add78
08-20 12:48 PM
Here are the answers -
To begin with first, there are two different things
1) Document that determines your STATUS IN USA - Your CURRENT I-94 and what it says (stamp/handwritten valid status with valid until date)
2) Document that determines your EMPLOYMENT ELIGIBILITY IN USA - Your H1-B I797 with Employer Name and valid until date OR Your H1-B Visa Stamp with Employer Name and valid until date (OR your L1 visa with employer name and valid until date or F-1 visa with CPT/OPT) OR Your EAD card (any employer) OR Your Green Card (any employer) OR Your USA Passport (holy grail).
You have H1-B I-797, You may have H1-B Stamp, Your I-94 says H1-B, Therefore Your Status is H-1B, Your Work Authorization Document is H1-B.
You file 485, You file for AP and EAD, You get AP and EAD, You haven't used either yet.
You exit USA, You return to USA using AP.
Your I-94 now says "Parolee", Your status now in USA is "Parolee/Pending AOS"
Your Work Authorization for SAME (continuing) employer is H1-B
A.K.A. NO NEED to use EAD.
There is NO SUCH THING as H1-B Transfer
Every H1-B filing is a new one, USCIS checks if
1) You have valid remaining 6 year period at the time this new H1-B that they have received AND
2) You have been counted against the H1-B before in the last 6 years or not.
So now after I-94 says "Parolee/Pending AOS", You CAN
A) Extend your H1-B with the SAME EMPLOYER provided you have time left in your 6 year window
OR
B) File a new H1-B with a DIFFERENT EMPLOYER provided you have time left in your 6 year window AND you are counted in the cap
OR
C) Move to this DIFFERENT EMPLOYER WITHOUT filing H1-B by using your EAD.
in scenario A) your status CHANGES from "Parolee/WaitingAOS" to H1-B with SAME EMPLOYER once you receive your new I-797 that has I-94 at the bottom, you keep working on current H1-B that is being extended
in scenario B) your status CHANGES from "Parolee/WaitingAOS" to H1-B with DIFFERENT EMPLOYER once you receive your new I-797 that has I-94 at the bottom, you start working on new H1-B receipt notice until that gets approved and then on the new approved H1-B
in scenario C) your status STAYS "Parolee/WaitingAOS", you start working on your EAD which is NOT tied to any employer.
Many people FEAR that they should CLING ON TO H1-B "just in case" 485 is denied. Well that fear is not well placed since if your 485 is denied at any point in either scenario A) or B) even though you may remain "IN STATUS" you probably have run out of 6 year clock by then. Conversely, in scenario C) in case of 485 denial, even though you may temporarily become "OUT OF STATUS" you can immediately file H1-B with the working or a different employer to get back "IN STATUS" if your clock has not expired by then.
between scenarios B) and C), scenario C) is simpler and easier as long as the job is same/similar if you are using AC-21.
Hope This Helps.
To begin with first, there are two different things
1) Document that determines your STATUS IN USA - Your CURRENT I-94 and what it says (stamp/handwritten valid status with valid until date)
2) Document that determines your EMPLOYMENT ELIGIBILITY IN USA - Your H1-B I797 with Employer Name and valid until date OR Your H1-B Visa Stamp with Employer Name and valid until date (OR your L1 visa with employer name and valid until date or F-1 visa with CPT/OPT) OR Your EAD card (any employer) OR Your Green Card (any employer) OR Your USA Passport (holy grail).
You have H1-B I-797, You may have H1-B Stamp, Your I-94 says H1-B, Therefore Your Status is H-1B, Your Work Authorization Document is H1-B.
You file 485, You file for AP and EAD, You get AP and EAD, You haven't used either yet.
You exit USA, You return to USA using AP.
Your I-94 now says "Parolee", Your status now in USA is "Parolee/Pending AOS"
Your Work Authorization for SAME (continuing) employer is H1-B
A.K.A. NO NEED to use EAD.
There is NO SUCH THING as H1-B Transfer
Every H1-B filing is a new one, USCIS checks if
1) You have valid remaining 6 year period at the time this new H1-B that they have received AND
2) You have been counted against the H1-B before in the last 6 years or not.
So now after I-94 says "Parolee/Pending AOS", You CAN
A) Extend your H1-B with the SAME EMPLOYER provided you have time left in your 6 year window
OR
B) File a new H1-B with a DIFFERENT EMPLOYER provided you have time left in your 6 year window AND you are counted in the cap
OR
C) Move to this DIFFERENT EMPLOYER WITHOUT filing H1-B by using your EAD.
in scenario A) your status CHANGES from "Parolee/WaitingAOS" to H1-B with SAME EMPLOYER once you receive your new I-797 that has I-94 at the bottom, you keep working on current H1-B that is being extended
in scenario B) your status CHANGES from "Parolee/WaitingAOS" to H1-B with DIFFERENT EMPLOYER once you receive your new I-797 that has I-94 at the bottom, you start working on new H1-B receipt notice until that gets approved and then on the new approved H1-B
in scenario C) your status STAYS "Parolee/WaitingAOS", you start working on your EAD which is NOT tied to any employer.
Many people FEAR that they should CLING ON TO H1-B "just in case" 485 is denied. Well that fear is not well placed since if your 485 is denied at any point in either scenario A) or B) even though you may remain "IN STATUS" you probably have run out of 6 year clock by then. Conversely, in scenario C) in case of 485 denial, even though you may temporarily become "OUT OF STATUS" you can immediately file H1-B with the working or a different employer to get back "IN STATUS" if your clock has not expired by then.
between scenarios B) and C), scenario C) is simpler and easier as long as the job is same/similar if you are using AC-21.
Hope This Helps.
wallpaper quotes about oys. quotes for
ndbhatt
11-01 05:15 PM
I hear people say that there is reverse brain drain. But this is not completely true. I cannot quantify in numbers but there are certainly few people, I know of, who have migrated to countries like Canada and Australia.
I will not call it as reverse brain drain but diversion of brain drain to other pastures that may be worthy from individuals standpoint.
Reasons could be endless, to name a few - stagnancy in career growth, frustration for wait for GC, inability to invest further in housing for job insecurity, longer time for family union (ageing parents), save kids from western culture, etc.. etc.
I have heard one of the above reasons, while there could be more, from people who want to vent out their frustations. But rest assured very few choose to put it to action at the end of the day.
My two cents - don't bash others. I believe that all of us go through this turmoil at some point or the other.
Let's stay focussed on what you want. Most of us, if not all, are here for better life, career growth, money ;), etc and if other countries offer better prospects and meet majority of ones expectations, most likely, we will consider the options. I think, to a certain extent, we are patriotic to our ownself or if may call - opportunist.
Given a scenario. EU Blue card gives better option (though not sure if it will :p) flow to newer pastures is inevitable and unstoppable. This may not appeal to 100% of the readers but it's one of the faces of dice.
I will not call it as reverse brain drain but diversion of brain drain to other pastures that may be worthy from individuals standpoint.
Reasons could be endless, to name a few - stagnancy in career growth, frustration for wait for GC, inability to invest further in housing for job insecurity, longer time for family union (ageing parents), save kids from western culture, etc.. etc.
I have heard one of the above reasons, while there could be more, from people who want to vent out their frustations. But rest assured very few choose to put it to action at the end of the day.
My two cents - don't bash others. I believe that all of us go through this turmoil at some point or the other.
Let's stay focussed on what you want. Most of us, if not all, are here for better life, career growth, money ;), etc and if other countries offer better prospects and meet majority of ones expectations, most likely, we will consider the options. I think, to a certain extent, we are patriotic to our ownself or if may call - opportunist.
Given a scenario. EU Blue card gives better option (though not sure if it will :p) flow to newer pastures is inevitable and unstoppable. This may not appeal to 100% of the readers but it's one of the faces of dice.
rheoretro
11-13 02:46 PM
- First, it is highly unlikely that Hastert will ever, ever support CIR. That itself is a "red flag" from a post by "Red card."
- Actions speak louder than words. If Murtha becomes the majority leader in house than Democrat agenda for 2008 presidential agenda will be Iraq not immigration. That doesn't mean no immigration reform, just not in the "lame-duck" session.
- Lets wait for next year for any progress on immigration.
GCS999 - excellent points! I asked someone yesterday why they even care about Hastert. He's toast, anyway.There's a very revealing article in the Washington Post today, which says that the Dems will tread cautiously, and perhaps even slowly, on immigration. And they have bigger fish to fry, the number one being Iraq. Not sure what the needless hullabaloo about the lame duck session is. People need to stop crying wolf.
Democrats May Proceed With Caution on Immigration
Explosive Issue Not A Top Priority For Incoming Leaders
By Darryl Fears and Spencer S. Hsu
Washington Post Staff Writers
Monday, November 13, 2006; A03
When election results started rolling in Tuesday, Cecilia Mu�oz said that she and other immigration advocates were "holding our breath." One by one, Republicans who had fought tooth and nail for stricter immigration laws fell, turning control of Congress over to the Democrats.
By morning, a 700-mile Mexican border fence passed by Republicans in a pre-election gambit had fallen flat with voters. A sharply worded GOP bill that targeted illegal immigrants and spurred marches by millions of Latinos in the spring appeared likely to fade into memory.
"I think this is the best environment we've had on the issue in quite some time," said Cassandra Q. Butts, a senior vice president for the pro-immigration Center for American Progress.
But when it comes to immigration, things are never easy. In the days after the election, Democratic leaders surprised pro-immigration groups by not including the issue on their list of immediate priorities. Experts said the issue is so complicated, so sensitive and so explosive that it could easily blow up in the Democrats' faces and give control of Congress back to Republicans in the next election two years from now. And a number of Democrats who took a hard line on illegal immigration were also elected to Congress.
"It's not without its challenges, for sure," said Jeanne Butterfield, executive director of the American Immigration Lawyers Association. "You've got opposition in both parties. You still have restrictionists in the Republican Party. You have Democrats who've been reluctant to move on any kind of worker program."
Butterfield predicted that lobbyists and Democrats have less than a year to move legislation that could put some 12 million illegal immigrants on a path to legal residency, before the looming 2008 elections make a deal politically impossible. And analysts say the fate of President Bush's proposal to create a temporary worker program for 200,000 immigrants is in doubt, with labor's allies in charge.
In recent days, advocates have been burning up the phone lines talking to one another and to try to determine whom House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.), the presumed speaker of the next Congress, will appoint to key committees, and how the new Democratically controlled Congress will approach the issue.
Major challenges lay ahead. The Mexican border remains a sieve where an estimated 100,000 immigrants sneak into the country every year. Conservatives in the House, and some Democrats, want the border sealed with manpower, fencing and technological gadgets before they will even consider guest workers.
Mark Krikorian, executive director of the Center for Immigration Studies, which opposes increased immigration, said Democrats should implement an enforcement program first. Anything else might be political suicide.
"The Democrats need to get their majority reelected in the next two years," Krikorian said. "My sense is that the Democrats have grown up enough to know they can't get reelected trying to get everything they want."
Immigration experts are on the lookout for the kind of compromises that led to the flawed immigration reform laws of 1986 and 1996. In those years, a White House and Congress split between the two parties passed watered-down laws requiring employers to check the legal status of new hires to satisfy businesses and immigration advocates. They also failed to give enforcement agencies the money, staff, technology or practical ability to do the job.
The miscues paved the way for an explosion of illegal immigration.
"The question is, will this just be another split-the-baby approach, such as we saw in 1986," said Robert Bonner, commissioner of U.S. Customs and Border Protection from 2003 to 2005, "or are we actually going to do something that is going to seriously achieve the objectives of controlling the border?"
At the White House Friday, the Bush administration struck a bipartisan chord, trumpeting both border enforcement and a guest worker initiative. "The President believes a temporary guest worker program, where you will know if you're in or you're out, is going to relieve pressure on the border and also reduce the incentive for people to travel from Central America through Mexico in search of such jobs," said White House spokesman Tony Snow.
Bush supports a proposal by Sens. John McCain (R-Ariz.) and Edward M. Kennedy (D-Mass.) to allow foreign nationals currently outside the country to work in the United States temporarily. Illegal immigrants now in the country could work too, but only if they pay a $2,000 penalty for breaking the law, pay back taxes, undergo a criminal check, learn English, take civics lessons, go to the back of the employment line and then work six years with no legal problems.
The McCain-Kennedy bill would also strengthen the border and create a computerized system to check the legal status of workers. The Senate bill would authorize spending $400 million to expand a pilot program used by 5,000 employers to cover new hires by more than 8 million U.S. companies within 18 months.
But some experts are skeptical. The non-partisan Migration Policy Institute has said that the pilot system is flawed, will take at least three years to implement, and will fail unless it is made much more accurate. The MPI panel, co-chaired by former congressman Lee H. Hamilton (D-Ind.) and former senator Spencer Abraham (R-Mich.) also said other steps are needed, such as producing tamper-proof Social Security or other employment ID card based on fingerprints or other unique identifying features.
Others say thousands of immigration investigators are needed to verify legal workers and track down those who remain in the country illegally.
James W. Ziglar, former commissioner of the Immigration and Naturalization Service, said if Congress does take up an overhaul, "the recognition that enforcement has to be of equal stature is something that will occur this time, because the lessons learned from the 1986 act are still burning very brightly in the minds of people on both sides of the debate."
Mu�oz, a vice president at the National Council of La Raza, the nation's largest Latino civil rights group, said Democrats should move carefully ahead with a plan that satisfies both sides.
"This notion that it's dangerous to vote to support comprehensive immigration reform I believe to be false," she said. In Arizona, she said, voters rejected anti-immigration Republicans Randy Graf and Rep. J.D. Hayworth.
But, to show how complicated the issue is, Arizona voters also approved three referenda to make life tougher for illegal immigrants.
Anti-immigration Rep. Tom Tancredo (R-Colo.), who was distraught after the election, believing a guest worker program was inevitable under the Democrats, now says he's changed his mind.
"It seemed to me that it was not going to be as easy for them as I had anticipated or feared," Tancredo said. "They're not putting it out there as their number one, out-of-the-box issue."
The more he thought about the issue, the more cloudy the future seemed.
"I don't know," he said. A temporary guest worker program "could certainly happen. I may be just skipping past the graveyard."
- Actions speak louder than words. If Murtha becomes the majority leader in house than Democrat agenda for 2008 presidential agenda will be Iraq not immigration. That doesn't mean no immigration reform, just not in the "lame-duck" session.
- Lets wait for next year for any progress on immigration.
GCS999 - excellent points! I asked someone yesterday why they even care about Hastert. He's toast, anyway.There's a very revealing article in the Washington Post today, which says that the Dems will tread cautiously, and perhaps even slowly, on immigration. And they have bigger fish to fry, the number one being Iraq. Not sure what the needless hullabaloo about the lame duck session is. People need to stop crying wolf.
Democrats May Proceed With Caution on Immigration
Explosive Issue Not A Top Priority For Incoming Leaders
By Darryl Fears and Spencer S. Hsu
Washington Post Staff Writers
Monday, November 13, 2006; A03
When election results started rolling in Tuesday, Cecilia Mu�oz said that she and other immigration advocates were "holding our breath." One by one, Republicans who had fought tooth and nail for stricter immigration laws fell, turning control of Congress over to the Democrats.
By morning, a 700-mile Mexican border fence passed by Republicans in a pre-election gambit had fallen flat with voters. A sharply worded GOP bill that targeted illegal immigrants and spurred marches by millions of Latinos in the spring appeared likely to fade into memory.
"I think this is the best environment we've had on the issue in quite some time," said Cassandra Q. Butts, a senior vice president for the pro-immigration Center for American Progress.
But when it comes to immigration, things are never easy. In the days after the election, Democratic leaders surprised pro-immigration groups by not including the issue on their list of immediate priorities. Experts said the issue is so complicated, so sensitive and so explosive that it could easily blow up in the Democrats' faces and give control of Congress back to Republicans in the next election two years from now. And a number of Democrats who took a hard line on illegal immigration were also elected to Congress.
"It's not without its challenges, for sure," said Jeanne Butterfield, executive director of the American Immigration Lawyers Association. "You've got opposition in both parties. You still have restrictionists in the Republican Party. You have Democrats who've been reluctant to move on any kind of worker program."
Butterfield predicted that lobbyists and Democrats have less than a year to move legislation that could put some 12 million illegal immigrants on a path to legal residency, before the looming 2008 elections make a deal politically impossible. And analysts say the fate of President Bush's proposal to create a temporary worker program for 200,000 immigrants is in doubt, with labor's allies in charge.
In recent days, advocates have been burning up the phone lines talking to one another and to try to determine whom House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.), the presumed speaker of the next Congress, will appoint to key committees, and how the new Democratically controlled Congress will approach the issue.
Major challenges lay ahead. The Mexican border remains a sieve where an estimated 100,000 immigrants sneak into the country every year. Conservatives in the House, and some Democrats, want the border sealed with manpower, fencing and technological gadgets before they will even consider guest workers.
Mark Krikorian, executive director of the Center for Immigration Studies, which opposes increased immigration, said Democrats should implement an enforcement program first. Anything else might be political suicide.
"The Democrats need to get their majority reelected in the next two years," Krikorian said. "My sense is that the Democrats have grown up enough to know they can't get reelected trying to get everything they want."
Immigration experts are on the lookout for the kind of compromises that led to the flawed immigration reform laws of 1986 and 1996. In those years, a White House and Congress split between the two parties passed watered-down laws requiring employers to check the legal status of new hires to satisfy businesses and immigration advocates. They also failed to give enforcement agencies the money, staff, technology or practical ability to do the job.
The miscues paved the way for an explosion of illegal immigration.
"The question is, will this just be another split-the-baby approach, such as we saw in 1986," said Robert Bonner, commissioner of U.S. Customs and Border Protection from 2003 to 2005, "or are we actually going to do something that is going to seriously achieve the objectives of controlling the border?"
At the White House Friday, the Bush administration struck a bipartisan chord, trumpeting both border enforcement and a guest worker initiative. "The President believes a temporary guest worker program, where you will know if you're in or you're out, is going to relieve pressure on the border and also reduce the incentive for people to travel from Central America through Mexico in search of such jobs," said White House spokesman Tony Snow.
Bush supports a proposal by Sens. John McCain (R-Ariz.) and Edward M. Kennedy (D-Mass.) to allow foreign nationals currently outside the country to work in the United States temporarily. Illegal immigrants now in the country could work too, but only if they pay a $2,000 penalty for breaking the law, pay back taxes, undergo a criminal check, learn English, take civics lessons, go to the back of the employment line and then work six years with no legal problems.
The McCain-Kennedy bill would also strengthen the border and create a computerized system to check the legal status of workers. The Senate bill would authorize spending $400 million to expand a pilot program used by 5,000 employers to cover new hires by more than 8 million U.S. companies within 18 months.
But some experts are skeptical. The non-partisan Migration Policy Institute has said that the pilot system is flawed, will take at least three years to implement, and will fail unless it is made much more accurate. The MPI panel, co-chaired by former congressman Lee H. Hamilton (D-Ind.) and former senator Spencer Abraham (R-Mich.) also said other steps are needed, such as producing tamper-proof Social Security or other employment ID card based on fingerprints or other unique identifying features.
Others say thousands of immigration investigators are needed to verify legal workers and track down those who remain in the country illegally.
James W. Ziglar, former commissioner of the Immigration and Naturalization Service, said if Congress does take up an overhaul, "the recognition that enforcement has to be of equal stature is something that will occur this time, because the lessons learned from the 1986 act are still burning very brightly in the minds of people on both sides of the debate."
Mu�oz, a vice president at the National Council of La Raza, the nation's largest Latino civil rights group, said Democrats should move carefully ahead with a plan that satisfies both sides.
"This notion that it's dangerous to vote to support comprehensive immigration reform I believe to be false," she said. In Arizona, she said, voters rejected anti-immigration Republicans Randy Graf and Rep. J.D. Hayworth.
But, to show how complicated the issue is, Arizona voters also approved three referenda to make life tougher for illegal immigrants.
Anti-immigration Rep. Tom Tancredo (R-Colo.), who was distraught after the election, believing a guest worker program was inevitable under the Democrats, now says he's changed his mind.
"It seemed to me that it was not going to be as easy for them as I had anticipated or feared," Tancredo said. "They're not putting it out there as their number one, out-of-the-box issue."
The more he thought about the issue, the more cloudy the future seemed.
"I don't know," he said. A temporary guest worker program "could certainly happen. I may be just skipping past the graveyard."
2011 Crush Quotes For Guys To Girls
rimzhim
02-07 12:10 PM
And not just because I am from EB-3 ROW.
But, because everything that I have learnt seems to indicate that EB-3 ROW is getting a lot of visa numbers. So why the hell would it be stuck??
because there is a very large number of ppl in EB3-ROW.
But, because everything that I have learnt seems to indicate that EB-3 ROW is getting a lot of visa numbers. So why the hell would it be stuck??
because there is a very large number of ppl in EB3-ROW.
more...
mallu
11-17 10:37 AM
I filed 485 in Sep 2003.
First Finger Print is done in Aug 2004.
Second Finger Print is done in April 2007.
Took Infopass on Sep 11th 2007 and I was told by Officer that everything looks good but still pending and asked me to check after 2 months.
Took Infopass again on Nov 13th 2007 and came to know that FBI Name Check is Pending on my and my wife's cases.
How do I know how long FBI Name Check is Pending on my case ?
You filed in Sep 2003, right ? So name check is pending for 4+ years. Why didn't file WOM on them ?
First Finger Print is done in Aug 2004.
Second Finger Print is done in April 2007.
Took Infopass on Sep 11th 2007 and I was told by Officer that everything looks good but still pending and asked me to check after 2 months.
Took Infopass again on Nov 13th 2007 and came to know that FBI Name Check is Pending on my and my wife's cases.
How do I know how long FBI Name Check is Pending on my case ?
You filed in Sep 2003, right ? So name check is pending for 4+ years. Why didn't file WOM on them ?
nc14
09-17 01:55 PM
I dont see this going anywhere. Looks like we will be stuck on HR6020
2nd order amendment -seems related to illegal immigration and deportation of convicted criminals
2nd order amendment -seems related to illegal immigration and deportation of convicted criminals
more...
anzerraja
07-19 06:36 PM
Thanks very much !
Will DO...Just gimme some time.
Will DO...Just gimme some time.
2010 quotes for oys who are
abhijitp
12-03 04:46 PM
With all due respect I don't think lottery may be a workable idea. Here's why -
Those who buy lotteries wish to spend least posible amount of money for a chance to win an insanely large sum of money - for e.g. spend $10 to win $10 million. Idea is prize money should make the money spent feel ridiculously low ( it doesn't matter if chances of winning are lower than getting struck by lightning ! ). How can this be worked out in the IV scenario?
2 times the money is less than what people win at a 'Pot luck'!
Unforunately though, the audience does believe in "penny wise pound foolish".
People should not need a lottery or an IV credit card, they would be contributing without any of these incentives... if only they realized
1) no relief is likely unless they want to help IV DO SOMETHING about it
2) getting a GC sooner means saving a LOT more money than $50 a month
Those who buy lotteries wish to spend least posible amount of money for a chance to win an insanely large sum of money - for e.g. spend $10 to win $10 million. Idea is prize money should make the money spent feel ridiculously low ( it doesn't matter if chances of winning are lower than getting struck by lightning ! ). How can this be worked out in the IV scenario?
2 times the money is less than what people win at a 'Pot luck'!
Unforunately though, the audience does believe in "penny wise pound foolish".
People should not need a lottery or an IV credit card, they would be contributing without any of these incentives... if only they realized
1) no relief is likely unless they want to help IV DO SOMETHING about it
2) getting a GC sooner means saving a LOT more money than $50 a month
more...
seekerofpeace
09-15 09:14 PM
What works for someone may not work for us. VXG and others were lucky we are not as simple as that which does not mean that we left any stone unturned...it just doesn't work that way.....but again will keep on trying...
has anybody tried calling USCIS as the proxy applicant..I mean has anyone as a primary called USCIS for their dependent....the reason I am asking is I need to do that....I am sure there is no "sex" in the file and there is no way for them knowing that I am the primary applicant or not.
SoP
has anybody tried calling USCIS as the proxy applicant..I mean has anyone as a primary called USCIS for their dependent....the reason I am asking is I need to do that....I am sure there is no "sex" in the file and there is no way for them knowing that I am the primary applicant or not.
SoP
hair quotes about guys that are
walking_dude
04-26 11:56 PM
Newer version is - as should've been expected - more protectionist than before.
1) It prohibits H1B workers from working in contract positions.There is a redundant provision for the L1 visa as well (there is already a law which does this for L1). However it doesn't prevent American companies from keeping these contract workers in India or elsewhere and co-ordinate the work through web-conferencing, video conferencing, VPN/VNC etc.
2) It increases H1B fees by another 1000 dollars. There will be the added cost of advertising on DOL website. Also, the legal costs of navigating the audits. It also enables Tort attorneys to sue the companies on behalf of labor unions such as IEEE-USA, PG, Bright Future Jobs, Zazona etc. In essence it makes the whole visa program unviable. American companies cannot participate in the visa program without letting the DOL and the Tort attorneys poking their noses in the daily functioning of Corporate America. Imagine which company will apply for H1B when you'll have ads airing on TV from Tort attorneys - 'Have you been displaced by H1B worker? Call 1-800-TORT-ATTORNEY'?
3) It has a whole gamut of so-called 'H1B/L1B worker protections'. Unless and until the complaining foreign worker's visa status/GC status is protected against employer retaliation, these provisions will remain only on paper, as foreigner workers facing the prospect of forced departure from the country will not complain - extra worker protections or not. They might as well scrap these provisions and save some trees in the process!
4) It retains the provision that H1B/L1 worker must be provided all originals for H1B, Green Card etc. However this will be moot, as there won't be many H1B/L1 workers left in the US to take the benefit. They would already have moved to their home countries, brining the salaries down in their home countries die to excess supply. This combined with technical enablers are going to make outsourcing HOT. I think it's a good time to invest in the stocks of these outsourcing companies. Their returns are going to increase exponentially in a year. I am not surprised, if these companies send a 'Thank You' note to Senators Durbin and Grassley for making such a windfall possible.
If this year only 44,000 visas were used after half a month, wait until this law passes. There will already 10,000 or less visa applications. On a short term basis wages will sky-rocket, when companies are already struggling to make the ends meet. This will definitely make the usage of technological innovations such as the ones mentioned in point 1 more appealing to the companies. In the long run Outsourcing will become cheaper and more attractive.
Faced with accute worker shortage and unreasonably high-salaries driven scarcity in an economy under recession, Companies will have only 3 options. 1) Announce bankruptcy and get out of business salvaging what they can 2) Leverage technology to do outsourcing circumventing the need for visas 3) Beg the government for another 'Stimulus' and more borrowed money from the Chinese to pay the salaries.
This will hit hard the humanitarian immigration for refugees, asylees etc. USCIS is a government department run on visa application fees. As H1B fee-base reduces US government will have to appropriate more funds to USCIS to keep these programs running. The cost of these programmes will increasingly be borne by the American tax-payer. As jobs keep getting outsourced at a much faster speed tax-base formed by these H1B/L1 workers will shift to other economies benefiting them, the government will have to increases the taxes to make up for the difference. No doubt this will increase the tax burden on an average American - even those who had nothing to do with H1B, pro- or against.
The day this law passes will be a great day for Outsourcing, and a sad day for America.
Please stop H1 Vs L1 discussion and do not support those who aim to divide this community on various visa types, categories, nationalities etc. Any further attempts by any member in this direction will result in ban. We would appreciate if you read the bill posted by IV and provide some analysis on its content on this thread.
1) It prohibits H1B workers from working in contract positions.There is a redundant provision for the L1 visa as well (there is already a law which does this for L1). However it doesn't prevent American companies from keeping these contract workers in India or elsewhere and co-ordinate the work through web-conferencing, video conferencing, VPN/VNC etc.
2) It increases H1B fees by another 1000 dollars. There will be the added cost of advertising on DOL website. Also, the legal costs of navigating the audits. It also enables Tort attorneys to sue the companies on behalf of labor unions such as IEEE-USA, PG, Bright Future Jobs, Zazona etc. In essence it makes the whole visa program unviable. American companies cannot participate in the visa program without letting the DOL and the Tort attorneys poking their noses in the daily functioning of Corporate America. Imagine which company will apply for H1B when you'll have ads airing on TV from Tort attorneys - 'Have you been displaced by H1B worker? Call 1-800-TORT-ATTORNEY'?
3) It has a whole gamut of so-called 'H1B/L1B worker protections'. Unless and until the complaining foreign worker's visa status/GC status is protected against employer retaliation, these provisions will remain only on paper, as foreigner workers facing the prospect of forced departure from the country will not complain - extra worker protections or not. They might as well scrap these provisions and save some trees in the process!
4) It retains the provision that H1B/L1 worker must be provided all originals for H1B, Green Card etc. However this will be moot, as there won't be many H1B/L1 workers left in the US to take the benefit. They would already have moved to their home countries, brining the salaries down in their home countries die to excess supply. This combined with technical enablers are going to make outsourcing HOT. I think it's a good time to invest in the stocks of these outsourcing companies. Their returns are going to increase exponentially in a year. I am not surprised, if these companies send a 'Thank You' note to Senators Durbin and Grassley for making such a windfall possible.
If this year only 44,000 visas were used after half a month, wait until this law passes. There will already 10,000 or less visa applications. On a short term basis wages will sky-rocket, when companies are already struggling to make the ends meet. This will definitely make the usage of technological innovations such as the ones mentioned in point 1 more appealing to the companies. In the long run Outsourcing will become cheaper and more attractive.
Faced with accute worker shortage and unreasonably high-salaries driven scarcity in an economy under recession, Companies will have only 3 options. 1) Announce bankruptcy and get out of business salvaging what they can 2) Leverage technology to do outsourcing circumventing the need for visas 3) Beg the government for another 'Stimulus' and more borrowed money from the Chinese to pay the salaries.
This will hit hard the humanitarian immigration for refugees, asylees etc. USCIS is a government department run on visa application fees. As H1B fee-base reduces US government will have to appropriate more funds to USCIS to keep these programs running. The cost of these programmes will increasingly be borne by the American tax-payer. As jobs keep getting outsourced at a much faster speed tax-base formed by these H1B/L1 workers will shift to other economies benefiting them, the government will have to increases the taxes to make up for the difference. No doubt this will increase the tax burden on an average American - even those who had nothing to do with H1B, pro- or against.
The day this law passes will be a great day for Outsourcing, and a sad day for America.
Please stop H1 Vs L1 discussion and do not support those who aim to divide this community on various visa types, categories, nationalities etc. Any further attempts by any member in this direction will result in ban. We would appreciate if you read the bill posted by IV and provide some analysis on its content on this thread.
more...
vidhya_srini
01-05 05:06 AM
After long wait i received passport today jan 4th.. My interview was on dec 20th..
good luck to the rest!
good luck to the rest!
hot tattoo quotes for guys. good
whoever
01-30 08:58 AM
finally, something good by DOL for us.
more...
house quotes for guys. quotes about
chicago60607
09-17 11:28 AM
Seems like they are discussing about Attorney General Michael B. Mukasey
tattoo quotes about guys being
northstar
07-30 09:02 PM
This is not related in any way to Immigration.
Not related, correct! - That's why he posted under 'Interesting topics' where many other non-immi topics are discussed. Those who are not interested will choose not to visit the thread by looking at the subject line.
Not related, correct! - That's why he posted under 'Interesting topics' where many other non-immi topics are discussed. Those who are not interested will choose not to visit the thread by looking at the subject line.
more...
pictures tattoo quotes for guys. good
DariusMonsef
05-31 04:16 AM
Desert Sunset.
(I already entered mine, but I was having too much fun so I thought I would just share and inspire the rest of you.)
(I already entered mine, but I was having too much fun so I thought I would just share and inspire the rest of you.)
dresses quotes on guys. hot quotes for
ElectricGrandpa
06-20 09:55 AM
yep..
more...
makeup pictures guys are like quotes,
vselvam
09-24 06:55 PM
http://boards.immigration.com/showthread.php?t=286606
I know the post was entirely wrong and foolish.
But I feel that I am in the dark about IV activities for the past one year.
I am one of the silent IV Supporters and long time (from the beginning) monthly contributing IV Member.
It would be better to have a special thread/monthly bulleting page from IV to tell the members to know about IV activities or progress.
After the last year July fiasco issue I have not seen any posting about IV activities on the web site other than lot of threads and could not able to figure out the work IV is exactly doing.
I strongly believe because of IV core team only we were able to come through successful in July 2007 Bulletin issue. But do not know what else is IV doing for the past 12 months.
The Flowers, Letters and Phone Calls is not working as we expect. I do not know about other activities other than sending letters and phones during every congress session.
I believe IV need to do some thing different. There is no media reports about legal immigration issue (not for IV) for the past one year.
My perspective is that we need to find a way that Media and Public will aware of the issues we face every day.
I am not questioning the IV Core Team. It would be great if the IV members know some details about IV activities every month in a bulletin or thread etc.
Thanks
vselvam
I know the post was entirely wrong and foolish.
But I feel that I am in the dark about IV activities for the past one year.
I am one of the silent IV Supporters and long time (from the beginning) monthly contributing IV Member.
It would be better to have a special thread/monthly bulleting page from IV to tell the members to know about IV activities or progress.
After the last year July fiasco issue I have not seen any posting about IV activities on the web site other than lot of threads and could not able to figure out the work IV is exactly doing.
I strongly believe because of IV core team only we were able to come through successful in July 2007 Bulletin issue. But do not know what else is IV doing for the past 12 months.
The Flowers, Letters and Phone Calls is not working as we expect. I do not know about other activities other than sending letters and phones during every congress session.
I believe IV need to do some thing different. There is no media reports about legal immigration issue (not for IV) for the past one year.
My perspective is that we need to find a way that Media and Public will aware of the issues we face every day.
I am not questioning the IV Core Team. It would be great if the IV members know some details about IV activities every month in a bulletin or thread etc.
Thanks
vselvam
girlfriend tattoo quotes for guys. tattoo
Maniaci
06-08 03:18 PM
I say end it asap. Unless someone has an amazing design in the works that will take a while, there is no use to keep goin imo heh.
hairstyles jerks. quotes about guys
fasterthanlight�
06-16 12:00 PM
i dont know why we are debating this...... just do it if you want, and if you dont want to then dont. simple as that.
wandmaker
03-30 02:51 PM
Forum Gurus - I got a denial letter on my 485. I am a July 2007 filer and applied for AOS in July 2007. My 140 was revoked by ex employer in August 2008 and immediately I got a NOID from USCIS and responded to it in a timely manner and my case processing resumed.
But now, I got a denial stating that my 140 has been revoked in August 2008 and thats why my 485 is denied. My Attorney is filing for MTR and says it is a mistake on their side and will be resolved through MTR.
It just baffles me that the person who sent the denial letter never looked into the system to see my case trail and blindly issued the denial notice. My Attorney says, it is very much possible that they do not look at RFEs or responses - they just issue denials when they browse through the 140s.
I am EB2 India with a priority date of March 2006. I think some kind of pre assessment is going on. There are no LUDs and mine is at the TSC.
Is there anyone else in the same boat? How long does it take for MTR to get processed?
Nothing to panic, browse through chanduv23's posting(s) - you will be back in track in few weeks.
Most recent case is at http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/showthread.php?t=23800&highlight=revoked+denial
But now, I got a denial stating that my 140 has been revoked in August 2008 and thats why my 485 is denied. My Attorney is filing for MTR and says it is a mistake on their side and will be resolved through MTR.
It just baffles me that the person who sent the denial letter never looked into the system to see my case trail and blindly issued the denial notice. My Attorney says, it is very much possible that they do not look at RFEs or responses - they just issue denials when they browse through the 140s.
I am EB2 India with a priority date of March 2006. I think some kind of pre assessment is going on. There are no LUDs and mine is at the TSC.
Is there anyone else in the same boat? How long does it take for MTR to get processed?
Nothing to panic, browse through chanduv23's posting(s) - you will be back in track in few weeks.
Most recent case is at http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/showthread.php?t=23800&highlight=revoked+denial
va_labor2002
07-21 10:17 AM
Starting a Recruiting company for Nurses will be a good idea now. There is a heavy shortage for Nurses in USA. It is easy to bring qualified nurses from India to USA. IV can start a recruiting company with the help of 5000 members.
If 5000 members contributing atleast $100 to raise the initial capital,we can easily make a Good company with 1/2 million capital asset.Everybody will be share holders of the company and they can get profit every year. We need to employ 2-3 persons for marketing and administration.
Think about it. You are investing only $100.00 ! Any comments from IV core members ?
If 5000 members contributing atleast $100 to raise the initial capital,we can easily make a Good company with 1/2 million capital asset.Everybody will be share holders of the company and they can get profit every year. We need to employ 2-3 persons for marketing and administration.
Think about it. You are investing only $100.00 ! Any comments from IV core members ?
No comments:
Post a Comment