smuggymba
01-15 04:08 PM
Body shops aka desi dallas have bad business practices as someone just mentioned - all they do is provide a TAX ID.....nothing else.
You have to find a project on your own, no pay on bench, no proper office space - renting 2 rooms doesn't make a company, no benefits or medical insurance. Since an H1-B person requires an employer to do paper work - that is all what they do.
As someone just mentioned, this rule is not against H1-Bs but against such ppl who have bad business practices. Not all desi dallas are bad - 10-15% are good also.
You have to find a project on your own, no pay on bench, no proper office space - renting 2 rooms doesn't make a company, no benefits or medical insurance. Since an H1-B person requires an employer to do paper work - that is all what they do.
As someone just mentioned, this rule is not against H1-Bs but against such ppl who have bad business practices. Not all desi dallas are bad - 10-15% are good also.
wallpaper Cool cricket t-shirt for girls
apnair2002
04-29 09:23 AM
04/29/2007: Elimination of Substitution of Aliens for the Certified Labor Certification Applications
As we stated earlier, the OMB had 90 days to make a decision on this DOL Final Rule. It was submitted on 01/26/2007 and the OMB cleared on 04/27/2007, just immediately prior to expiration of 90 days.
This final rule will not go into effect until it is published by the DOL in the federal register. Record reflects that this final rule will not be published in the federal register, Monday, 04/30/2007. We have yet to see what changes to the proposed version of the rule the DOL made in the final rule. However, it is certain that this rule will not go into effect on Monday, 04/30/2007, and there may still be some actions the employers can make before it is published in the federal register.
Pending Labor Certification Cases: PERM rule does not allow any amendments and no substitution of alien beneficiary available until the PERM application is certified. By the time PERM is approved, it may be too late to initiate the substitution. However, the cases which are pending at the BECs are different. The beneficiaries can be substituted inasmuch as the job order and the BEC supervised recruitment has yet to be initiated. At this time, the amendment of the BEC application does not require a paper request and e-mail or even phone call request followed by fax will work to substitute the alien. Under the final rule which will go into effect soon, the labor certification applications at the stage of DOL can survive only if the substitution has been approved at the time of release of the final rule. Accordingly, the employers can contact the BECs tomorrow, Monday, to amend the pending ETA 705 and alien beneficiary over the phone, via e-mail, followed by the phone calls and fax or straightforwardedly via fax. CAVEAT: If substitution is denied and original beneficiary ETA 750 is denied for the reason that there is no beneficiary, the employer can lose everything!!
Certified Labor Certification Cases: These cases will not be able to survive unless the I-140 petition is quickly filed on Monday substituting the alien beneficiary. The earliest filing date will be "Tuesday" since overnight delivery has to reach the Service Centers. Still worth trying. Once it is "filed," it will be safe. There remain a host of issues which will have to be resolved by the USCIS as to the consequences of the denial of these substitution I-140 petitions on issues other than alien beneficiaries qualifications such as the employer's financial ability to pay the proffered wage, etc. Obviously, the denial becomes a "final" action, the cases on appeal to the AAO will continue to remain outside the parameter of the elimination rule. Another question is the effect of motion to reopen of denial of substitution I-140 petitions. There is some chance that the USCIS may decide that once the motion is granted and I-140 petition is approved, the DOL's final rule of elimination of substitution will not affect the case. What if the employer refiles the substitution I-140 petitions? The chances of these cases will remail slim or nil. Since it will be considred a "new" filing of substitution I-140 petition, the USCIS may rule that such filing will be subject to the DOL's substitution elimination final rule. There will be other issues which fall under the jurisdiction of the USCIS rather than DOL as related to the interpretation of the substitution I-140 petitions. The USCIS is scheduled to initiate this rule making process sooner or later. Please stay tuned.
Impact on the Retention of Priority Date: The rule of retention of priority date is governed not by the DOL but by the USCIS. Under the USCIS rule, the priority date of the labor certification application is not retained until I-140 petition is "approved." Accordingly, if the decision of the denial of the substitution I-140 becomes final on appeal, the substituting alien will not be able to retain the priority. Neither the original beneficiary can retain the priority date unless the alien beneficiary substition I-140 petition was filed after the I-140 had been approved for the original beneficiary.
Impact on the 7th-Year H-1B Extension: Until the substitution I-140 is denied and becomes final on appeal, the substitutiing alien will be able to continuously extend the H-1B status in one-year increment, but the substituted alien will not be able to extend the 7th-year H-1B status based on the substituted labor certification application. Once the decision of denial becomes final, the substituting alien will not be able to extend the H-1B status after that time, but the validity of the approved 7th-year H-1B status will remain valid until the expiration date.
Impact on the 245(i) Benefits: Grandfathering of the 245(i) benefits cannot be transferred to other aliens and substituting aliens cannot take over the 245(i) benefits unless the substitution was filed before April 30, 2001. Once the grandfathering is attached, it remains valid unless "not approveable at the time of labor certification application filing" is found. Accordingly, the denial of substitution I-140 petition on behalf of the substituting alien will have no affect on the original beneficiary's retention of the 245(i) benefits.
Well, let's wait and see the text of the soon-to-be published final rule.
As we stated earlier, the OMB had 90 days to make a decision on this DOL Final Rule. It was submitted on 01/26/2007 and the OMB cleared on 04/27/2007, just immediately prior to expiration of 90 days.
This final rule will not go into effect until it is published by the DOL in the federal register. Record reflects that this final rule will not be published in the federal register, Monday, 04/30/2007. We have yet to see what changes to the proposed version of the rule the DOL made in the final rule. However, it is certain that this rule will not go into effect on Monday, 04/30/2007, and there may still be some actions the employers can make before it is published in the federal register.
Pending Labor Certification Cases: PERM rule does not allow any amendments and no substitution of alien beneficiary available until the PERM application is certified. By the time PERM is approved, it may be too late to initiate the substitution. However, the cases which are pending at the BECs are different. The beneficiaries can be substituted inasmuch as the job order and the BEC supervised recruitment has yet to be initiated. At this time, the amendment of the BEC application does not require a paper request and e-mail or even phone call request followed by fax will work to substitute the alien. Under the final rule which will go into effect soon, the labor certification applications at the stage of DOL can survive only if the substitution has been approved at the time of release of the final rule. Accordingly, the employers can contact the BECs tomorrow, Monday, to amend the pending ETA 705 and alien beneficiary over the phone, via e-mail, followed by the phone calls and fax or straightforwardedly via fax. CAVEAT: If substitution is denied and original beneficiary ETA 750 is denied for the reason that there is no beneficiary, the employer can lose everything!!
Certified Labor Certification Cases: These cases will not be able to survive unless the I-140 petition is quickly filed on Monday substituting the alien beneficiary. The earliest filing date will be "Tuesday" since overnight delivery has to reach the Service Centers. Still worth trying. Once it is "filed," it will be safe. There remain a host of issues which will have to be resolved by the USCIS as to the consequences of the denial of these substitution I-140 petitions on issues other than alien beneficiaries qualifications such as the employer's financial ability to pay the proffered wage, etc. Obviously, the denial becomes a "final" action, the cases on appeal to the AAO will continue to remain outside the parameter of the elimination rule. Another question is the effect of motion to reopen of denial of substitution I-140 petitions. There is some chance that the USCIS may decide that once the motion is granted and I-140 petition is approved, the DOL's final rule of elimination of substitution will not affect the case. What if the employer refiles the substitution I-140 petitions? The chances of these cases will remail slim or nil. Since it will be considred a "new" filing of substitution I-140 petition, the USCIS may rule that such filing will be subject to the DOL's substitution elimination final rule. There will be other issues which fall under the jurisdiction of the USCIS rather than DOL as related to the interpretation of the substitution I-140 petitions. The USCIS is scheduled to initiate this rule making process sooner or later. Please stay tuned.
Impact on the Retention of Priority Date: The rule of retention of priority date is governed not by the DOL but by the USCIS. Under the USCIS rule, the priority date of the labor certification application is not retained until I-140 petition is "approved." Accordingly, if the decision of the denial of the substitution I-140 becomes final on appeal, the substituting alien will not be able to retain the priority. Neither the original beneficiary can retain the priority date unless the alien beneficiary substition I-140 petition was filed after the I-140 had been approved for the original beneficiary.
Impact on the 7th-Year H-1B Extension: Until the substitution I-140 is denied and becomes final on appeal, the substitutiing alien will be able to continuously extend the H-1B status in one-year increment, but the substituted alien will not be able to extend the 7th-year H-1B status based on the substituted labor certification application. Once the decision of denial becomes final, the substituting alien will not be able to extend the H-1B status after that time, but the validity of the approved 7th-year H-1B status will remain valid until the expiration date.
Impact on the 245(i) Benefits: Grandfathering of the 245(i) benefits cannot be transferred to other aliens and substituting aliens cannot take over the 245(i) benefits unless the substitution was filed before April 30, 2001. Once the grandfathering is attached, it remains valid unless "not approveable at the time of labor certification application filing" is found. Accordingly, the denial of substitution I-140 petition on behalf of the substituting alien will have no affect on the original beneficiary's retention of the 245(i) benefits.
Well, let's wait and see the text of the soon-to-be published final rule.
ramus
07-04 11:06 AM
When you send any email, subject of the email matters.. If our subject is something like just immigration then I think they will just send automatic reply..
Let Mecaca work on getting good template/letter that we can use to send it to everybody..
Thanks.
I am sick and tired of cookie cutter responses from lawmakers staff. They have a standard template, that starts off with how concerned they are that the immigration system is broken, and their concern for American companies and workers and H-1b.
Enough of that freaking rubbish....
Lets send them letters, and specifically ask them
a) Do you condemn USCIS/DOS behavior, or do you commend it?
b) Do you sympathise with the plight of the employment based greencard applicants or not?
Finally, say that their response will be posted on online public forums so that it can be shared with other employment based greencard applicants.
Let Mecaca work on getting good template/letter that we can use to send it to everybody..
Thanks.
I am sick and tired of cookie cutter responses from lawmakers staff. They have a standard template, that starts off with how concerned they are that the immigration system is broken, and their concern for American companies and workers and H-1b.
Enough of that freaking rubbish....
Lets send them letters, and specifically ask them
a) Do you condemn USCIS/DOS behavior, or do you commend it?
b) Do you sympathise with the plight of the employment based greencard applicants or not?
Finally, say that their response will be posted on online public forums so that it can be shared with other employment based greencard applicants.
2011 cricket world Sri Lanka
kumarc123
07-23 01:56 PM
vdlrao is everyone's friend these days ...not only urs ... :-)
Don't worry you are my friend too, as well as all the IV members
Take Care
Don't worry you are my friend too, as well as all the IV members
Take Care
more...
El_Guapo
01-14 01:59 PM
LOL.....I see where this is headed. We will all post on these threads and whine and complain, just like we do with the visa bulletin. And then in about a week's time, it will all die and no one will bother about this memo. We will "accept" whatever is offered to us. But I am sure within the next week, you can see 10 different threads with people talking about stuff such as "Gandhigiri", "Flower" campaign, "Hunger Strike", "Lawsuit", "Email Campaign", "Letter Campaign", "Phone Campaign", etc.....Don't worry, nothing will materialize and all these will die down. We as Immigrants have learned to accept everything and never fight back :)
snathan
01-21 06:27 PM
I got the below email from multiple friends. I don't know what is the source, who wrote this analysis because there is no links. I did NOT mean to spread the fear. Just sharing the contents unaltered.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
However, this is how many could read RECENT (Jan 8, 2010) actions / announcement by USCIS towards Consulting companies, which engages or merely places their employees at the client sites for various projects.
� No new H1B application will be approved, as per the new guidelines provided USCIS on Jan 08, 2010 memorandum � for 3rd Party Consulting company.
� No new H1B extension/stamping will be approved, as per the new guidelines provided USCIS on Jan 08, 2010 memorandum � for 3rd Party Consulting company.
� If an employee has H1B approved or extension approved, and if he/she comes back to US from a vacation or from an emergency, he/she would be deported back to his/her home country from the Port of Entry (PoE) � for 3rd Party Consulting company.
Why?
Because of 2 recent events:
1) USCIS gave new memorandum (which is now guidelines for USCIS professionals working on the H1B petitions/extensions) on Jan 08th, 2010. (Attached the PDF file for the memorandum).
2) Recently (Jan 2010) several H1B Employees were sent back (in some forum, its mentioned � all of them) to their home country from Newark, NJ and JFK, NY Port of Entry � these were the H1B employees, who went to spend Christmas/New Year vacation to their home countries.
What does the memorandum mention, specifically, about 3rd Party Consulting companies?
Link to the memorandum (PDF attached) � http://www.uscis.gov/USCIS/Laws/Memoranda/2010/H1B%20Employer-Employee%20Memo010810.pdf
Employer-Employee Relationship:
As per the memorandum, some previous H1B Law defines, the definition of an �US Employer�. Somewhere in that definition (Page 2 of memo), it mentions the word �Employer-Employee relationship�. Till now, it seems that there was no clear guidance on what kind of relationship was considered having Employer-Employee relationship. So, it was being, probably, interpreted independently or ambiguously. Now, on Jan 8th, 2010, USCIS has published this memorandum for TRAINING USCIS OFFICIALS about understanding, Employer-Employee relationship. The memorandum seems to have been prepared with a clear understanding about it, along with the specific EXAMPLES.
Memorandum has given few specific examples, which would QUALIFY for having Employer-Employee relationship, on Page 4-5 of the Memo � including the nature of the job/business. On Page 5-6, memorandum gives few specific examples, which would NOT QUALIFY for having Employer-Employee relationship. Third Party Placement / �Job-Shop� (better version of �Body-shop�, probably) is NOT QUALIFIED for meeting Employer-Employee Relationships � meaning, 3rd Party placement (which most of the small consulting companies do) doesn�t meet H1B requirement, as defined by the law � meaning for this job, the new H1B or Extension or Stamping petitions CANNOT be approved!! Period !!
This is how memorandum has identified 3rd Party Placements and in Bold letters, why it disqualifies for the H1B petitions (comments are in Red):
�The petitioner is a computer consulting company (which is what all small consulting do). The petitioner has contract with numerous outside companies in which it supplies these companies with employee to fulfill specific staffing needs. The specific positions are not outlined in the contract between the petitioner and the third-party company but are staffed on an as-needed basis (this is nothing but, Service Agreement between the petitioner and the mid-vendor!). The beneficiary is a computer analyst (which is what many small consulting company�s employee are). The beneficiary has been assigned to work for the third-party company to fill a core position to maintain the third-party company�s payroll (this nothing but, Mid-Vendor�s or so-called Prime-Vendor�s or Consulting Partner�s Revenue). Once placed at the client company, the beneficiary reports to a manager who works for the third-party company (as it happens, when Consulting partner hires employee as a contractor). The beneficiary does not report to the petitioner for work assignments, and all work assignments are determined by the third-party company (petitioner just runs pay-rolls!). The petitioner does not control how the beneficiary will complete daily tasks, and no propriety information of the petitioner is used by the beneficiary to complete any work assignments (petitioner just runs pay-rolls!). The beneficiary�s end-product, the payroll (payroll of mid-vendor/prime vendor/consulting partner), is not in any way related to the petitioner�s line of business, which is computer consulting. The beneficiary�s progress reviews are completed by the client company, not the petitioner (petitioner just runs pay-rolls!). [Petitioner Has No Right to Control; No Exercise of Control].�
Right to Control:
Supreme Court has stated the definition of Employer-Employee Relationship (Page 3 of Memo), and there it was mentioned to have �Right to Control� over the work of the employee by the employer. From the entire memo, it sounds that Right control is well-established, ONLY WHEN, at least one supervisor from the petitioner�s company works with the beneficiary at the end-client site, and supervises beneficiary�s day-to-day work. So, big Consulting companies such as Wipro, Infosys, Accenture, Deloitte etc. will be good, as they would meet �Right to Control� and that way, they will satisfy H1B requirement by law, and their petitions for similar 3rd party consulting work, will be APPROVED, but not in case of, small consulting companies!! This is because, big consulting companies such as Accenture � have their entire or partial team � along with managers etc. � working at the same client site, where the beneficiary would be working, so they could supervise their work and so exercise control over their work etc., but that cannot be the case with the small consulting � because, their actual business has been, so far, to place employees and run pay-roll � not to get the client projects!
Why one could think that there are slim chances for this memorandum to get reversed in favor of small consulting companies?
This memorandum took care of big consulting companies such as Wipro, Infosys, Cognizant, Accenture etc. � meaning, these companies and their employees are NOT impacted. They can travel freely to-and-fro their home country etc. Since, big companies are not impacted, there will not be any big lobbying or oppositions to this memorandum, per say!! There don�t seem to be a platform for small consulting companies to gather and lobby, plus most the small consulting may not get involved, with fear of exposing themselves more to other issues!! So, it might be east to assume that this memorandum is permanent and not temporary. The recent deportation also indicates that the changes like this memorandum is for serious, not just the warning!
How this memorandum relates to the recent deportation events from NY and NJ airports?
There seems to be an anticipated link between these 2 events � Memorandum and recent Deportations � kind of an indication about the current level of government scrutiny and seriousness of the H1B program. Hence, there have been advices by others that � each employer and employee should operate by strictly following the H1B program requirements.
Link to Murthy.com front page posting about this � MurthyDotCom : NewsFlash! Note to H1Bs Traveling to U.S., Working for Consulting Companies (http://www.murthy.com/nflash/nf_h1conc.html)
What one could predict as happening sooner (trend)?
� Since, it seems big consulting companies (having their own consulting projects)/full-time end-clients and their beneficiaries are not impacted with these changes � there could be trend � employee moving from small companies to big companies for a better shelter for full-time positions � especially, when small consulting company�s immediate preventions / actions to this memo cannot ensure safety.
� Big consulting companies could buy small consulting companies or small consulting companies could sell their companies to big consulting companies (having their own consulting projects), to save their employee�s future/transition etc.
Good Luck my Friends....!!
Everyone knows what the impact would be...no one coming up with the solutions or ready to fight.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
However, this is how many could read RECENT (Jan 8, 2010) actions / announcement by USCIS towards Consulting companies, which engages or merely places their employees at the client sites for various projects.
� No new H1B application will be approved, as per the new guidelines provided USCIS on Jan 08, 2010 memorandum � for 3rd Party Consulting company.
� No new H1B extension/stamping will be approved, as per the new guidelines provided USCIS on Jan 08, 2010 memorandum � for 3rd Party Consulting company.
� If an employee has H1B approved or extension approved, and if he/she comes back to US from a vacation or from an emergency, he/she would be deported back to his/her home country from the Port of Entry (PoE) � for 3rd Party Consulting company.
Why?
Because of 2 recent events:
1) USCIS gave new memorandum (which is now guidelines for USCIS professionals working on the H1B petitions/extensions) on Jan 08th, 2010. (Attached the PDF file for the memorandum).
2) Recently (Jan 2010) several H1B Employees were sent back (in some forum, its mentioned � all of them) to their home country from Newark, NJ and JFK, NY Port of Entry � these were the H1B employees, who went to spend Christmas/New Year vacation to their home countries.
What does the memorandum mention, specifically, about 3rd Party Consulting companies?
Link to the memorandum (PDF attached) � http://www.uscis.gov/USCIS/Laws/Memoranda/2010/H1B%20Employer-Employee%20Memo010810.pdf
Employer-Employee Relationship:
As per the memorandum, some previous H1B Law defines, the definition of an �US Employer�. Somewhere in that definition (Page 2 of memo), it mentions the word �Employer-Employee relationship�. Till now, it seems that there was no clear guidance on what kind of relationship was considered having Employer-Employee relationship. So, it was being, probably, interpreted independently or ambiguously. Now, on Jan 8th, 2010, USCIS has published this memorandum for TRAINING USCIS OFFICIALS about understanding, Employer-Employee relationship. The memorandum seems to have been prepared with a clear understanding about it, along with the specific EXAMPLES.
Memorandum has given few specific examples, which would QUALIFY for having Employer-Employee relationship, on Page 4-5 of the Memo � including the nature of the job/business. On Page 5-6, memorandum gives few specific examples, which would NOT QUALIFY for having Employer-Employee relationship. Third Party Placement / �Job-Shop� (better version of �Body-shop�, probably) is NOT QUALIFIED for meeting Employer-Employee Relationships � meaning, 3rd Party placement (which most of the small consulting companies do) doesn�t meet H1B requirement, as defined by the law � meaning for this job, the new H1B or Extension or Stamping petitions CANNOT be approved!! Period !!
This is how memorandum has identified 3rd Party Placements and in Bold letters, why it disqualifies for the H1B petitions (comments are in Red):
�The petitioner is a computer consulting company (which is what all small consulting do). The petitioner has contract with numerous outside companies in which it supplies these companies with employee to fulfill specific staffing needs. The specific positions are not outlined in the contract between the petitioner and the third-party company but are staffed on an as-needed basis (this is nothing but, Service Agreement between the petitioner and the mid-vendor!). The beneficiary is a computer analyst (which is what many small consulting company�s employee are). The beneficiary has been assigned to work for the third-party company to fill a core position to maintain the third-party company�s payroll (this nothing but, Mid-Vendor�s or so-called Prime-Vendor�s or Consulting Partner�s Revenue). Once placed at the client company, the beneficiary reports to a manager who works for the third-party company (as it happens, when Consulting partner hires employee as a contractor). The beneficiary does not report to the petitioner for work assignments, and all work assignments are determined by the third-party company (petitioner just runs pay-rolls!). The petitioner does not control how the beneficiary will complete daily tasks, and no propriety information of the petitioner is used by the beneficiary to complete any work assignments (petitioner just runs pay-rolls!). The beneficiary�s end-product, the payroll (payroll of mid-vendor/prime vendor/consulting partner), is not in any way related to the petitioner�s line of business, which is computer consulting. The beneficiary�s progress reviews are completed by the client company, not the petitioner (petitioner just runs pay-rolls!). [Petitioner Has No Right to Control; No Exercise of Control].�
Right to Control:
Supreme Court has stated the definition of Employer-Employee Relationship (Page 3 of Memo), and there it was mentioned to have �Right to Control� over the work of the employee by the employer. From the entire memo, it sounds that Right control is well-established, ONLY WHEN, at least one supervisor from the petitioner�s company works with the beneficiary at the end-client site, and supervises beneficiary�s day-to-day work. So, big Consulting companies such as Wipro, Infosys, Accenture, Deloitte etc. will be good, as they would meet �Right to Control� and that way, they will satisfy H1B requirement by law, and their petitions for similar 3rd party consulting work, will be APPROVED, but not in case of, small consulting companies!! This is because, big consulting companies such as Accenture � have their entire or partial team � along with managers etc. � working at the same client site, where the beneficiary would be working, so they could supervise their work and so exercise control over their work etc., but that cannot be the case with the small consulting � because, their actual business has been, so far, to place employees and run pay-roll � not to get the client projects!
Why one could think that there are slim chances for this memorandum to get reversed in favor of small consulting companies?
This memorandum took care of big consulting companies such as Wipro, Infosys, Cognizant, Accenture etc. � meaning, these companies and their employees are NOT impacted. They can travel freely to-and-fro their home country etc. Since, big companies are not impacted, there will not be any big lobbying or oppositions to this memorandum, per say!! There don�t seem to be a platform for small consulting companies to gather and lobby, plus most the small consulting may not get involved, with fear of exposing themselves more to other issues!! So, it might be east to assume that this memorandum is permanent and not temporary. The recent deportation also indicates that the changes like this memorandum is for serious, not just the warning!
How this memorandum relates to the recent deportation events from NY and NJ airports?
There seems to be an anticipated link between these 2 events � Memorandum and recent Deportations � kind of an indication about the current level of government scrutiny and seriousness of the H1B program. Hence, there have been advices by others that � each employer and employee should operate by strictly following the H1B program requirements.
Link to Murthy.com front page posting about this � MurthyDotCom : NewsFlash! Note to H1Bs Traveling to U.S., Working for Consulting Companies (http://www.murthy.com/nflash/nf_h1conc.html)
What one could predict as happening sooner (trend)?
� Since, it seems big consulting companies (having their own consulting projects)/full-time end-clients and their beneficiaries are not impacted with these changes � there could be trend � employee moving from small companies to big companies for a better shelter for full-time positions � especially, when small consulting company�s immediate preventions / actions to this memo cannot ensure safety.
� Big consulting companies could buy small consulting companies or small consulting companies could sell their companies to big consulting companies (having their own consulting projects), to save their employee�s future/transition etc.
Good Luck my Friends....!!
Everyone knows what the impact would be...no one coming up with the solutions or ready to fight.
more...
alterego
12-14 01:33 PM
Think of lobbying as polite negotiation.
Think of Supreme court case as picking a fist fight, in which we are badly out numbered.
Once you have started a fist fight it is much harder to negotiate, especially from a loosing position.
This is exactly correct. It is not the question of right or wrong here. That is what gets folks so upset on this thread, they feel since their viewpoint s right then.......... Most neutral observers like mbartosik can see this as unjust and there may be many in the US as well, however certainly not the majority. However, there are many ways in which this could backfire. One example is the recently seen debate over illegal immigration and the turn in public sentiment. Truth be told, if someone did something wrong 12 yrs ago(crossed the fence), now is married to a US citizen and has 3 US children, what do you do with them? What about the 3yr old who was brought to the USA by their parents and knows no other system? Perhaps a few years ago joe public would have given them a pass, no more, the debate has become so nasty that positions have been hardened to the point that reason does not prevail. Another reason has something to do with the perceived sense of entitlement Americans sensed in the illegal immigrant community(of course fanned by Lou Dobbs and his ilk). These are complex issues and generally you will get a lot further appealing to someones sense of fairness than explaining how you are entitled to something and will take it from them if it is not given to you.
Think of Supreme court case as picking a fist fight, in which we are badly out numbered.
Once you have started a fist fight it is much harder to negotiate, especially from a loosing position.
This is exactly correct. It is not the question of right or wrong here. That is what gets folks so upset on this thread, they feel since their viewpoint s right then.......... Most neutral observers like mbartosik can see this as unjust and there may be many in the US as well, however certainly not the majority. However, there are many ways in which this could backfire. One example is the recently seen debate over illegal immigration and the turn in public sentiment. Truth be told, if someone did something wrong 12 yrs ago(crossed the fence), now is married to a US citizen and has 3 US children, what do you do with them? What about the 3yr old who was brought to the USA by their parents and knows no other system? Perhaps a few years ago joe public would have given them a pass, no more, the debate has become so nasty that positions have been hardened to the point that reason does not prevail. Another reason has something to do with the perceived sense of entitlement Americans sensed in the illegal immigrant community(of course fanned by Lou Dobbs and his ilk). These are complex issues and generally you will get a lot further appealing to someones sense of fairness than explaining how you are entitled to something and will take it from them if it is not given to you.
2010 India Cricket Polo T-Shirt
svr_76
05-11 10:54 AM
And you have moved to the US. Participating in IV forums to see when/how the visa bulleting can be changed so your date becomes current and you get a GC and are free to hop and try to get a job of your dream. Why do you care about these things? Just wait for your card man...enjoy the wait in the line..rest of the stuff is not of your worry (unless offcourse you get laid off and then all of a sudden your patriotism wakens up...and u get all firedup to proove your mettle in your own land.?
Leave this pseudo-patriotism in your apartment dude as u are in the land of dreams that you dreamt about. Just worry about the time it takes for u to get GC and then wait 5 years to get citizenship.
Leave this pseudo-patriotism in your apartment dude as u are in the land of dreams that you dreamt about. Just worry about the time it takes for u to get GC and then wait 5 years to get citizenship.
more...
n2b
09-23 06:15 PM
i cant believe ppl think this is a brilliant idea..
economy is screwed for a while..citizens are on life support..and you want immigrants to be welcomed with open arms..
did i wake up in a fools paradise...:eek:
Yes, you did wake up in fools paradise!!! And the first thing you did was saw yourself in the mirror!!! :p
economy is screwed for a while..citizens are on life support..and you want immigrants to be welcomed with open arms..
did i wake up in a fools paradise...:eek:
Yes, you did wake up in fools paradise!!! And the first thing you did was saw yourself in the mirror!!! :p
hair Sri Lankan cricket team
paskal
12-13 05:40 PM
Note that it would certainly not benefit the other 60%+ from countries other than India that are also stuck in various steps (EB3, name check). So, unless you want IV to stand for IndiaVoice, you should concentrate your admirable effort on increasing the overall quota (with increased per-country quota), excluding dependents, etc.
in a nutshell:
an end to retrogression for all
increased GC quota
removal of per country quota
efficient processing of applications
the per country quota issue is only one among the measures
we cannot focus exclusively on that because our goal is an end to retrogression for ALL. it does remain though, one of our goals in the package because we believe it is fundamentally unfair and should not be apart of a skilled immigration program.
in a nutshell:
an end to retrogression for all
increased GC quota
removal of per country quota
efficient processing of applications
the per country quota issue is only one among the measures
we cannot focus exclusively on that because our goal is an end to retrogression for ALL. it does remain though, one of our goals in the package because we believe it is fundamentally unfair and should not be apart of a skilled immigration program.
more...
garybanz
12-14 05:49 PM
I am in.
Thank you BharatPremi.
All,
Please respond to this post and let us know if you support us.
Thanks.
All,
I think we have spent enough time discussing this, please respond to this post if you are willing to share the cost of taking this discussion to a top Constitutional attorney. (just the cost of initial discussion...not the actual case)
Also if some one can point me in the right direction on finding the right attorney for this question then I'll really appreciate it.
Thanks."
Thank you BharatPremi.
All,
Please respond to this post and let us know if you support us.
Thanks.
All,
I think we have spent enough time discussing this, please respond to this post if you are willing to share the cost of taking this discussion to a top Constitutional attorney. (just the cost of initial discussion...not the actual case)
Also if some one can point me in the right direction on finding the right attorney for this question then I'll really appreciate it.
Thanks."
hot Cricket - ICC Cricket World
coopheal
10-10 07:16 AM
I agree, the notion of fix our problem so that we housing problem is not a good approach.
Our situation is grave enough that it needs a focus on its own. Our efforts should be to bring this on fore front of the issues being discussed in congress and in public media.
While it is a good idea to educate the congress regarding the impact the EB Green Card applicants could have on the Housing Market. It is a terrible idea to propose a legislation which would offer GCs to applicants who would purchases houses in US. To put it bluntly, the legislation seems to be meant for selling GCs to applicants who are in a position to afford it, offering GC to applicants who will invest in housing market is akin to giving out GCs for cash and there is already a category for that. How would one factor in the CP applicants like nurses and PT who are waiting in their home countries?
The idea should be modified to spread the message regarding the positive impact that the EB GC applicants could have on the housing market and not to create a niche category of EB applicants who can purchase their GC to scoot ahead of other less fortunate ones. This proposal should be nipped in the bud before some anti immigrant group or advocate like Lou gets wind of it.
Our situation is grave enough that it needs a focus on its own. Our efforts should be to bring this on fore front of the issues being discussed in congress and in public media.
While it is a good idea to educate the congress regarding the impact the EB Green Card applicants could have on the Housing Market. It is a terrible idea to propose a legislation which would offer GCs to applicants who would purchases houses in US. To put it bluntly, the legislation seems to be meant for selling GCs to applicants who are in a position to afford it, offering GC to applicants who will invest in housing market is akin to giving out GCs for cash and there is already a category for that. How would one factor in the CP applicants like nurses and PT who are waiting in their home countries?
The idea should be modified to spread the message regarding the positive impact that the EB GC applicants could have on the housing market and not to create a niche category of EB applicants who can purchase their GC to scoot ahead of other less fortunate ones. This proposal should be nipped in the bud before some anti immigrant group or advocate like Lou gets wind of it.
more...
house Prima Group and Sri Lanka
ebizash
07-27 02:18 PM
I get good monthly checks every month (more then $115), and they don't seem to bounce either. And good thing it increases. Don't need to google anything while I can get from credible sources.
Good luck then!! I really hope that you get to go to Peter Island one day..
By the way I realized while reading your reply that I had made a typo in my original message. The disclaimer claims that the average IBO makes $115 a YEAR not month.
Good luck then!! I really hope that you get to go to Peter Island one day..
By the way I realized while reading your reply that I had made a typo in my original message. The disclaimer claims that the average IBO makes $115 a YEAR not month.
tattoo a cricket shirt, and don#39;t
jayleno
09-23 11:57 AM
Sent the e-mail to the folks in my state.
more...
pictures Cricket t-shirts, cricket
gcisadawg
05-01 06:02 PM
And who told you that they are being opressed - have you been to Sri Lanka and if yes which places did you visit to see the Tamils being opressed .
The terrorists who come to fight in J&K from Pak say they are fighting because Indian Army and govt is opressing the Muslims . Is that true also ?
Seriously I don't care - my personal opinion that in this particular case it is none of our ( India's ) business to meddle in Sri Lankan affairs when they are on the verge of getting rid of a menace they have . Terrorism is not a solution of anything . Only peaceful times can bring happiness and prosperity.
I think your fear is that if you accept the argument that SL Govt is oppressing the Tamil minority, then by default, you would be *forced* to accept the argument that Indian govt is oppressing Kashmiris. It is an apples vs oranges comparison. The situation that is happening in SL is nowhere near anything that had happened in India. I like to see LTTE wiped out completely. BUT the real question is, would that result in equal rights for SL tamil citizens? Let us wait and watch ( without actively intervening) while the people for whom this war is fought perish one by one. Rajapakhse has termed this war as liberating Tamils from the clutches of LTTE. Instead, it seems like, he is liberating people from their earthly life.
To be a fair judge, one should visit both Tamil leaning websites and defense.lk to get both sides of the story. It is suicidal to make a judgment from those flashy videos at defense.lk alone!
The terrorists who come to fight in J&K from Pak say they are fighting because Indian Army and govt is opressing the Muslims . Is that true also ?
Seriously I don't care - my personal opinion that in this particular case it is none of our ( India's ) business to meddle in Sri Lankan affairs when they are on the verge of getting rid of a menace they have . Terrorism is not a solution of anything . Only peaceful times can bring happiness and prosperity.
I think your fear is that if you accept the argument that SL Govt is oppressing the Tamil minority, then by default, you would be *forced* to accept the argument that Indian govt is oppressing Kashmiris. It is an apples vs oranges comparison. The situation that is happening in SL is nowhere near anything that had happened in India. I like to see LTTE wiped out completely. BUT the real question is, would that result in equal rights for SL tamil citizens? Let us wait and watch ( without actively intervening) while the people for whom this war is fought perish one by one. Rajapakhse has termed this war as liberating Tamils from the clutches of LTTE. Instead, it seems like, he is liberating people from their earthly life.
To be a fair judge, one should visit both Tamil leaning websites and defense.lk to get both sides of the story. It is suicidal to make a judgment from those flashy videos at defense.lk alone!
dresses Sri Lanka Cricket allows
angelina
07-11 05:12 PM
I have lived in Canada for 15 years, immigration system is healthy and fast enough for my family to come over. My friend who has a Master degree used to work for Xerox, quit his job go back to Canada. After 3 months he found a professional job. Personally I havent encountered such thing as discrimation or no jobs situation as serious as it mentioned on the web site.
Talking about discrimation, dont tell me you havent been discriminated from your company in the certain degree...
Talking about discrimation, dont tell me you havent been discriminated from your company in the certain degree...
more...
makeup We wouldn#39;t have to write
krish2005
01-14 03:17 PM
She says AILA is aware and very well understands all the repercussions of this on attorneys too. She will post back on their updates as and when she gets.
Hope they will help us fight together.
Hope they will help us fight together.
girlfriend Sri Lanka cricket fans cheer
gc28262
01-13 03:06 PM
There is lot of non-sense happening in USCIS with union man, Grassley friendly, president in white house.
Looks like this memo is inspired by anti-immigrant lawmaker Grassley's recent questions to USCIS director. I doubt USCIS has such wide powers as to define employee/employer relationship.
Looks like this memo is inspired by anti-immigrant lawmaker Grassley's recent questions to USCIS director. I doubt USCIS has such wide powers as to define employee/employer relationship.
hairstyles Sri Lanka Cricket allows players to stay in IPL till May 18
snathan
01-13 06:12 PM
Interesting. I think there would probably be around maybe half a million or so H1Bs currently in the US, probably more , working in the IT industry. Many if not most would work for these consulting companies; ranging from the large one's like Accenture or TCS to the grocery store offices in NJ. All of them have the potential to be affected if this memo is strictly enforced.
While I would be glad if all the shady consultancy firms that have wrecked the H1B program to be put out of business; there might be serious disruptions in the IT industry if hundreds of thousands of workers are going to be forced out; even if in a phased manner; i.e. letting folks stay till their current visas expire.
Consulting companies are just the tip of the ice burg. They should really target infy, wipro, TCS like companies. They are the one truly exploiting the sytem to the fullest. They do not sponsor GC, do not pay the good salary or any benefit to the employee. I also dont see the share holders are rewared. God knows where all the profits are going. (which holes are getting filled)?
While I would be glad if all the shady consultancy firms that have wrecked the H1B program to be put out of business; there might be serious disruptions in the IT industry if hundreds of thousands of workers are going to be forced out; even if in a phased manner; i.e. letting folks stay till their current visas expire.
Consulting companies are just the tip of the ice burg. They should really target infy, wipro, TCS like companies. They are the one truly exploiting the sytem to the fullest. They do not sponsor GC, do not pay the good salary or any benefit to the employee. I also dont see the share holders are rewared. God knows where all the profits are going. (which holes are getting filled)?
BharatPremi
09-25 06:05 PM
Pre-adjudication means that this particular case can be approved because everything else (Biometrics, Name-checks and all other checks/documentation) is in place - but a Visa Number is not available to approve case and issue GC
Earlier, USCIS wouldnt even touch a file and complete checks if the PD wasnt current. Now they pre-adjudicate - meaning they look at the case and determine if the case can be approved if the PD were current.....
Assigning a Visa Number is basically same as giving GC...once a visa number is assigned, all they have to do is order the production of the physical card...which happens in a few days and in another couple of weeks you actually get the card
Agree..about the clear definition of Pre-adjudication. But main question was about the accurate count of "Real pending" 485 which equals to "other pending" + "preadjudicated" + "awaiting cutomer response" + "new receipt" when you refer to USCIS's trend/volume charts.
While the other worksheet in the thread seems to be depicting the closet values to "other pending" of a trnd chart so that worksheet can not be considered authentic for a total count of "real pending" 485 cases.
Earlier, USCIS wouldnt even touch a file and complete checks if the PD wasnt current. Now they pre-adjudicate - meaning they look at the case and determine if the case can be approved if the PD were current.....
Assigning a Visa Number is basically same as giving GC...once a visa number is assigned, all they have to do is order the production of the physical card...which happens in a few days and in another couple of weeks you actually get the card
Agree..about the clear definition of Pre-adjudication. But main question was about the accurate count of "Real pending" 485 which equals to "other pending" + "preadjudicated" + "awaiting cutomer response" + "new receipt" when you refer to USCIS's trend/volume charts.
While the other worksheet in the thread seems to be depicting the closet values to "other pending" of a trnd chart so that worksheet can not be considered authentic for a total count of "real pending" 485 cases.
grupak
02-13 03:05 PM
Besides that, immigration is a privilege not a right, so if the US wants diversity and limit per country immigration, it is their right to do so. Before you start being shocked by this, I am NOT saying I do not understand your frustration and the feeling you discriminated against, but rights are rights and we knew that before we started the process. If we can improve it great, if we can't we will just have to deal with it realisticly.
take care
Everybody agrees that GC is a benefit that can come from employment, it is not an entitlement. However, we do not have to except the current situation as fate. Making the process better is what IV is about. And yes, there is no guarantee that things work out exactly as IV plans.
take care
Everybody agrees that GC is a benefit that can come from employment, it is not an entitlement. However, we do not have to except the current situation as fate. Making the process better is what IV is about. And yes, there is no guarantee that things work out exactly as IV plans.
No comments:
Post a Comment