that they know major companies do not give such letters. They are frequently referring cases to department of state in kentucky to contact clients who wrote the letters. If client doesn't confrm (ie., HR at client company) then it is a very, very big problem for all people concerned.
For extensions; file as early as possible so you don't have issues with your drivers license, etc.
USCIS relies on a lot of case precdece to deny cases. many times they are misapplying these cases and going outside the law what is really required. In motion to reopens; california is very quick in givingin another decision. However; vermont sits on it for many, many months and they very rarely change their decisions.
When changing client locations then as a minimum get a new LCA but if you really want to cover yourself then consider amending h-1b for new location.
UN,
am always puzzled how H1B is valid also for outsourcing the h1b-employee to another company (like sub-sub-.....sub-contracting) ?
wasnt h1b intended for a inhouse job rather than a job at a client company ?
clockwork
08-22 05:22 PM
I had a LUD on 7/28 and nothing after that... My I140 approved in Texas in April2006. I think we should get the receipt number here pretty soon...
Yeah me too. I had a LUD on 7/28 on my I-140 approval notice. I wonder, what is going on here? Thanks -
Yeah me too. I had a LUD on 7/28 on my I-140 approval notice. I wonder, what is going on here? Thanks -
suavesandeep
08-20 11:51 AM
My order so far is follows
Aug 12 8AM - Email -> Notice mailed welcoming the new permanent resident.
Aug 12 9PM - Email -> Card production ordered.
Aug 15 - Email -> Approval notice sent (for ME)
Aug 18 - Email -> Approval notice sent for Spouse
Aug 18 - Received I-797C Approval Notice for both me and spouse by USPS. In fact i received 3 original copies of the same approval for me and only 1 for my spouse.
Still waiting for the actual cards to come.
Aug 12 8AM - Email -> Notice mailed welcoming the new permanent resident.
Aug 12 9PM - Email -> Card production ordered.
Aug 15 - Email -> Approval notice sent (for ME)
Aug 18 - Email -> Approval notice sent for Spouse
Aug 18 - Received I-797C Approval Notice for both me and spouse by USPS. In fact i received 3 original copies of the same approval for me and only 1 for my spouse.
Still waiting for the actual cards to come.