gc_bulgaria
02-12 03:38 PM
My husband is ROW and dependent. I am primary and EB2 India.
Therefore cross charge comes into play.
Therefore cross charge comes into play.
wallpaper Sunset Vector Cartoon
ajcates
11-24 11:28 AM
I want the kawoosh one to win mainly because of the cool name.
purplehazea
01-25 04:50 PM
wah wah wah wah!
2011 East African Sunset Wallpaper
snthampi
08-16 02:24 PM
Hi ,
I have a problem with my employer. He never paid me ontime and he didn't paid me since April,2010. So i have applied for H1 trasfer as i am having problems with this Employer. My H1 got approved and now my old employer sent me a notice saying i am in breach of agreement and i should not work for the same client and he will sue me for 50,000 dollars .
Then i replied him saying since he is not paying me from past 4 months his agreement got voided as he is in Material Breach of Agreement.
He is still giving me hard time. Can any one please give some suggestions like if i also proceed legally will it be helpful to me .
Thanks,
Srikanth
As @hebron suggested, complain to DOL. Prepare records for proving that you didn't get paid for significant amount of time to defend yourself.
I have a problem with my employer. He never paid me ontime and he didn't paid me since April,2010. So i have applied for H1 trasfer as i am having problems with this Employer. My H1 got approved and now my old employer sent me a notice saying i am in breach of agreement and i should not work for the same client and he will sue me for 50,000 dollars .
Then i replied him saying since he is not paying me from past 4 months his agreement got voided as he is in Material Breach of Agreement.
He is still giving me hard time. Can any one please give some suggestions like if i also proceed legally will it be helpful to me .
Thanks,
Srikanth
As @hebron suggested, complain to DOL. Prepare records for proving that you didn't get paid for significant amount of time to defend yourself.
more...
hibhagya
05-15 12:03 PM
Great job and hope the current immigrations bill will pass this year.
sury
11-08 09:19 AM
Many thanks for the information
more...
Brittanicus
04-22 08:38 PM
First and foremost we are a nation of laws, or as we are all anticipated? But years of previous administrations have neglected the illegal immigrant problem, to the detriment of American workers. Ever since the inception of the 1986 Immigration & Reform Act, signed into law by Ronald Reagan, the politicians have pushed for a new AMNESTY. In addition, anytime a new law has been drafted to combat the illegal immigrant occupation of our country, they have behind closed doors killed it or weakened it's enactment. The law of given instant citizenship to babies intentionally born here, is a complete misinterpretation of the 14th amendment, after the civil war that emancipated African slaves.
It was never meant for (Anchor Babies) to give pregnant illegal alien mothers the right to legal status? The law has been badly mauled because the children can then draw on US education, free medical care, free baby delivery and after care, low income housing and it is a route to many government handouts. The major problem now facing the Obama White House is are the children of illegal immigrants to blame for their parents breaking the law? Obviously the left-wingers are to blame for this conundrum, but both parties have added to neglect to the sovereign laws of our nation. I think we should follow other countries "Rule of Law" and cement in place that children who have proven themselves can go to a place of higher learning. We desperately need a wide scope of professionals in Engineering, Science and 21st Century technology. But also remember that our government settles the largest population of new immigrants on Earth. What we don't need is more poorly educated, non-English speaking, impoverished aliens, looking for handouts. Like other developed nations we must be very specific, who we pick and choose as new citizens. We must also restrain ourselves from chain migration, who are liable to become a public charges, because the family sponsors have decided the US taxpayer should carry the financial weight?
We can thank our corrupt liberal politicians, judges in the past as drafting a passive law, instead of entering America being a criminal offense. Now we have uncountable number of illegal aliens squatting here, because of the absolute intentional neglect of our lawmakers. Is there any other country in the world, that makes illegally crossing into their sovereign territory a Civil Crime--I really don't think so? Our laws deliberately drafted this way in favor of the open border, big Catholic church and special interest groups. To HXXX with the American people, who are forced to fight for their jobs?
But if American defeat the next Amnesty ready to pounce on the unsuspecting legal population, we must make an example in using the 1986 law. We as a people must build-on the E-Verify application, upgrade, modify to extract illegal job applicants from the workplace. Illegal immigrants who have overstayed visas, illegal crossed the border and children must be exempt from any pardon. All children of illegal parents that have committed crimes, been expelled or just deserted school should leave with parents in the usage of self-deportation. This is a compliance way to remove foreign nationals and any criminal businesses that employ them, must receive mandatory, fines, asset confiscation and prison terms. The use of a in-perpetuity E-Verify will be a ultimate deterrent and see movement of illegal labor and families packing and leaving under the term of "ATTRITION" We must force our reluctant politicians to be governed by--THE PEOPLE'S--WILL or face the dire consequences in the election process. This will surely happen when Sen. Reid, Speaker Pelosi and 48 other Senate lawmakers come up for re-election. They underfunded E-Verify, that obviously is working efficiently for them to kill it. Today I have heard Homeland Security Chief Janet Napolitano is approaching State governors to appeal the Real ID Act, that would add national standards for state-issued driver licenses and non-driver identification cards, Revising and tightening the laws on application for asylum and deportation of aliens for terrorist activity. That wouldWaiver laws that interfere with construction of physical barriers at the borders, to name a few statutes. So that means since the new Presidency, the Democratic run Congress are trying to revoke E-Verify and the Real ID act. My guess, is under this regime they will be rescinding the Federal program for State and local police called 247(g) that trains officers to arrest and detain illegal alien criminals.
The open border, free traders, special interest groups will use any contradictions, epithets, racial slurs to annul any new law--which they have done successfully up to now. But American should realize strongly, that this has nothing to do with a persons color, religion or ethnic background--and EVERYTHING--to do with being--CARTE BLANCHE--for parasite employers, who pay nothing to illegal immigrant upkeep? It's left to Taxpayers? Its everything to do with billions of dollars spent, to pacify the big Catholic church, a portion of Liberal voters and others who see nothing wrong in loading citizens, residents down with sky high taxes. Supposedly the last White House promised no thoughts of a Path to Citizenship until the border was orderly and closed to undesirable With another drafted and secret Amnesty on the House and Senate table, like always--this is not the case. Drug smuggling and incessant illegal immigration is still very prevalent. The rumors from the new White House are clearly signaling another push for AMNESTY?
So go to these sites: VDARE, FAIRUS, JUDICIALWATCH, NUMBERSUSA, AMERICANPATROL, CAPSWEB & ALIPAC. The stakes are sky high because Amnesty means, thousands more will swamp the border looking for yet a 3rd---AMNESTY.
It was never meant for (Anchor Babies) to give pregnant illegal alien mothers the right to legal status? The law has been badly mauled because the children can then draw on US education, free medical care, free baby delivery and after care, low income housing and it is a route to many government handouts. The major problem now facing the Obama White House is are the children of illegal immigrants to blame for their parents breaking the law? Obviously the left-wingers are to blame for this conundrum, but both parties have added to neglect to the sovereign laws of our nation. I think we should follow other countries "Rule of Law" and cement in place that children who have proven themselves can go to a place of higher learning. We desperately need a wide scope of professionals in Engineering, Science and 21st Century technology. But also remember that our government settles the largest population of new immigrants on Earth. What we don't need is more poorly educated, non-English speaking, impoverished aliens, looking for handouts. Like other developed nations we must be very specific, who we pick and choose as new citizens. We must also restrain ourselves from chain migration, who are liable to become a public charges, because the family sponsors have decided the US taxpayer should carry the financial weight?
We can thank our corrupt liberal politicians, judges in the past as drafting a passive law, instead of entering America being a criminal offense. Now we have uncountable number of illegal aliens squatting here, because of the absolute intentional neglect of our lawmakers. Is there any other country in the world, that makes illegally crossing into their sovereign territory a Civil Crime--I really don't think so? Our laws deliberately drafted this way in favor of the open border, big Catholic church and special interest groups. To HXXX with the American people, who are forced to fight for their jobs?
But if American defeat the next Amnesty ready to pounce on the unsuspecting legal population, we must make an example in using the 1986 law. We as a people must build-on the E-Verify application, upgrade, modify to extract illegal job applicants from the workplace. Illegal immigrants who have overstayed visas, illegal crossed the border and children must be exempt from any pardon. All children of illegal parents that have committed crimes, been expelled or just deserted school should leave with parents in the usage of self-deportation. This is a compliance way to remove foreign nationals and any criminal businesses that employ them, must receive mandatory, fines, asset confiscation and prison terms. The use of a in-perpetuity E-Verify will be a ultimate deterrent and see movement of illegal labor and families packing and leaving under the term of "ATTRITION" We must force our reluctant politicians to be governed by--THE PEOPLE'S--WILL or face the dire consequences in the election process. This will surely happen when Sen. Reid, Speaker Pelosi and 48 other Senate lawmakers come up for re-election. They underfunded E-Verify, that obviously is working efficiently for them to kill it. Today I have heard Homeland Security Chief Janet Napolitano is approaching State governors to appeal the Real ID Act, that would add national standards for state-issued driver licenses and non-driver identification cards, Revising and tightening the laws on application for asylum and deportation of aliens for terrorist activity. That wouldWaiver laws that interfere with construction of physical barriers at the borders, to name a few statutes. So that means since the new Presidency, the Democratic run Congress are trying to revoke E-Verify and the Real ID act. My guess, is under this regime they will be rescinding the Federal program for State and local police called 247(g) that trains officers to arrest and detain illegal alien criminals.
The open border, free traders, special interest groups will use any contradictions, epithets, racial slurs to annul any new law--which they have done successfully up to now. But American should realize strongly, that this has nothing to do with a persons color, religion or ethnic background--and EVERYTHING--to do with being--CARTE BLANCHE--for parasite employers, who pay nothing to illegal immigrant upkeep? It's left to Taxpayers? Its everything to do with billions of dollars spent, to pacify the big Catholic church, a portion of Liberal voters and others who see nothing wrong in loading citizens, residents down with sky high taxes. Supposedly the last White House promised no thoughts of a Path to Citizenship until the border was orderly and closed to undesirable With another drafted and secret Amnesty on the House and Senate table, like always--this is not the case. Drug smuggling and incessant illegal immigration is still very prevalent. The rumors from the new White House are clearly signaling another push for AMNESTY?
So go to these sites: VDARE, FAIRUS, JUDICIALWATCH, NUMBERSUSA, AMERICANPATROL, CAPSWEB & ALIPAC. The stakes are sky high because Amnesty means, thousands more will swamp the border looking for yet a 3rd---AMNESTY.
2010 sunset sunsets scenic scenery
vin13
09-30 12:50 PM
I did have a LUD on 09/05 and 09/08 and then RFE was issued. Responded to the RFE on 09/22 . LUD on 09/22, 09/23 ,09/29 and 09/30.
EB2 India Mar 2005 NSC
There were atleast 7-8 cases from NSC on this board who received RFE's.
Can you please tell us what the RFE was about....Did you use AC21.
Me and my spouse both have RFE....so i dont know what to expect. And I have used AC21 and changed jobs....I am just hoping it is not related to this.
EB2 India Mar 2005 NSC
There were atleast 7-8 cases from NSC on this board who received RFE's.
Can you please tell us what the RFE was about....Did you use AC21.
Me and my spouse both have RFE....so i dont know what to expect. And I have used AC21 and changed jobs....I am just hoping it is not related to this.
more...
cbrnet
06-10 02:10 PM
Hi,
I was tested positive with the skin test and by chest x-ray turned out to be negative. Also my family doctor prescribed a medication for 6 months course and I got the letter from the doctor after 6 months confirming the course of medication. The USCIS sent an RFE when they were about to process my I-485 and I sent the letter from the doctor confirming my chest x-ray was negative and the letter supporting the completion of 6 months medication.
Thanks
Kumar
I was tested positive with the skin test and by chest x-ray turned out to be negative. Also my family doctor prescribed a medication for 6 months course and I got the letter from the doctor after 6 months confirming the course of medication. The USCIS sent an RFE when they were about to process my I-485 and I sent the letter from the doctor confirming my chest x-ray was negative and the letter supporting the completion of 6 months medication.
Thanks
Kumar
hair cartoon sunset background.
rolrblade
07-27 04:00 PM
Not entirely true..
Some employees of my client company who filed their AOS in june did so without signing a single piece of paper and already got their RNs and FP's done as well.
There are a few things to see if what your lawyer did was correct:
1) Did he ask you to write him/her an email/letter authorizing them to sign on your behalf
2) Your company has your facsimile signatures or signature stamps.
this is the correct information. Applicant signature is not necessary if you have an attorney representation form. I have verified this with two different attorneys and also my HR guy, who suprisingly is very knowledgeable in GC process.
In my own case I have sent an email to the attorney authorizing them to sign on my behalf. The firm has confirmed that it is sufficient. I just off the phone with them too. 3 attorney - SAME ANSWER.
Some employees of my client company who filed their AOS in june did so without signing a single piece of paper and already got their RNs and FP's done as well.
There are a few things to see if what your lawyer did was correct:
1) Did he ask you to write him/her an email/letter authorizing them to sign on your behalf
2) Your company has your facsimile signatures or signature stamps.
this is the correct information. Applicant signature is not necessary if you have an attorney representation form. I have verified this with two different attorneys and also my HR guy, who suprisingly is very knowledgeable in GC process.
In my own case I have sent an email to the attorney authorizing them to sign on my behalf. The firm has confirmed that it is sufficient. I just off the phone with them too. 3 attorney - SAME ANSWER.
more...
Blog Feeds
02-01 08:30 AM
Summary
(LINK TO FULL REPORT BELOW)
Congress created the H-1B program in 1990 to enable U.S. employers to hire temporary, foreign workers in specialty occupations. The law capped the number of H-1B visas issued per fiscal year at 65,000. Since then, the cap has fluctuated with legislative changes. Congress asked GAO to assess the impact of the cap on the ability of domestic companies to innovate, while ensuring that U.S. workers are not disadvantaged. In response, GAO examined what is known about (1) employer demand for H-1B workers; (2) how the cap affects employer costs and decisions to move operations overseas; (3) H-1B worker characteristics and the potential impact of raising the cap; and (4) how well requirements of the H-1B program protect U.S. workers. GAO analyzed data from 4 federal agencies; interviewed agency officials, experts, and H-1B employers; and reviewed agency documents and literature.
In most years, demand for new H-1B workers exceeded the cap: From 2000 to 2009, demand for new H-1B workers tended to exceed the cap, as measured by the numbers of initial petitions submitted by employers who are subject to the cap. There is no way to precisely determine the level of any unmet demand among employers, since they tend to stop submitting (and the Department of Homeland Security stops tracking) petitions once the cap is reached each year. When we consider all initial petitions, including those from universities and research institutions that are not subject to the cap, we find that demand for new H-1B workers is largely driven by a small number of employers. Over the decade, over 14 percent of all initial petitions were submitted by cap-exempt employers, and only a few employers (fewer than 1 percent) garnered over one-quarter of all H-1B approvals. Most interviewed companies said the H-1B cap and program created costs, but were not factors in their decisions to move R&D overseas: The 34 H-1B employers GAO interviewed reported that the cap has created some additional costs, though the cap's impact depended on the size and maturity of the company. For example, in years when visas were denied by the cap, most large firms reported finding other (sometimes more costly) ways to hire their preferred job candidates. On the other hand, small firms were more likely to fill their positions with different candidates, which they said resulted in delays and sometimes economic losses, particularly for firms in rapidly changing technology fields. Limitations in agency data and systems hinder tracking the cap and H-1B workers over time: The total number of H-1B workers in the U.S. at any one time--and information about the length of their stay--is unknown, because (1) data systems among the various agencies that process such individuals are not linked so individuals cannot be readily tracked, and (2) H-1B workers are not assigned a unique identifier that would allow for tracking them over time--particularly if and when their visa status changes. Restricted agency oversight and statutory changes weaken protections for U.S. workers: Elements of the H-1B program that could serve as worker protections--such as the requirement to pay prevailing wages, the visa's temporary status, and the cap itself--are weakened by several factors. First, program oversight is fragmented and restricted. Second, the H-1B program lacks a legal provision for holding employers accountable to program requirements when they obtain H-1B workers through a staffing company. Third, statutory changes made to the H-1B program have, in combination and in effect, increased the pool of H-1B workers beyond the cap and lowered the bar for eligibility. Taken together, the multifaceted challenges identified in this report show that the H-1B program, as currently structured, may not be used to its full potential and may be detrimental in some cases. This report offers several matters for congressional consideration, including that Congress re-examine key H-1B program provisions and make appropriate changes as needed. GAO also recommends that the Departments of Homeland Security and Labor take steps to improve efficiency, flexibility, and monitoring of the H-1B program. Homeland Security disagreed with two recommendations and one matter, citing logistical and other challenges; however, we believe such challenges can be overcome. Labor did not respond to our recommendations.
Recommendations
Our recommendations from this work are listed below with a Contact for more information. Status will change from "In process" to "Open," "Closed - implemented," or "Closed - not implemented" based on our follow up work.
Director:Andrew SherrillTeam:Government Accountability Office: Education, Workforce, and Income SecurityPhone:(202) 512-7252
Matters for Congressional Consideration
Recommendation: To ensure that the H-1B program continues to meet the needs of businesses in a global economy while maintaining a balance of protections for U.S. workers, Congress may wish to consider reviewing the merits and shortcomings of key program provisions and making appropriate changes as needed. Such a review may include, but would not necessarily be limited to (1) the qualifications required for workers eligible under the H-1B program, (2) exemptions from the cap, (3) the appropriateness of H-1B hiring by staffing companies, (4) the level of the cap, and (5) the role the program should play in the U.S. immigration system in relationship to permanent residency.
Status: In process
Comments: When we determine what steps the Congress has taken, we will provide updated information.
Recommendation: To reduce duplication and fragmentation in the administration and oversight of the H-1B application process, consistent with past GAO matters for congressional consideration, Congress may wish to consider eliminating the requirement that employers first submit a Labor Condition Application (LCA) to the Department of Labor for certification, and require instead that employers submit this application along with the I-129 application to the Department of Homeland Security's U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services for review.
Status: In process
Comments: When we determine what steps the Congress has taken, we will provide updated information.
Recommendation: To improve the Department of Labor's ability to investigate and enforce employer compliance with H-1B program requirements, Congress may wish to consider granting the department subpoena power to obtain employer records during investigations under the H-1B program.
Status: In process
Comments: When we determine what steps the Congress has taken, we will provide updated information.
Recommendation: To help ensure the full protection of H-1B workers employed through staffing companies, Congress may wish to consider holding the employer where an H-1B visa holder performs work accountable for meeting program requirements to the same extent as the employer that submitted the LCA form.
Status: In process
Comments: When we determine what steps the Congress has taken, we will provide updated information.
Recommendations for Executive Action
Recommendation: To help ensure that the number of new H-1B workers who are subject to the cap--both entering the United States and changing to H-1B status within the United States--does not exceed the cap each year, U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services should take steps to improve its tracking of the number of approved H-1B applications and the number of issued visas under the cap by fully leveraging the transformation effort currently under way, which involves the adoption of an electronic petition processing system that will be linked to the Department of State's tracking system. Such steps should ensure that linkages to the Department of State's tracking system will provide Homeland Security with timely access to data on visa issuances, and that mechanisms for tracking petitions and visas against the cap are incorporated into U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services' business rules to be developed for the new electronic petition system.
Agency Affected: Department of Homeland Security
Status: In process
Comments: When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.
Recommendation: To address business concerns without undermining program integrity, U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services should, to the extent permitted by its existing statutory authority, explore options for increasing the flexibility of the application process for H-1B employers, such as (1) allowing employers to rank their applications for visa candidates so that they can hire the best qualified worker for the jobs in highest need; (2) distributing the applications granted under the annual cap in allotments throughout the year (e.g. quarterly); and (3) establishing a system whereby businesses with a strong track-record of compliance with H-1B regulations may use a streamlined application process.
Agency Affected: Department of Homeland Security
Status: In process
Comments: When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.
Recommendation: To improve the transparency and oversight of the posting requirement on the Labor Condition Application (LCA), as part of its current oversight role, the Employment and Training Administration should develop and maintain a centralized Web site, accessible to the public, where businesses must post notice of the intent to hire H-1B workers. Such notices should continue to specify the job category and worksite location noted on the LCA and required by statute on current noncentralized postings.
Agency Affected: Department of Labor
Status: In process
Comments: When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.
Recommendation: To improve the efficiency and effectiveness of its investigations of employer compliance with H-1B requirements, the Employment and Training Administration should provide Labor's Wage and Hour Division searchable access to the LCA database.
Agency Affected: Department of Labor
Status: In process
Comments: When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.
VIEW FULL REPORT (http://www.gao.gov/new.items/d1126.pdf)
More... (http://ashwinsharma.com/2011/01/25/h-1b-visa-program-reforms-are-needed-to-minimize-the-risks-and-costs-of-current-program.aspx?ref=rss)
(LINK TO FULL REPORT BELOW)
Congress created the H-1B program in 1990 to enable U.S. employers to hire temporary, foreign workers in specialty occupations. The law capped the number of H-1B visas issued per fiscal year at 65,000. Since then, the cap has fluctuated with legislative changes. Congress asked GAO to assess the impact of the cap on the ability of domestic companies to innovate, while ensuring that U.S. workers are not disadvantaged. In response, GAO examined what is known about (1) employer demand for H-1B workers; (2) how the cap affects employer costs and decisions to move operations overseas; (3) H-1B worker characteristics and the potential impact of raising the cap; and (4) how well requirements of the H-1B program protect U.S. workers. GAO analyzed data from 4 federal agencies; interviewed agency officials, experts, and H-1B employers; and reviewed agency documents and literature.
In most years, demand for new H-1B workers exceeded the cap: From 2000 to 2009, demand for new H-1B workers tended to exceed the cap, as measured by the numbers of initial petitions submitted by employers who are subject to the cap. There is no way to precisely determine the level of any unmet demand among employers, since they tend to stop submitting (and the Department of Homeland Security stops tracking) petitions once the cap is reached each year. When we consider all initial petitions, including those from universities and research institutions that are not subject to the cap, we find that demand for new H-1B workers is largely driven by a small number of employers. Over the decade, over 14 percent of all initial petitions were submitted by cap-exempt employers, and only a few employers (fewer than 1 percent) garnered over one-quarter of all H-1B approvals. Most interviewed companies said the H-1B cap and program created costs, but were not factors in their decisions to move R&D overseas: The 34 H-1B employers GAO interviewed reported that the cap has created some additional costs, though the cap's impact depended on the size and maturity of the company. For example, in years when visas were denied by the cap, most large firms reported finding other (sometimes more costly) ways to hire their preferred job candidates. On the other hand, small firms were more likely to fill their positions with different candidates, which they said resulted in delays and sometimes economic losses, particularly for firms in rapidly changing technology fields. Limitations in agency data and systems hinder tracking the cap and H-1B workers over time: The total number of H-1B workers in the U.S. at any one time--and information about the length of their stay--is unknown, because (1) data systems among the various agencies that process such individuals are not linked so individuals cannot be readily tracked, and (2) H-1B workers are not assigned a unique identifier that would allow for tracking them over time--particularly if and when their visa status changes. Restricted agency oversight and statutory changes weaken protections for U.S. workers: Elements of the H-1B program that could serve as worker protections--such as the requirement to pay prevailing wages, the visa's temporary status, and the cap itself--are weakened by several factors. First, program oversight is fragmented and restricted. Second, the H-1B program lacks a legal provision for holding employers accountable to program requirements when they obtain H-1B workers through a staffing company. Third, statutory changes made to the H-1B program have, in combination and in effect, increased the pool of H-1B workers beyond the cap and lowered the bar for eligibility. Taken together, the multifaceted challenges identified in this report show that the H-1B program, as currently structured, may not be used to its full potential and may be detrimental in some cases. This report offers several matters for congressional consideration, including that Congress re-examine key H-1B program provisions and make appropriate changes as needed. GAO also recommends that the Departments of Homeland Security and Labor take steps to improve efficiency, flexibility, and monitoring of the H-1B program. Homeland Security disagreed with two recommendations and one matter, citing logistical and other challenges; however, we believe such challenges can be overcome. Labor did not respond to our recommendations.
Recommendations
Our recommendations from this work are listed below with a Contact for more information. Status will change from "In process" to "Open," "Closed - implemented," or "Closed - not implemented" based on our follow up work.
Director:Andrew SherrillTeam:Government Accountability Office: Education, Workforce, and Income SecurityPhone:(202) 512-7252
Matters for Congressional Consideration
Recommendation: To ensure that the H-1B program continues to meet the needs of businesses in a global economy while maintaining a balance of protections for U.S. workers, Congress may wish to consider reviewing the merits and shortcomings of key program provisions and making appropriate changes as needed. Such a review may include, but would not necessarily be limited to (1) the qualifications required for workers eligible under the H-1B program, (2) exemptions from the cap, (3) the appropriateness of H-1B hiring by staffing companies, (4) the level of the cap, and (5) the role the program should play in the U.S. immigration system in relationship to permanent residency.
Status: In process
Comments: When we determine what steps the Congress has taken, we will provide updated information.
Recommendation: To reduce duplication and fragmentation in the administration and oversight of the H-1B application process, consistent with past GAO matters for congressional consideration, Congress may wish to consider eliminating the requirement that employers first submit a Labor Condition Application (LCA) to the Department of Labor for certification, and require instead that employers submit this application along with the I-129 application to the Department of Homeland Security's U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services for review.
Status: In process
Comments: When we determine what steps the Congress has taken, we will provide updated information.
Recommendation: To improve the Department of Labor's ability to investigate and enforce employer compliance with H-1B program requirements, Congress may wish to consider granting the department subpoena power to obtain employer records during investigations under the H-1B program.
Status: In process
Comments: When we determine what steps the Congress has taken, we will provide updated information.
Recommendation: To help ensure the full protection of H-1B workers employed through staffing companies, Congress may wish to consider holding the employer where an H-1B visa holder performs work accountable for meeting program requirements to the same extent as the employer that submitted the LCA form.
Status: In process
Comments: When we determine what steps the Congress has taken, we will provide updated information.
Recommendations for Executive Action
Recommendation: To help ensure that the number of new H-1B workers who are subject to the cap--both entering the United States and changing to H-1B status within the United States--does not exceed the cap each year, U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services should take steps to improve its tracking of the number of approved H-1B applications and the number of issued visas under the cap by fully leveraging the transformation effort currently under way, which involves the adoption of an electronic petition processing system that will be linked to the Department of State's tracking system. Such steps should ensure that linkages to the Department of State's tracking system will provide Homeland Security with timely access to data on visa issuances, and that mechanisms for tracking petitions and visas against the cap are incorporated into U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services' business rules to be developed for the new electronic petition system.
Agency Affected: Department of Homeland Security
Status: In process
Comments: When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.
Recommendation: To address business concerns without undermining program integrity, U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services should, to the extent permitted by its existing statutory authority, explore options for increasing the flexibility of the application process for H-1B employers, such as (1) allowing employers to rank their applications for visa candidates so that they can hire the best qualified worker for the jobs in highest need; (2) distributing the applications granted under the annual cap in allotments throughout the year (e.g. quarterly); and (3) establishing a system whereby businesses with a strong track-record of compliance with H-1B regulations may use a streamlined application process.
Agency Affected: Department of Homeland Security
Status: In process
Comments: When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.
Recommendation: To improve the transparency and oversight of the posting requirement on the Labor Condition Application (LCA), as part of its current oversight role, the Employment and Training Administration should develop and maintain a centralized Web site, accessible to the public, where businesses must post notice of the intent to hire H-1B workers. Such notices should continue to specify the job category and worksite location noted on the LCA and required by statute on current noncentralized postings.
Agency Affected: Department of Labor
Status: In process
Comments: When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.
Recommendation: To improve the efficiency and effectiveness of its investigations of employer compliance with H-1B requirements, the Employment and Training Administration should provide Labor's Wage and Hour Division searchable access to the LCA database.
Agency Affected: Department of Labor
Status: In process
Comments: When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.
VIEW FULL REPORT (http://www.gao.gov/new.items/d1126.pdf)
More... (http://ashwinsharma.com/2011/01/25/h-1b-visa-program-reforms-are-needed-to-minimize-the-risks-and-costs-of-current-program.aspx?ref=rss)
hot cartoon sunset. cartoon sunset
rsdang
10-30 04:05 PM
Dude you have the AP use it... I have travelled on AP multiple time no issues. I have an approved H1 which I dont use any more...
All the best
All the best
more...
house cartoon sunset. stock vector : Cartoon
basav
08-03 03:20 PM
I came to US in March 2007 on L1B, mean time applied for H1b during April 2008 which got approved with COS effective from Oct 1 2008,
I could not work on H1b for some reasons, continued work on L1 until end of may 09 , went back to india during last week of May 2009 and returned in a month time (last week of June 09) with same L1 visa,
Now I have a valid I94 fo L1 until Feb 2010, also H1B I94 says valid until 2011 which I assume is no more valid due to re-entry on L1 n offcourse never having worked on H1b till date.
Now I would like to take up H1B in a month time, following are my questions
1. I assume that my employer need to apply for COS from L1-H1 now (form I-539) correct me if iam wrong,also is it legal to work while COS approval is in progress?
2. Is there a premium processing for COS? to make sure I get approval first and then start working,how long does it take to process premium and what is the typical time frame for normal one?
3. My family is back in India, are they legal to travel during my COS being in progress with necessary stamping ? This is in case iam legal to work while COS is in progress, or
you recommend me getting them before COS is initiated with there L2 visa n then apply COS for them too ? Risk here is if COS is not approved for some reasons everyone have to leave !
I could not work on H1b for some reasons, continued work on L1 until end of may 09 , went back to india during last week of May 2009 and returned in a month time (last week of June 09) with same L1 visa,
Now I have a valid I94 fo L1 until Feb 2010, also H1B I94 says valid until 2011 which I assume is no more valid due to re-entry on L1 n offcourse never having worked on H1b till date.
Now I would like to take up H1B in a month time, following are my questions
1. I assume that my employer need to apply for COS from L1-H1 now (form I-539) correct me if iam wrong,also is it legal to work while COS approval is in progress?
2. Is there a premium processing for COS? to make sure I get approval first and then start working,how long does it take to process premium and what is the typical time frame for normal one?
3. My family is back in India, are they legal to travel during my COS being in progress with necessary stamping ? This is in case iam legal to work while COS is in progress, or
you recommend me getting them before COS is initiated with there L2 visa n then apply COS for them too ? Risk here is if COS is not approved for some reasons everyone have to leave !
tattoo tattoo cartoon sunset on each.
jonty_11
06-18 01:22 PM
you are lucky if u get one....!!! Dont have ur cake and eat it too!!!
Justkidding!
Justkidding!
more...
pictures sunset vector cartoon
FrankZulu
08-12 04:26 PM
As my priority date is current I contacted my local congressman's office for help with my I-485. NSC replied back to the office (see reply below) saying my background checks are still on. But the officer at the infopass appointment said my backgrounds checks are complete. I don't know whom to believe.
Is this some kind of standard reply that USCIS is giving for Congressman's or Senators case status inquiry?
Good morning XXXXXXXXXXX,
Re: I-485s <Applicant Name>
I have conversed with those in charge of these cases.
The United States Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) is
committed to adjudicating immigration benefits in a timely, efficient
manner that ensures public safety and national security.
Toward that end, USCIS requires extensive background checks for every
application or petition it adjudicates. While background checks for
most applications or petitions are completed quickly, a small percentage
of cases involve unresolved background check issues that result in
adjudication delays.
Background checks involve more than just the initial submission of and
response related to biographical information and fingerprints. When
checks and/or a review of an administrative record reveal an issue
potentially impacting an applicant's eligibility for the requested
immigration benefit, further inquiry is needed. The inquiry may include
an additional interview and/or the need to contact another agency for
updates or more comprehensive information. If it is determined that an
outside agency possesses relevant information about a case, USCIS
requests such information for review. Upon gathering and assessing all
available information, USCIS then adjudicates the application as
expeditiously as possible.
We have checked into your constituent's case and have been assured that
the agency is aware of your inquiry, and is monitoring progress related
to it. However, unresolved issues in your constituent's case require
thorough review before a decision can be rendered. Unfortunately, we
cannot speculate as to when this review process will be completed.
We realize that your constituent may feel frustrated by delays related
to his or her case. As an agency, we must weigh individual
inconvenience against the broader concerns of public safety and national
security.
We hope this information and assurance are helpful. If we may be of
assistance in the future, please let us know.
I hope this information is helpful to you. At this time I am closing the
inquiry on this matter.
Thank you,
<Officer Name>
Immigration Services Officer
NSC Congressional Unit
I have tried multiple sources and following is the response:
* SR (july 19th): No response Yet
* IO Inquiry (2nd Level, multiple times): You are pre-adjudicated. Officer will review/in review.
* Congressmen: I am in the queue to be processed (File will be picked through electronic sweep :confused:).
* Senator: Background check being conducted. (No written response yet, just was updated on phone by the senators office).
* InfoPass (3 months back): Your application is pre-adju. and will be approved once visa is available.
To all who have experienced something similar, how can I confirm if my application is really going through background check??? Or should I give it more time?
Is this some kind of standard reply that USCIS is giving for Congressman's or Senators case status inquiry?
Good morning XXXXXXXXXXX,
Re: I-485s <Applicant Name>
I have conversed with those in charge of these cases.
The United States Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) is
committed to adjudicating immigration benefits in a timely, efficient
manner that ensures public safety and national security.
Toward that end, USCIS requires extensive background checks for every
application or petition it adjudicates. While background checks for
most applications or petitions are completed quickly, a small percentage
of cases involve unresolved background check issues that result in
adjudication delays.
Background checks involve more than just the initial submission of and
response related to biographical information and fingerprints. When
checks and/or a review of an administrative record reveal an issue
potentially impacting an applicant's eligibility for the requested
immigration benefit, further inquiry is needed. The inquiry may include
an additional interview and/or the need to contact another agency for
updates or more comprehensive information. If it is determined that an
outside agency possesses relevant information about a case, USCIS
requests such information for review. Upon gathering and assessing all
available information, USCIS then adjudicates the application as
expeditiously as possible.
We have checked into your constituent's case and have been assured that
the agency is aware of your inquiry, and is monitoring progress related
to it. However, unresolved issues in your constituent's case require
thorough review before a decision can be rendered. Unfortunately, we
cannot speculate as to when this review process will be completed.
We realize that your constituent may feel frustrated by delays related
to his or her case. As an agency, we must weigh individual
inconvenience against the broader concerns of public safety and national
security.
We hope this information and assurance are helpful. If we may be of
assistance in the future, please let us know.
I hope this information is helpful to you. At this time I am closing the
inquiry on this matter.
Thank you,
<Officer Name>
Immigration Services Officer
NSC Congressional Unit
I have tried multiple sources and following is the response:
* SR (july 19th): No response Yet
* IO Inquiry (2nd Level, multiple times): You are pre-adjudicated. Officer will review/in review.
* Congressmen: I am in the queue to be processed (File will be picked through electronic sweep :confused:).
* Senator: Background check being conducted. (No written response yet, just was updated on phone by the senators office).
* InfoPass (3 months back): Your application is pre-adju. and will be approved once visa is available.
To all who have experienced something similar, how can I confirm if my application is really going through background check??? Or should I give it more time?
dresses cartoon sunset background.
The7zen
06-14 08:01 PM
Thank you for your inputs. I really appreciated for your help. We went to Detective office and he allowed my sister only to question. He asked couple of questions regarding that family and theft. My sister explained him that she don't know about that situation. It took about 20 minutes time there. We have below questions still remains in our mind.
1) Do we really required a Lawyer to protect?
2) I believe they should have proper information to arrest or accuse right?
3) We know my sister is innocent but feeling insecure for being happend. so what are all the chances to again question my sister?.
After viewing your messages here, we realized it is wrong to go to Detective office but we went this morning
Please help me in this
1) Its better to have a lawyer in these type of situations, especially if they have to record your statements.
3) Did you talk to the accuser to find out what exactly is happening and why he is suspecting your sister? BTW if you do so, just be polite and listen to what he says dont get agitated over the phone.
Good luck....
1) Do we really required a Lawyer to protect?
2) I believe they should have proper information to arrest or accuse right?
3) We know my sister is innocent but feeling insecure for being happend. so what are all the chances to again question my sister?.
After viewing your messages here, we realized it is wrong to go to Detective office but we went this morning
Please help me in this
1) Its better to have a lawyer in these type of situations, especially if they have to record your statements.
3) Did you talk to the accuser to find out what exactly is happening and why he is suspecting your sister? BTW if you do so, just be polite and listen to what he says dont get agitated over the phone.
Good luck....
more...
makeup makeup cartoon sunset. cartoon
nixstor
11-04 02:27 PM
Here's my exact situation:
- My employer is company A
- I am assigned by Company A to Company B (corp-to-corp)
- Company B assigned me to Client X
- I want to move to Company Z
- Company Z would assign me to the same Client X
My non-compete clause says something like... Employee(I) cannot work to client of Company A within 1 year of leaving Company A
Now, is client X considered as client of company A? I'm thinking that company B is the client of company A. Thus, it should be okay if I move to company Z and be assigned to client X.
Any thoughts?
It depends on how big the company is. Companies like Bearingpoint, Accenture will take them seriously some times. If this is just yet another staffing firm, they are not going to waste their money for a lawyer and time on you. As others said, these contract papers have no value. (unless they spent like 10K on training you outside of the company).
- My employer is company A
- I am assigned by Company A to Company B (corp-to-corp)
- Company B assigned me to Client X
- I want to move to Company Z
- Company Z would assign me to the same Client X
My non-compete clause says something like... Employee(I) cannot work to client of Company A within 1 year of leaving Company A
Now, is client X considered as client of company A? I'm thinking that company B is the client of company A. Thus, it should be okay if I move to company Z and be assigned to client X.
Any thoughts?
It depends on how big the company is. Companies like Bearingpoint, Accenture will take them seriously some times. If this is just yet another staffing firm, they are not going to waste their money for a lawyer and time on you. As others said, these contract papers have no value. (unless they spent like 10K on training you outside of the company).
girlfriend cartoon sunset background. cartoon sunset. cartoon sunset background.
BECsufferer
04-19 09:45 AM
Hi Folks,
My fiancee is a MS student and currently has student loan in India being charged at 13.5%. I am wondering if there is any loan that i can get here with a lower interest rate to repay off the one in india.
I would appreciate any pointers or suggestions here.
Dude!
You must be badly in lover with her!... I have never heard about a typical Indian dude worrying about to-be-bride's financial distress. Good for both of you love birds! ;)
My fiancee is a MS student and currently has student loan in India being charged at 13.5%. I am wondering if there is any loan that i can get here with a lower interest rate to repay off the one in india.
I would appreciate any pointers or suggestions here.
Dude!
You must be badly in lover with her!... I have never heard about a typical Indian dude worrying about to-be-bride's financial distress. Good for both of you love birds! ;)
hairstyles cartoon sunset background. cartoon sunset. cartoon sunset background.
pappu
10-18 10:16 AM
I received a letter from BEC and it says
This Notice of Findings is the Department’s statement of its intent to deny the application.
The following reasons were attached in the document:
1. - The job opportunity has been and is clearly open to any qualified U.S worker.
The case file indicates that telephone calls were placed made to U.S. applicants but the calls failed to reach the following applicants: A,B,C (name of the applicants)
Although telephone calls were unsuccessfully places to the three U.S. applicants, no certified mailing or other attempts were made to contact the applicants. An employer must prove that its overall recruitment efforts were in good faith.
The employer may rebut this finding by:
Providing documentation that certified mail was sent to the four applicants which demonstrates the employer made the minimally acceptable effort to recruit U.S. applicants.
2. The department of labor requires that when submitting an Application for Alien Employment Certification the case file must contain two sets of original ETA 750’s Parts A and B. your case file contains only one set of original ETA750’s. The other set of 750’s in the case file are photocopies. ETA 750’s with photocopied signatures are not acceptable for processing. In order to continue processing the Application for Alien Employment Certification you must send an additional set of original ETA 750’s.
A copy of the Form ETA 750, parts A and B, have been returned in the event that any changes are necessary. The amended copies must be returned with your resubmission. Any amendments made to the ETA 750, Part A, must be initialed and dated by the employer: and any amendments made to the ETA 750, Part B, must be initialed by the alien, as appropriate.
It is the employer’s responsibility to submit the rebuttal in a timely manner directly to the certifying officer.
I got already my 7th year extension and it valid till Nov 2007. I spoke with my attorney and he seems to be positive, but he could only able to find two of the three candidates email correspondence.
Please let me know if you have faced similar situation or any suggestions. What is the possibility of my case gets approved?
sorry to hear this. There are several instances where employers have been callous or did not take adequate interest in filing the application. My experience with lawyers is also the same, especially if the lawyer is hired by the company. I would suggest members who are yet to hire an attorney to hire their own attorney instead of going with the company attorney. a company attorney will only work in the interest of the company. if you dont have a choice in this matter, then also hire your own attorney as a consultant and run each and every document by him before it is submitted to the authorities. It will keep you safe from such irregularities. Some extra money spent on having your own lawyer as a consultant is always helpful.
In your case i recommended seeking advice from multiple lawyers. submit your question to our attorney- sonal verma for the confrence call. legal advice for IV members is free in these conference calls. In future try to be on top of things wth HR with your application and be aware of all documents and proccedures instead of depending on HR and lawyers. I am sure there must be a way your situation can be sorted out. good luck.
This Notice of Findings is the Department’s statement of its intent to deny the application.
The following reasons were attached in the document:
1. - The job opportunity has been and is clearly open to any qualified U.S worker.
The case file indicates that telephone calls were placed made to U.S. applicants but the calls failed to reach the following applicants: A,B,C (name of the applicants)
Although telephone calls were unsuccessfully places to the three U.S. applicants, no certified mailing or other attempts were made to contact the applicants. An employer must prove that its overall recruitment efforts were in good faith.
The employer may rebut this finding by:
Providing documentation that certified mail was sent to the four applicants which demonstrates the employer made the minimally acceptable effort to recruit U.S. applicants.
2. The department of labor requires that when submitting an Application for Alien Employment Certification the case file must contain two sets of original ETA 750’s Parts A and B. your case file contains only one set of original ETA750’s. The other set of 750’s in the case file are photocopies. ETA 750’s with photocopied signatures are not acceptable for processing. In order to continue processing the Application for Alien Employment Certification you must send an additional set of original ETA 750’s.
A copy of the Form ETA 750, parts A and B, have been returned in the event that any changes are necessary. The amended copies must be returned with your resubmission. Any amendments made to the ETA 750, Part A, must be initialed and dated by the employer: and any amendments made to the ETA 750, Part B, must be initialed by the alien, as appropriate.
It is the employer’s responsibility to submit the rebuttal in a timely manner directly to the certifying officer.
I got already my 7th year extension and it valid till Nov 2007. I spoke with my attorney and he seems to be positive, but he could only able to find two of the three candidates email correspondence.
Please let me know if you have faced similar situation or any suggestions. What is the possibility of my case gets approved?
sorry to hear this. There are several instances where employers have been callous or did not take adequate interest in filing the application. My experience with lawyers is also the same, especially if the lawyer is hired by the company. I would suggest members who are yet to hire an attorney to hire their own attorney instead of going with the company attorney. a company attorney will only work in the interest of the company. if you dont have a choice in this matter, then also hire your own attorney as a consultant and run each and every document by him before it is submitted to the authorities. It will keep you safe from such irregularities. Some extra money spent on having your own lawyer as a consultant is always helpful.
In your case i recommended seeking advice from multiple lawyers. submit your question to our attorney- sonal verma for the confrence call. legal advice for IV members is free in these conference calls. In future try to be on top of things wth HR with your application and be aware of all documents and proccedures instead of depending on HR and lawyers. I am sure there must be a way your situation can be sorted out. good luck.
skd
01-12 12:48 PM
^^^^
Its' very depressing state, I really feel bad about current state of affairs of economy...
Its' very depressing , So lets close this thread :(
But gcformeornot Don't give me read for that , Nothing against you , I am giving you green
Its' very depressing state, I really feel bad about current state of affairs of economy...
Its' very depressing , So lets close this thread :(
But gcformeornot Don't give me read for that , Nothing against you , I am giving you green
spoly
09-17 01:43 PM
Dear folks,
I tried to help your mission. I offered my talent, time, and my experience of delivering messages.
Written to the forum and called in several times, was promised to get a call back.
And was not contacted, nor called.
And here is my message for you:
You do not care about immigration reform - you care about your own green cards. You care ONLY about daisy consultants, such as yourselves, and you are not ready to address issues at large.
You do not speak on behalf of me, nor you speak on behalf of the mainstream any employment based immigrant.
Best of luck.
I tried to help your mission. I offered my talent, time, and my experience of delivering messages.
Written to the forum and called in several times, was promised to get a call back.
And was not contacted, nor called.
And here is my message for you:
You do not care about immigration reform - you care about your own green cards. You care ONLY about daisy consultants, such as yourselves, and you are not ready to address issues at large.
You do not speak on behalf of me, nor you speak on behalf of the mainstream any employment based immigrant.
Best of luck.
No comments:
Post a Comment