sundarpn
02-07 03:41 PM
$50.
Your transaction ID for this payment is: 20403265J43769648.
Thx
Your transaction ID for this payment is: 20403265J43769648.
Thx
wallpaper World+of+warcraft+arthas
kunjirs
02-26 09:39 AM
Was not active on the forum for long time. Visited the forum for a question and came to know about Advocacy Days in Washington DC. Will not be able to attend due to family commitments. Thanks you all for your efforts for this event.
Contributed $50; receipt number for this payment is: 4235-8095-3773-3845. I will also check to see if I have any air miles.
Contributed $50; receipt number for this payment is: 4235-8095-3773-3845. I will also check to see if I have any air miles.
walking_dude
06-28 01:46 PM
Thanks gc28262 for your contributions to this drive. I request others to pitch in as well. We can discuss the nitty-gritties till we bleed. But that won't achieve anything. It will not stop the minformation being spread. We have to collect enough evidence and present it to the media. 4-5 job ads is just the beginning, we need a collection of few hundred to prove this is the prevalent trend.
2011 World+of+warcraft+arthas
dingudi
11-07 01:26 PM
I am trying to understand something here. So When we call TSC for FP they say it depends on local ASC. And I read from other posts on this and other forums that people who take infopass appointment for FP with their local ASC get a response that they have to call TSC for FP. So basically with Infopass , the local IO say to contact TSC and by calling TSC they say it depends on local ASC. What do we do now?
more...
dtekkedil
07-05 01:37 PM
For all those bouquets your sending... they will dismiss it as some security breach... cmon dont u know by now how USCIS is after 9-11.
They might just create panic out of innocent lovely flowers.
How can it be a security breach if we inform the media what we are doing? Besides... we are not the ones physically delivering those flowers! It is the florists! We are just ordering them!
I hope they don't create any panic but even if they do it is still news! Isn't that what we are trying to achieve?
They might just create panic out of innocent lovely flowers.
How can it be a security breach if we inform the media what we are doing? Besides... we are not the ones physically delivering those flowers! It is the florists! We are just ordering them!
I hope they don't create any panic but even if they do it is still news! Isn't that what we are trying to achieve?
sankap
07-10 12:45 AM
@desi3933:
This comment was then obviously was not directed to you but to others who advise to "file AC21." Please show me any of my post where I have advised people to file for AC-21.
.
This comment was then obviously was not directed to you but to others who advise to "file AC21." Please show me any of my post where I have advised people to file for AC-21.
.
more...
anukcs
09-02 11:33 PM
Received 'Card Production Ordered' email for my EAD few minutes back. Had received the same email yesterday for my wife. AP was approved for both me and my wife on 7/24. RD is 6/19/08 and ND is 6/23/08.
I am now relieved since I am currently working on EAD and current EAD expires on 10/4.
Regards,
I am now relieved since I am currently working on EAD and current EAD expires on 10/4.
Regards,
2010 active wallpaper wow.
fundo14
12-18 03:32 PM
Hi,
Our case was filed on July 2, 2007 at TSC.
We have got EADs, APs long back but did not get any FP notice.
Last week we got a letter saying that to speed up processing on your case we have transfered your case to NSC.(don't knw what it means)..but no FP notice till date.:confused:
anyone from July2 filers here waiting for FP notice still?
PD: Dec-2003/EB3
140: Approved
Thanks
Our case was filed on July 2, 2007 at TSC.
We have got EADs, APs long back but did not get any FP notice.
Last week we got a letter saying that to speed up processing on your case we have transfered your case to NSC.(don't knw what it means)..but no FP notice till date.:confused:
anyone from July2 filers here waiting for FP notice still?
PD: Dec-2003/EB3
140: Approved
Thanks
more...
desi3933
07-08 10:45 AM
The entire process of immigrating to US via a employment based system is so loosely organized and puts people in unfair situations.
I agree. Since Employment based immigration is driven by Employer needs, employer has the bigger say.
It is just not desi employers or consulting companies, in general, but any employer can have an upper hand on you when you are at their mercy.
Since the process is driven by Employer needs, whole immigration process depends on it. Is it fair from employee point of view? Most likely, not. But, thats how current laws are in place. Changing these laws are not easy, to say the least.
People say big companies have policies and they abide. I agree, but it is not always the case. If someone is in business - they do things in their business interest - if dealing with USCIS is getting difficult - they may say "enough of it - no more responding to RFEs".
One person contacted me - he is having a fulltime job and filed for AC21. he got RFE for EVL 2 times. The first time his HR gave EVL without any hasstles, the second time she was pissed, said "We do not want to deal with this - I have contacted legal and they recommend not to issue such letters".
Now such a situation puts this person in a tough spot -the issue is not because of his employer because his employer did give a proper letter but USCIS asked it again.
Just imagine what is this person's situation for no fault of his?
This is really a very unfortunate situation.
The big difference between EAD (for AC-21) and GC is that AC-21 employer has to provide supporting EVL document to continue pending I-485. Now, it is upto the applicant how he/she passes this information to the employer when he/she joins that AC-21 job.
Now, many would pass clear info to AC21 employer that they would EVL to support their GC process (I-485) and no other sponsorship is required. Now, its upto their mutual agreement on EVL. Employer is, within his rights, not to support or issue AC-21 EVL letter.
On the practical side, vast majority of employer have no issues with such EVL letters.
Big companies, of course, go with their legal team recommendation as their main purpose to run their business with least legal hassels.
We can always argue that "If you are worth and if company wants to retain you then they will not have any issues" - which once again may not always be true because we all know how relationships work out at companies - with ass kissing, nepotism, situations, financial etc......
It is two-way street. If employer is really good, employee will make extra effort on his job. IF employee is valuable (from employer's point of view), most employer will go extra mile to retain him/her. I have seen many such incidents in 12+ years of professional career.
There is, of course, work politics involved too. Bitching about co-worker, a$$ kissing, nepotism is part of it.
I have seen cases, where one team member is making 115k and another team member, at same role, is making just 85k. This may be unfair, but legal.
---------------
Life is not fair; get used to it. - Bill Gates
Success is a lousy teacher. It seduces smart people into thinking they can't lose. - Bill Gates
.
I agree. Since Employment based immigration is driven by Employer needs, employer has the bigger say.
It is just not desi employers or consulting companies, in general, but any employer can have an upper hand on you when you are at their mercy.
Since the process is driven by Employer needs, whole immigration process depends on it. Is it fair from employee point of view? Most likely, not. But, thats how current laws are in place. Changing these laws are not easy, to say the least.
People say big companies have policies and they abide. I agree, but it is not always the case. If someone is in business - they do things in their business interest - if dealing with USCIS is getting difficult - they may say "enough of it - no more responding to RFEs".
One person contacted me - he is having a fulltime job and filed for AC21. he got RFE for EVL 2 times. The first time his HR gave EVL without any hasstles, the second time she was pissed, said "We do not want to deal with this - I have contacted legal and they recommend not to issue such letters".
Now such a situation puts this person in a tough spot -the issue is not because of his employer because his employer did give a proper letter but USCIS asked it again.
Just imagine what is this person's situation for no fault of his?
This is really a very unfortunate situation.
The big difference between EAD (for AC-21) and GC is that AC-21 employer has to provide supporting EVL document to continue pending I-485. Now, it is upto the applicant how he/she passes this information to the employer when he/she joins that AC-21 job.
Now, many would pass clear info to AC21 employer that they would EVL to support their GC process (I-485) and no other sponsorship is required. Now, its upto their mutual agreement on EVL. Employer is, within his rights, not to support or issue AC-21 EVL letter.
On the practical side, vast majority of employer have no issues with such EVL letters.
Big companies, of course, go with their legal team recommendation as their main purpose to run their business with least legal hassels.
We can always argue that "If you are worth and if company wants to retain you then they will not have any issues" - which once again may not always be true because we all know how relationships work out at companies - with ass kissing, nepotism, situations, financial etc......
It is two-way street. If employer is really good, employee will make extra effort on his job. IF employee is valuable (from employer's point of view), most employer will go extra mile to retain him/her. I have seen many such incidents in 12+ years of professional career.
There is, of course, work politics involved too. Bitching about co-worker, a$$ kissing, nepotism is part of it.
I have seen cases, where one team member is making 115k and another team member, at same role, is making just 85k. This may be unfair, but legal.
---------------
Life is not fair; get used to it. - Bill Gates
Success is a lousy teacher. It seduces smart people into thinking they can't lose. - Bill Gates
.
hair World+of+warcraft+arthas
pittdude
02-18 11:13 PM
bump..
more...
kshitijnt
04-22 08:06 PM
I am not hitting on employers revenues, infact employer made money since two yrs because of me. The reason is, employer never got this project for me. It never had any business either with PF or with the client earlier. It was only because of my contact with the PF i got the project. i introduced the PF to my employer, have them sign a contract and since these two yrs my employer was able to place 4-5 consultants through the PF i introduced to them. Now tell me, how much my employer would have made because of me or other consultants??? Even after all this, he is being mean to me. these desi companies thirst for money is never ending. whereas consulatnts can never look up for a better life!!!!!!
After reading this post completely, here is my take. There are 2 things to view here:
1) employer and employee conduct.
2) non compete.
employee by leaving his job to work for PF has actually worked in unethical way if not illegal. You should have joined the PF to start with. Second thing is, you said your PERM is in process. How long ago did you file it? If you filed it more than 6 months ago, maybe you didnt know you were going to leave. Did you file it very recently despite knowing that you may join PF? In that case why you wasted your employers money? Also who picked the fight? You or employer? See... if the case goes to the court, the judge is going to notice this behaviour and will not like it. I am not saying you are a bad guy, we all make mistakes like this, but in court of law everyone is equal.
employer is not only unethical but also unprofessional in holding back employee wages. It does not matter when or with what intention the employee left, employers should not be breaking the law by withholding wages.
Since both sides have made some mistakes, I suggest get a good attorney. That attorney will negotiate with your employer and you will get your money, experience letter and also attorney expenses. There is no need to involve your PF at this stage. Your employer has a relationship with that company and that is the reason they do not want to go to court. However if you conduct yourself in unethical or unprofessional way, your previous employer can indicate that to your current company and that is a bad career move. Your case is very simple and it will be settled out of court. I would say, you do not get involved and commit mistakes under stress, let an attorney handle it.
Lastly, if you consult an attorney, any good attorney should tell you 2 things:
1) you have advantage over employer because employer has withheld your wages which is illegal as they have violated statutes for PERM.
2) It also depends on your non compete, you dont know what you signed. It may not be directly related to GC expense or direct revenue loss, but it may be something that your employer can hold you accountable.
I think your employer is just mad that you left them on unpleasant terms. Here is what I recommend:
1) Send an email, and offer to apologize if any of your actions left the employer less than satisfied. "DO NOT explicitly admit to mistakes. But offer a sincere apology if that can close the matter." Highlight, what you have done for the company, including placing 4 employees, working for 2 years etc. Regret that you had to leave despite filing perm with them and say you will be willing to help in future. Then call your boss. ask for his help. If he doesnt pick up, doesnt matter, leave a VM. However much you dont like doing it. It is necessary to do so. World is a small place and never burn bridges. Also mention in email you would like to get $4K back and experience letter. I will say copy HR, your boss and his boss. etc. The more higher levels you keep in loop, more people become answerable in court of law. If you copy VP etc of your group, if you decide to go court they can be called in as witnesses. They do not want this. No company wants to put their senior executives/managers in cross examinations in court. They know you can sue them, however do not use such language as the judge will not like it and in all probability he will ask you what you did in good faith to get your wage back? And any shouting , calling names etc will count against you for getting any damages.
2) give them 2 weeks to reply. Consult a lawyer, a good lawyer is one who also tells you what was your fault. No lawyer will tell you what you want to hear. All lawyers will tell you to conduct in ethical and professional manner. You know they are representing you. Their reputation is based on merit of your case.
3) if they dont respond in 2 weeks, file a claim in small claims court. serve a notice. In small claims court attorneys are not allowed to practise. If you win, ask the judge to award you maximum penalty allowed under the law. Also mention you want to get it in one payment. This becomes a public record against the company for anyone to see. I dont think any company wants so much hassle for 4K.
After reading this post completely, here is my take. There are 2 things to view here:
1) employer and employee conduct.
2) non compete.
employee by leaving his job to work for PF has actually worked in unethical way if not illegal. You should have joined the PF to start with. Second thing is, you said your PERM is in process. How long ago did you file it? If you filed it more than 6 months ago, maybe you didnt know you were going to leave. Did you file it very recently despite knowing that you may join PF? In that case why you wasted your employers money? Also who picked the fight? You or employer? See... if the case goes to the court, the judge is going to notice this behaviour and will not like it. I am not saying you are a bad guy, we all make mistakes like this, but in court of law everyone is equal.
employer is not only unethical but also unprofessional in holding back employee wages. It does not matter when or with what intention the employee left, employers should not be breaking the law by withholding wages.
Since both sides have made some mistakes, I suggest get a good attorney. That attorney will negotiate with your employer and you will get your money, experience letter and also attorney expenses. There is no need to involve your PF at this stage. Your employer has a relationship with that company and that is the reason they do not want to go to court. However if you conduct yourself in unethical or unprofessional way, your previous employer can indicate that to your current company and that is a bad career move. Your case is very simple and it will be settled out of court. I would say, you do not get involved and commit mistakes under stress, let an attorney handle it.
Lastly, if you consult an attorney, any good attorney should tell you 2 things:
1) you have advantage over employer because employer has withheld your wages which is illegal as they have violated statutes for PERM.
2) It also depends on your non compete, you dont know what you signed. It may not be directly related to GC expense or direct revenue loss, but it may be something that your employer can hold you accountable.
I think your employer is just mad that you left them on unpleasant terms. Here is what I recommend:
1) Send an email, and offer to apologize if any of your actions left the employer less than satisfied. "DO NOT explicitly admit to mistakes. But offer a sincere apology if that can close the matter." Highlight, what you have done for the company, including placing 4 employees, working for 2 years etc. Regret that you had to leave despite filing perm with them and say you will be willing to help in future. Then call your boss. ask for his help. If he doesnt pick up, doesnt matter, leave a VM. However much you dont like doing it. It is necessary to do so. World is a small place and never burn bridges. Also mention in email you would like to get $4K back and experience letter. I will say copy HR, your boss and his boss. etc. The more higher levels you keep in loop, more people become answerable in court of law. If you copy VP etc of your group, if you decide to go court they can be called in as witnesses. They do not want this. No company wants to put their senior executives/managers in cross examinations in court. They know you can sue them, however do not use such language as the judge will not like it and in all probability he will ask you what you did in good faith to get your wage back? And any shouting , calling names etc will count against you for getting any damages.
2) give them 2 weeks to reply. Consult a lawyer, a good lawyer is one who also tells you what was your fault. No lawyer will tell you what you want to hear. All lawyers will tell you to conduct in ethical and professional manner. You know they are representing you. Their reputation is based on merit of your case.
3) if they dont respond in 2 weeks, file a claim in small claims court. serve a notice. In small claims court attorneys are not allowed to practise. If you win, ask the judge to award you maximum penalty allowed under the law. Also mention you want to get it in one payment. This becomes a public record against the company for anyone to see. I dont think any company wants so much hassle for 4K.
hot World+of+warcraft+arthas
reddymjm
05-01 09:04 AM
Look Here
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
look here at
http://www.uscis.gov/portal/site/usc...0045f3d6a1RCRD
"Though we still have challenges to overcome, USCIS is currently showing improvements as a result of process improvements. As of April 25, 2008, USCIS had adjudicated over 65 percent of its FY 2008 target for employment-based visas. With five months to go in FY 2008, this is a strong start. We plan to continue implementing process improvements and new reporting mechanisms for managing these important applications. "
It means they have used 90K Visa out of 140-150K ..it means 50K visa left for next 5 month..not sure how much visa dates wlll be moved.
EB2 went to U and then because of EB1 they are available. so it could be all EB3 numbers left. In that case we can see considerable movement in EB3. If EB3 ROW becomes current or close to current next visa bulliten there might be some movement for India and china in coming months or atleast IN FY 2009.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
look here at
http://www.uscis.gov/portal/site/usc...0045f3d6a1RCRD
"Though we still have challenges to overcome, USCIS is currently showing improvements as a result of process improvements. As of April 25, 2008, USCIS had adjudicated over 65 percent of its FY 2008 target for employment-based visas. With five months to go in FY 2008, this is a strong start. We plan to continue implementing process improvements and new reporting mechanisms for managing these important applications. "
It means they have used 90K Visa out of 140-150K ..it means 50K visa left for next 5 month..not sure how much visa dates wlll be moved.
EB2 went to U and then because of EB1 they are available. so it could be all EB3 numbers left. In that case we can see considerable movement in EB3. If EB3 ROW becomes current or close to current next visa bulliten there might be some movement for India and china in coming months or atleast IN FY 2009.
more...
house wallpaper wow. world of
caydee
07-09 11:16 AM
A news article from San Jose Mercury News...........
http://www.mercurynews.com/news/ci_6331029?nclick_check=1
(apologies for posting this here. I couldnt find the link to News Article Thread - 3. Moderators please move this to the right thread)
IMMIGRATION REFORM'S COLLAPSE GETS FIRMS LOOKING ABROAD
By Frank Davies
MediaNews Washington Bureau
Article Launched: 07/09/2007 01:29:41 AM PDT
WASHINGTON - Reeling from the collapse of a massive immigration bill, major tech firms plan to press for more visas and green cards for foreign workers - one element of the failed legislation - but admit they face political resistance and an uncertain future.
"We face a serious problem this year, Congress knows that, and we just have to keep pushing," said Robert Hoffman, an Oracle lobbyist. He said restrictive caps on H-1B and L visas for skilled workers and the long waiting time for green cards for some were limiting companies' growth and sending some jobs overseas.
But Ralph Hellmann, who lobbied on the Senate bill for the Information Technology Industry trade group, sounded an upbeat note. He said a separate measure increasing visas and green cards "is probably a better product now that we don't have to ride on a compre hensive bill."
Hoffman, who co-chairs Compete America, a coalition of businesses seeking immigration reform, said he hopes to meet with key congressional leaders on the issue, including Sen. Ted Kennedy, D-Mass., sponsor of the failed Senate bill, and Rep. Zoe Lofgren, the San Jose Democrat who chairs the immigration subcommittee in the House.
"We'll have to see what's in the realm of the doable, whether it's long-term or a stop-gap," Hoffman said.
Lofgren sounded a note of caution Friday, saying progress on any component of the comprehensive bill may be difficult.
"We're in an assessment phase right now, and I don't know what can proceed - that's up to a very diverse group of people in the House and Senate," she said. Other provisions of the failed immigration bill have champions who now see an opening for separate legislation.
Taking separate action
Sen. Dianne Feinstein, a California Democrat, said the shortage in farm labor is a crisis that means her "ag jobs" proposal for more foreign workers "should be moved before any other immigration-related legislation."
She said she will work with Sen. Larry Craig, R-Idaho, a co-sponsor, and industry and farmworker groups to push soon for that bill.
Lofgren said "there's a compelling case for the Dream Act," another part of the comprehensive bill that would allow some children of illegal immigrants to achieve legal status and make it easier to enter college or the military.
Several South Bay students last week launched a fast to show their support for the Dream Act, and they demonstrated Tuesday in front of Lofgren's San Jose office.
Immigration hard-liners who oppose any legalization process for undocumented workers said the failure of the Senate bill shows the need to improve border security and workplace enforcement.
Rep. Brian Bilbray, a San Diego Republican who chairs the House Immigration Reform Caucus, said a congressional consensus exists to pursue those goals this year.
Workforce in jeopardy
Meanwhile, thousands of highly skilled visa-holders who filed paperwork last month for green cards had a more immediate problem this week. Because of a dispute between the State Department and Immigration Services, and a huge backlog of applications, they were told no more green cards are available this year.
Large employers, including some in the tech sector, were told this year by the Bush administration to help pass the overall bill to secure some of their key goals. Those include almost doubling the number of H-1B visas to 115,000 a year, exempting 40,000 people with higher degrees from any restrictions, and speeding up the employer-based green card system for workers already here.
With the demise of the bill and uncertainty over future immigration, some California companies may shift operations to other countries, Lofgren said. Microsoft announced plans Thursday to open a software development center in Vancouver, British Columbia, which would "allow the company to recruit and retain highly skilled people affected by the immigration issues in the U.S."
In 2006, Microsoft secured 3,117 H-1B visas for its workers - the third-highest total - according to the Department of Homeland Security.
Lou Gellos, a Microsoft spokesman, said immigration uncertainty was "an issue, but not the defining reason" for opening the Canada center.
Criticism has also mounted over abuses and fraud in the H-1B visa system.
Sen. Dick Durbin, D-Ill., citing government surveys, said that "job shops" and other brokers were misusing the system to bypass U.S. workers, bring in foreign workers for substandard wages, and outsource some jobs.
"Our immigration policy should seek to complement our U.S. workforce, not replace it," Durbin said last month during the Senate debate.
System left in limbo
After behind-the-scenes negotiations, tech companies acceded to some of the proposals from Durbin and Sen. Charles Grassley, R-Iowa, to improve oversight and enforcement of the H-1B program by the Department of Labor. All companies would have to pledge to seek U.S. workers first for openings, and if an employer's visa-holders who are paid entry-level wages exceeded 30 percent of its workforce, a Labor Department audit would be automatic.
That agreement is now in limbo. If a serious push for an increase in visas makes progress, Durbin would want to include his proposals, an aide said.
Hoffman said tech representatives would agree to more enforcement "that is not punitive."
Lofgren, who represents tech executives and workers, said she could support "reforms and changes" in the visa system.
"It needs a good review - I've never thought that just increasing the numbers was in the cards," she said.
Contact Frank Davies at fdavies@mercurynews.com or (202) 662-8921.
http://www.mercurynews.com/news/ci_6331029?nclick_check=1
(apologies for posting this here. I couldnt find the link to News Article Thread - 3. Moderators please move this to the right thread)
IMMIGRATION REFORM'S COLLAPSE GETS FIRMS LOOKING ABROAD
By Frank Davies
MediaNews Washington Bureau
Article Launched: 07/09/2007 01:29:41 AM PDT
WASHINGTON - Reeling from the collapse of a massive immigration bill, major tech firms plan to press for more visas and green cards for foreign workers - one element of the failed legislation - but admit they face political resistance and an uncertain future.
"We face a serious problem this year, Congress knows that, and we just have to keep pushing," said Robert Hoffman, an Oracle lobbyist. He said restrictive caps on H-1B and L visas for skilled workers and the long waiting time for green cards for some were limiting companies' growth and sending some jobs overseas.
But Ralph Hellmann, who lobbied on the Senate bill for the Information Technology Industry trade group, sounded an upbeat note. He said a separate measure increasing visas and green cards "is probably a better product now that we don't have to ride on a compre hensive bill."
Hoffman, who co-chairs Compete America, a coalition of businesses seeking immigration reform, said he hopes to meet with key congressional leaders on the issue, including Sen. Ted Kennedy, D-Mass., sponsor of the failed Senate bill, and Rep. Zoe Lofgren, the San Jose Democrat who chairs the immigration subcommittee in the House.
"We'll have to see what's in the realm of the doable, whether it's long-term or a stop-gap," Hoffman said.
Lofgren sounded a note of caution Friday, saying progress on any component of the comprehensive bill may be difficult.
"We're in an assessment phase right now, and I don't know what can proceed - that's up to a very diverse group of people in the House and Senate," she said. Other provisions of the failed immigration bill have champions who now see an opening for separate legislation.
Taking separate action
Sen. Dianne Feinstein, a California Democrat, said the shortage in farm labor is a crisis that means her "ag jobs" proposal for more foreign workers "should be moved before any other immigration-related legislation."
She said she will work with Sen. Larry Craig, R-Idaho, a co-sponsor, and industry and farmworker groups to push soon for that bill.
Lofgren said "there's a compelling case for the Dream Act," another part of the comprehensive bill that would allow some children of illegal immigrants to achieve legal status and make it easier to enter college or the military.
Several South Bay students last week launched a fast to show their support for the Dream Act, and they demonstrated Tuesday in front of Lofgren's San Jose office.
Immigration hard-liners who oppose any legalization process for undocumented workers said the failure of the Senate bill shows the need to improve border security and workplace enforcement.
Rep. Brian Bilbray, a San Diego Republican who chairs the House Immigration Reform Caucus, said a congressional consensus exists to pursue those goals this year.
Workforce in jeopardy
Meanwhile, thousands of highly skilled visa-holders who filed paperwork last month for green cards had a more immediate problem this week. Because of a dispute between the State Department and Immigration Services, and a huge backlog of applications, they were told no more green cards are available this year.
Large employers, including some in the tech sector, were told this year by the Bush administration to help pass the overall bill to secure some of their key goals. Those include almost doubling the number of H-1B visas to 115,000 a year, exempting 40,000 people with higher degrees from any restrictions, and speeding up the employer-based green card system for workers already here.
With the demise of the bill and uncertainty over future immigration, some California companies may shift operations to other countries, Lofgren said. Microsoft announced plans Thursday to open a software development center in Vancouver, British Columbia, which would "allow the company to recruit and retain highly skilled people affected by the immigration issues in the U.S."
In 2006, Microsoft secured 3,117 H-1B visas for its workers - the third-highest total - according to the Department of Homeland Security.
Lou Gellos, a Microsoft spokesman, said immigration uncertainty was "an issue, but not the defining reason" for opening the Canada center.
Criticism has also mounted over abuses and fraud in the H-1B visa system.
Sen. Dick Durbin, D-Ill., citing government surveys, said that "job shops" and other brokers were misusing the system to bypass U.S. workers, bring in foreign workers for substandard wages, and outsource some jobs.
"Our immigration policy should seek to complement our U.S. workforce, not replace it," Durbin said last month during the Senate debate.
System left in limbo
After behind-the-scenes negotiations, tech companies acceded to some of the proposals from Durbin and Sen. Charles Grassley, R-Iowa, to improve oversight and enforcement of the H-1B program by the Department of Labor. All companies would have to pledge to seek U.S. workers first for openings, and if an employer's visa-holders who are paid entry-level wages exceeded 30 percent of its workforce, a Labor Department audit would be automatic.
That agreement is now in limbo. If a serious push for an increase in visas makes progress, Durbin would want to include his proposals, an aide said.
Hoffman said tech representatives would agree to more enforcement "that is not punitive."
Lofgren, who represents tech executives and workers, said she could support "reforms and changes" in the visa system.
"It needs a good review - I've never thought that just increasing the numbers was in the cards," she said.
Contact Frank Davies at fdavies@mercurynews.com or (202) 662-8921.
tattoo active wallpaper wow.
unitednations
03-08 08:20 PM
If many EB3-I folks are getting GCs then why is EB3-I PD stuck in 2001? Shouldn't it move?
There are still lots of cases in eb3 from back that far.
Many of the eb3 245i cases; there dependents were outside USA. Once; they got greencards; then their dependents went for consular processing or are going for consular processing.
One of the cases I worked on ability to pay; person had adopted her nephew so that he could get greencard as dependent. You couldn't even begin to imagine how many cases like this there are.
There are still lots of cases in eb3 from back that far.
Many of the eb3 245i cases; there dependents were outside USA. Once; they got greencards; then their dependents went for consular processing or are going for consular processing.
One of the cases I worked on ability to pay; person had adopted her nephew so that he could get greencard as dependent. You couldn't even begin to imagine how many cases like this there are.
more...
pictures Search wallpaper, coming
snathan
02-10 10:25 AM
dcu bill payer needs phone number for iv.
Can someone post tel# for iv ?
(202) 386-6250
Can someone post tel# for iv ?
(202) 386-6250
dresses Arthas from World of Warcraft:
payur
07-11 10:21 AM
Way to go !!!!
more...
makeup new wotlk arthas wallpaper
simple1
05-04 11:24 PM
wow its pouring reds and uncivilised comments for pointing out this. Ok. well i am going to continue anyway!.
That is not me.
http://www.uscis.gov/propub/template.htm?view=document&doc_action=setDoc&doc_keytype=tocid&doc_key=2dae084742aac42ac9134cc4466287e7[/url]
(d) Treatment of Family Members. - A spouse or child as defined in subparagraph (A), (B), (C), (D), or (E) of section 101(b)(1) shall, if not otherwise entitled to an immigrant status and the immediate issuance of a visa under subsection (a), (b), or (c), be entitled to the same status, and the same order of consideration provided in the respective subsection, if accompanying or following to join, the spouse or parent.
same status = denied, paroled etc.
same order of consideration=Priority date which depends on petition for both primary and derivative.
I agree with the above two.
"respective subsection:" here means derivative�s corresponding/respective subsection (family) not primary's or petition's. It is the situation of individual that matters not primary or petition.
Take time to read (b) Preference Allocation for Employment-Based Immigrants.
You will find that the eligibility for EBvisa and quota usage are clearly documented. None other than the primary can use the quota. The ebdependent cannot get an ebvisa. so ebdependent cannot use ebquota.
That is not me.
http://www.uscis.gov/propub/template.htm?view=document&doc_action=setDoc&doc_keytype=tocid&doc_key=2dae084742aac42ac9134cc4466287e7[/url]
(d) Treatment of Family Members. - A spouse or child as defined in subparagraph (A), (B), (C), (D), or (E) of section 101(b)(1) shall, if not otherwise entitled to an immigrant status and the immediate issuance of a visa under subsection (a), (b), or (c), be entitled to the same status, and the same order of consideration provided in the respective subsection, if accompanying or following to join, the spouse or parent.
same status = denied, paroled etc.
same order of consideration=Priority date which depends on petition for both primary and derivative.
I agree with the above two.
"respective subsection:" here means derivative�s corresponding/respective subsection (family) not primary's or petition's. It is the situation of individual that matters not primary or petition.
Take time to read (b) Preference Allocation for Employment-Based Immigrants.
You will find that the eligibility for EBvisa and quota usage are clearly documented. None other than the primary can use the quota. The ebdependent cannot get an ebvisa. so ebdependent cannot use ebquota.
girlfriend skills to share arthas wow
rbusgc
02-24 01:30 PM
Receipt No: 5475-4035-1880-0959
RB
How to get added to the 'donor' forum?? ;)
RB
How to get added to the 'donor' forum?? ;)
hairstyles World+of+warcraft+arthas
waitnwatch
05-23 12:27 PM
sent emails to 10 +2
trueguy
07-28 10:48 AM
This thread was opened for working on Action Item. EB2-I community is giving all stupid reasons to divert us from our Action Item. Please stay focused and lets work on Action Items.
We already sent petition to support those three bills. What else shall we do now. We are running out of time and only few days left before Congress goes on recess (or whatever the term is). WE MUST ACT NOW.
Thanks.
We already sent petition to support those three bills. What else shall we do now. We are running out of time and only few days left before Congress goes on recess (or whatever the term is). WE MUST ACT NOW.
Thanks.
newuser
05-23 11:26 AM
Unfortunately, the Senator e-mail id's are not available. We need to do the hard way. use either AILA websiter or senators contact page
AILA - http://capwiz.com/aila2/dbq/officials/
Senators - http://www.senate.gov/general/contact_information/senators_cfm.cfm
Hi,
Can someone copy paste the email ids of senators. I have limited access to internet at my work place.
Thanks and Regards,
Krish
AILA - http://capwiz.com/aila2/dbq/officials/
Senators - http://www.senate.gov/general/contact_information/senators_cfm.cfm
Hi,
Can someone copy paste the email ids of senators. I have limited access to internet at my work place.
Thanks and Regards,
Krish
No comments:
Post a Comment