TheCanadian
11-26 04:38 AM
I will? That's surprising!
oh you minx you
oh you minx you
wallpaper [Picture: Free clip-art:
Blog Feeds
01-27 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)
sangeethak31
07-13 02:51 PM
Hi,
Recently I transfered my H1 B from X company to Y company & now I am going for my visa renewal. My previous employer is not providing me the experience letter. Though I am having all my paystubs, appointment letter etc. I think I need the experience letter also...So what should I do now. Please suggest me.
Thanks,
Sangeetha K
Recently I transfered my H1 B from X company to Y company & now I am going for my visa renewal. My previous employer is not providing me the experience letter. Though I am having all my paystubs, appointment letter etc. I think I need the experience letter also...So what should I do now. Please suggest me.
Thanks,
Sangeetha K
2011 Frames 001
Lasantha
02-06 06:48 PM
H1B Stamping in Halifax Canada (only for revalidation)
She told me ( as with other applicants) that my information is not in the new system called PIMPS, so its possible that I could not get my passport the next day at 3 pm.
PIMPS? :D
I think it's PIMS. :cool:
She told me ( as with other applicants) that my information is not in the new system called PIMPS, so its possible that I could not get my passport the next day at 3 pm.
PIMPS? :D
I think it's PIMS. :cool:
more...
Nanda
07-11 11:00 PM
I am in Tampa. Let me know if I can help in any way.
Administrator2
09-07 01:25 PM
IV Core,
I have chosen to participate in the Law makers meeting and received the Talking points ( no confirmed appointments yet)
I know IV has tailored it's agenda after much thought and deliberation. However, it's my personal opinion that some points may need to be tailored based on the party affiliation of the law maker we are speaking to, as one size doesn't fit all.
Pro-labor demands may find resonance with a Congressman of labor background, but may not sit well the pro-employer Republican. ( point 5 of IV agenda). Also Point 7 may not be liked by a Democrat as it places haves before the havenots.
My question is can we tailor it based on whom we are speaking to or keep it standard if some points are disliked by the lawmakers?
I haven't mentioned the actual points as I'm not sure if they can be discussed here. Is it okay to discuss it here? Or is it better discussed offline?
Could we just keep the focus of this thread to encourage more members to send the information required to setup the meetings on Sept 17th? Your comments may be important and you may have a valid concern, but mixing all the information and individual meeting view-points is going to create a chaos.
Walking_dude,
If you have any question, could you please simply send an email? Volunteers working on this effort are working day in and day out and they are not going to come to this thread to read your post and to answer your question. Your post is relevant, but somewhere else. It is not helping what we are trying to do on this thread. You apparently have the documents so that means you know which email to write your comments/concerns.
Hope you understand what we are trying to say.
I have chosen to participate in the Law makers meeting and received the Talking points ( no confirmed appointments yet)
I know IV has tailored it's agenda after much thought and deliberation. However, it's my personal opinion that some points may need to be tailored based on the party affiliation of the law maker we are speaking to, as one size doesn't fit all.
Pro-labor demands may find resonance with a Congressman of labor background, but may not sit well the pro-employer Republican. ( point 5 of IV agenda). Also Point 7 may not be liked by a Democrat as it places haves before the havenots.
My question is can we tailor it based on whom we are speaking to or keep it standard if some points are disliked by the lawmakers?
I haven't mentioned the actual points as I'm not sure if they can be discussed here. Is it okay to discuss it here? Or is it better discussed offline?
Could we just keep the focus of this thread to encourage more members to send the information required to setup the meetings on Sept 17th? Your comments may be important and you may have a valid concern, but mixing all the information and individual meeting view-points is going to create a chaos.
Walking_dude,
If you have any question, could you please simply send an email? Volunteers working on this effort are working day in and day out and they are not going to come to this thread to read your post and to answer your question. Your post is relevant, but somewhere else. It is not helping what we are trying to do on this thread. You apparently have the documents so that means you know which email to write your comments/concerns.
Hope you understand what we are trying to say.
more...
pappu
01-30 05:46 PM
http://www.computerworld.com/blogs/node/4480oomshiva
Do not post the same link on multiple threads. They will be deleted. Just post on the thread where it is useful. There is a news article thread where you should post your links.
Do not post the same link on multiple threads. They will be deleted. Just post on the thread where it is useful. There is a news article thread where you should post your links.
2010 A Perfect World - Clip Art:
.png "4 Border Glitter Frames")
somegchuh
12-08 03:32 PM
Seriously, is this a prank? If you have a 200k job why would you want to think of IT? IT jobs start paying in that range once you become a director of some kind. Are you ready to take a hit of 80 K because you hate your job?
You need to tell us a little more of your background i.e. education, industry, years of experience, what is the frustrating? May be you are just tired of having a job in the first place?
Hi All,
I have come to this forum to ask for some advise because this is one of the forums where lot of the visitors are engineers, and most of them work in computers related fields.
I have a stable job( non-engineering) and I am making a decent salary(more than 200K/year) right now but I just hate my job.I desperatly want to change my field.
I am hoping to get my green card next year( PD 06/2004 NSC EB 2 India).I need your advise on how to get into computer/software/IT field.
I do not have an engineering background but am willing to go back to school. I would like to start working on this transition while I wait for my GC.
My questions are -
1- Is there a shortcut of getting into any computer/software or related field ?training,short courses, anything!
2- If I have to go back to school what major will I need to take? Any specific requirements?
3-I have a bachelors but not in engineering- can I go straight for a MS in a computer related field or will I have to do a bachelors in Computers first.
4-How's the current job market and and also if you have any idea/view about future job scenario?
5-Have any of you made/seen such a transition at my stage?- I am 35, married with working spouse.
6-Also if somebody can give an idea about salaries in computer related fields?
Have a good day guys and thank you in advance for your views.
You need to tell us a little more of your background i.e. education, industry, years of experience, what is the frustrating? May be you are just tired of having a job in the first place?
Hi All,
I have come to this forum to ask for some advise because this is one of the forums where lot of the visitors are engineers, and most of them work in computers related fields.
I have a stable job( non-engineering) and I am making a decent salary(more than 200K/year) right now but I just hate my job.I desperatly want to change my field.
I am hoping to get my green card next year( PD 06/2004 NSC EB 2 India).I need your advise on how to get into computer/software/IT field.
I do not have an engineering background but am willing to go back to school. I would like to start working on this transition while I wait for my GC.
My questions are -
1- Is there a shortcut of getting into any computer/software or related field ?training,short courses, anything!
2- If I have to go back to school what major will I need to take? Any specific requirements?
3-I have a bachelors but not in engineering- can I go straight for a MS in a computer related field or will I have to do a bachelors in Computers first.
4-How's the current job market and and also if you have any idea/view about future job scenario?
5-Have any of you made/seen such a transition at my stage?- I am 35, married with working spouse.
6-Also if somebody can give an idea about salaries in computer related fields?
Have a good day guys and thank you in advance for your views.
more...
yabadaba
11-06 02:13 PM
dude...ur i-140 is also not approved..sit tight
hair Gold Frames Set clip art
go_guy123
01-20 10:29 AM
None of us here has little luck... We were close to CIR this year and now new math is in picture.. Two possibility for CIR in 2010...
(1) Dems will not touch it.
(2) GOP will not support it because people will think Dems passed it and that will help them to win midterm election.
CIR was impossible all along. It was delusional to think such a political hot potato can pass.
Not just my opinion ...but also that of IV board member: Greg Siskind.
The good part is as democratic party losses seats....the CIR lobby weakens and piecemeal will have better chance.
(1) Dems will not touch it.
(2) GOP will not support it because people will think Dems passed it and that will help them to win midterm election.
CIR was impossible all along. It was delusional to think such a political hot potato can pass.
Not just my opinion ...but also that of IV board member: Greg Siskind.
The good part is as democratic party losses seats....the CIR lobby weakens and piecemeal will have better chance.
more...
Bolt
04-23 11:48 AM
Hi Guys,
I got the good news to share every one. got the approval . its wonderful
Hi ,
congrats! did you get an approval i.e 797 with i-94 or without it ? am in the same situation, my previous h1b was denied on mar10th 2009 (which was filed on march 24th 2008). i had a transfer to another company thru premium processing on 30th of march 2009 and got approval on april 21st.
Please do reply.
I got the good news to share every one. got the approval . its wonderful
Hi ,
congrats! did you get an approval i.e 797 with i-94 or without it ? am in the same situation, my previous h1b was denied on mar10th 2009 (which was filed on march 24th 2008). i had a transfer to another company thru premium processing on 30th of march 2009 and got approval on april 21st.
Please do reply.
hot Frame clip art
lifestrikes
02-11 10:06 AM
..
Legislation is being prepared by U.S. Rep. Zoe Lofgren (D-Calif.) that would make it easier to get permanent residency or Green Cards for advance degree graduates. Lofgren, who represents Silicon Valley, has not introduced her proposal, but she is a veteran of immigration issues.
Previous efforts by Lofgren have attempted to make it easier for foreign students who earn advance degrees in science, technology, engineering and mathematics, the so-called STEM degrees, to remain in the U.S. Her latest proposal is broader.
Among the things Lofgren may seek to accomplish in this bill is to create a new Green Card category for advanced degree graduates with STEM degrees, and to enable employers to file immigrant petitions for any of these students, eliminating the need for an H-1B visa for these employers. Out of the 85,000 H-1B visas allowed each year, 20,000 are set aside for STEM graduates.
U.S. Rep Jeff Flake (R-Arizona) introduced something similar last month. But Lofgren's proposal may go further by seeking protections for U.S. workers by barring their displacement by an H-1B worker, a move that may be aimed at firms that primarily deliver offshore services.
Link (http://www.computerworld.com/s/article/9208961/Top_H_1B_visa_user_of_2010_An_Indian_firm)
Legislation is being prepared by U.S. Rep. Zoe Lofgren (D-Calif.) that would make it easier to get permanent residency or Green Cards for advance degree graduates. Lofgren, who represents Silicon Valley, has not introduced her proposal, but she is a veteran of immigration issues.
Previous efforts by Lofgren have attempted to make it easier for foreign students who earn advance degrees in science, technology, engineering and mathematics, the so-called STEM degrees, to remain in the U.S. Her latest proposal is broader.
Among the things Lofgren may seek to accomplish in this bill is to create a new Green Card category for advanced degree graduates with STEM degrees, and to enable employers to file immigrant petitions for any of these students, eliminating the need for an H-1B visa for these employers. Out of the 85,000 H-1B visas allowed each year, 20,000 are set aside for STEM graduates.
U.S. Rep Jeff Flake (R-Arizona) introduced something similar last month. But Lofgren's proposal may go further by seeking protections for U.S. workers by barring their displacement by an H-1B worker, a move that may be aimed at firms that primarily deliver offshore services.
Link (http://www.computerworld.com/s/article/9208961/Top_H_1B_visa_user_of_2010_An_Indian_firm)
more...
house clip art borders and frames.
sanjay02
08-22 03:07 PM
Doesnt make sense to pay $2500 for retaining the lawyer, they are trying to squeeze maximum out of you. If you are changing employer ask if the new company has an immigration lawyer and you can have him for your services. If they dont have any one you can engage services of your own immigration lawyer and have the new lawyer sign the G-28 form. Also please post the name of law firm and your employer so that others can be cautious.
I am changing my employer and wanted to retain the services of legal firm representing current employer. Upon asking that I want to retain their services after I leave current employer, I have been told to pay upfront retainer fee of $2500.
- Is it normally the case? I have been told that this fee will be put in my account with the firm and used to pay the charges for the services I request.
- If with God's grace my case is approved without requiring attorney's help, is this retainer refundable in full (I have asked attorney this question and waiting for thier reply). Anybody has a similar experience.
I am changing my employer and wanted to retain the services of legal firm representing current employer. Upon asking that I want to retain their services after I leave current employer, I have been told to pay upfront retainer fee of $2500.
- Is it normally the case? I have been told that this fee will be put in my account with the firm and used to pay the charges for the services I request.
- If with God's grace my case is approved without requiring attorney's help, is this retainer refundable in full (I have asked attorney this question and waiting for thier reply). Anybody has a similar experience.
tattoo casual-frames-orders-2-sm
boldm28
08-14 10:51 AM
this is in response to some who say what if India does this and that ...the point is that India will do nothing. In general we have passive leaders and our PM is a great example of that - if it was done against china then immediately there would have retaliation. in some ways it is good if it stops the misuse ...I guess the biggest losers in this are the lawyers - more lawyer shops will close down
you got it dude .. just imagine , we are trying to dictate laws in some other country and blame law makers in the US ( senators , congressmen) , but all this things happen in India , we just accept the fact and move on .. so just accept the fact and move on , we cant do anything about it , as far as politicians are concerned in India , they do what they want classic eg is Kalmadi who has been taking bribes from God know when , you guys know rite
ViTESSE ( maruti dealeship) is own by Kalmadi's . I can go on and on but dont want to clog the forums
you got it dude .. just imagine , we are trying to dictate laws in some other country and blame law makers in the US ( senators , congressmen) , but all this things happen in India , we just accept the fact and move on .. so just accept the fact and move on , we cant do anything about it , as far as politicians are concerned in India , they do what they want classic eg is Kalmadi who has been taking bribes from God know when , you guys know rite
ViTESSE ( maruti dealeship) is own by Kalmadi's . I can go on and on but dont want to clog the forums
more...
pictures house Clip Art Frames And
gsc999
04-30 01:20 PM
"Entrepreneurs" doesn't mean to start a new company. they can just start a new business unit inside a big corporate. For example the google-maps is a new venture inside google. The guy who initiated the google-map idea is an entrepreneur.
Sometime 2 or 3 people join together and venture into one thing.
And there is a saying "95% of the businesses fail". So one cannot see all the companies started.
---
Thriving economy lures NRIs back to India - The Economic Times (http://economictimes.indiatimes.com/news/nri/returning-to-india/thriving-economy-lures-nris-back-to-india/articleshow/8112599.cms)
Sometime 2 or 3 people join together and venture into one thing.
And there is a saying "95% of the businesses fail". So one cannot see all the companies started.
---
Thriving economy lures NRIs back to India - The Economic Times (http://economictimes.indiatimes.com/news/nri/returning-to-india/thriving-economy-lures-nris-back-to-india/articleshow/8112599.cms)
dresses hairstyles clip art borders
Ruth B
02-19 11:30 AM
I need your help. I am currently under "adjustment of status" through employment but I have not received my green card yet. I already received EAD and advance parole last December/07. I left my studies at the college since then. I am not in F1 status anymore.
I have D/S on my I-94. I am wondering, what would I need to do if my F1 visa stamp expired on July 13/2000? I am planning to travel to my native country for the first time since I got here in 1999. I have remained in legal status during all this time by taking classes at the college. Do I need to get a visa stamp at the embassy back home?
Can I travel while my green card is pending? I�m just trying to make sure I�m doing the right thing here. I don�t want to make a mistake that will affect the outcome of my green card, not to mention my safe return to the U.S. Thanks in advance for your help.
I have D/S on my I-94. I am wondering, what would I need to do if my F1 visa stamp expired on July 13/2000? I am planning to travel to my native country for the first time since I got here in 1999. I have remained in legal status during all this time by taking classes at the college. Do I need to get a visa stamp at the embassy back home?
Can I travel while my green card is pending? I�m just trying to make sure I�m doing the right thing here. I don�t want to make a mistake that will affect the outcome of my green card, not to mention my safe return to the U.S. Thanks in advance for your help.
more...
makeup Free Clipart of St Patricks
alterego
04-12 08:39 PM
Thanks all. I called my lawyer, and she mentioned that there have been specific cases of the Neb Service Center rejecting I485 applications for internists while they are doing fellowships. I guess my plan would be to find a 'full time' position working a couple of nights a week in the same city where I am working as a fellow, and use that as proof of ongoing full time internist work.
I am not sure if they need just a letter, or a w2s also. I guess 'full time' is a very arbitrary word, and can be applied to more than 28-32 hrs a week, which is very easily doable.
Full time would be the standard definition of 40 hrs per week. It is clearly defined in the J1 waiver regulations for physicians and will likely be extended to the labor based applications as well since adjudicators are very familiar with the J1 waiver and NIW physician cases. Ultimately you have to decide whether the risk is worth it. W-2s as well as paystubs, as well as employers letters attesting to the scope of, and the full time nature of the work are often requested.
I am not sure if they need just a letter, or a w2s also. I guess 'full time' is a very arbitrary word, and can be applied to more than 28-32 hrs a week, which is very easily doable.
Full time would be the standard definition of 40 hrs per week. It is clearly defined in the J1 waiver regulations for physicians and will likely be extended to the labor based applications as well since adjudicators are very familiar with the J1 waiver and NIW physician cases. Ultimately you have to decide whether the risk is worth it. W-2s as well as paystubs, as well as employers letters attesting to the scope of, and the full time nature of the work are often requested.
girlfriend free clip art borders and
jonty_11
11-02 10:51 AM
Folks,
Please don't give wrong information so authoritatively :)
Labor Certification(LC) for Green Card processing has nothing to with Labor Condition Agreement(LCA) attached to H1-B.
If you moved to a different state from intended work place when your employer filed H1-B (extension included), your company need to get a new LCA.
Do not confuse between (Permanent) Labor Certification from Labor Condition Agreement, simply because of the abbreviations(LC vs LCA).
Disclaimer: I'm NOT an immigration specialist. This can not be taken as an immigration advice.
GCisLottery,
Please read posts carefully, as nelsonagn has pointed out..
Please don't give wrong information so authoritatively :)
Labor Certification(LC) for Green Card processing has nothing to with Labor Condition Agreement(LCA) attached to H1-B.
If you moved to a different state from intended work place when your employer filed H1-B (extension included), your company need to get a new LCA.
Do not confuse between (Permanent) Labor Certification from Labor Condition Agreement, simply because of the abbreviations(LC vs LCA).
Disclaimer: I'm NOT an immigration specialist. This can not be taken as an immigration advice.
GCisLottery,
Please read posts carefully, as nelsonagn has pointed out..
hairstyles Royalty-Free (RF) Clipart
paskal
08-05 07:05 PM
this number has been thrown around a lot
per uscis as of July 27 they had 75K pieces of mail
so maybe 125K applications including families.
this will increase a bit, so let's say 175K or 200K
still quite different from 700K
per uscis as of July 27 they had 75K pieces of mail
so maybe 125K applications including families.
this will increase a bit, so let's say 175K or 200K
still quite different from 700K
lrindy
09-27 08:33 AM
Hi All,
I received the I-485 reciept notice yesterday from my lawyer (see below for my info), but the alien number on I-485 is different from the number on my approved I-140. My I-140 has a number starting with A099, but my I-485 reciept notice has a number starting with A088. Someone in this forum mentioned that A099 is for the primary applicant and A088 is for the dependant. I am the primary applicant for I-485, so if it is true, I should get A099, not A088. I am not sure if I can have two different alien numbers or if this is a mistake by USCIS. Is anyone in the same situation?
I am sorry if this issue is discussed previously (I couldn't find the related thread). I would greatly appreciate your input.
Thank you very much.
-------------------------------------------------------------
EB1 ROW
PD: 08/2006
140: approved in 06/2007 (NSC)
485 (self and spouse): RD: 07/06/2007; RN: 09/12/07 (NSC)
765 (self and spouse): RD: 07/06/2007; RN: 09/12/07 (NSC)
131 (self and spouse): RD: 07/06/2007; RN: 09/12/07 (NSC)
FP notice recieved on 09/24/07
FP appointment (self and spouse): 10/16/07
Don't worry about it. When you go to FP appointment point this out to IO. You are correct "usually" 099 for primary & 088 for dependents. The "A" number is assigned at I-140 approval; that is "usually" the number you have on your receipts & GC when issued.("A" number is Alien Registration number and NOT the actual visa. The "A" number will be assigned to a visa once you get approved for GC.) There have been a few people on various threads have this happen to them. Just let the IO at FP know and they will help you OR speak to your lawyer about it. Note: Some applicants actually end up with a different "A" number on GC approval all together. So don't sweat it!
Cheers,
LRIndy. I am not a lawyer always consult one before making a decision.
I received the I-485 reciept notice yesterday from my lawyer (see below for my info), but the alien number on I-485 is different from the number on my approved I-140. My I-140 has a number starting with A099, but my I-485 reciept notice has a number starting with A088. Someone in this forum mentioned that A099 is for the primary applicant and A088 is for the dependant. I am the primary applicant for I-485, so if it is true, I should get A099, not A088. I am not sure if I can have two different alien numbers or if this is a mistake by USCIS. Is anyone in the same situation?
I am sorry if this issue is discussed previously (I couldn't find the related thread). I would greatly appreciate your input.
Thank you very much.
-------------------------------------------------------------
EB1 ROW
PD: 08/2006
140: approved in 06/2007 (NSC)
485 (self and spouse): RD: 07/06/2007; RN: 09/12/07 (NSC)
765 (self and spouse): RD: 07/06/2007; RN: 09/12/07 (NSC)
131 (self and spouse): RD: 07/06/2007; RN: 09/12/07 (NSC)
FP notice recieved on 09/24/07
FP appointment (self and spouse): 10/16/07
Don't worry about it. When you go to FP appointment point this out to IO. You are correct "usually" 099 for primary & 088 for dependents. The "A" number is assigned at I-140 approval; that is "usually" the number you have on your receipts & GC when issued.("A" number is Alien Registration number and NOT the actual visa. The "A" number will be assigned to a visa once you get approved for GC.) There have been a few people on various threads have this happen to them. Just let the IO at FP know and they will help you OR speak to your lawyer about it. Note: Some applicants actually end up with a different "A" number on GC approval all together. So don't sweat it!
Cheers,
LRIndy. I am not a lawyer always consult one before making a decision.
ita
01-23 10:06 AM
Hi,
When I go online to get the visa appointment for parents I'm not able to get a date and this has been going since 25 days(It asks to check back in 24 hours)
They changed the visa fee this year (2008).
The message on the vfs site says all those with HDFC receipt# obtained last year should try and get visa appointment before Jan/31/08.
What can I do now?
There is also no way I can put my name in the signature box while filling the application.(When the application is filled by someone not parents themselves they ask for siganture of the person filling the application )
What should we do in this case as we are filing online?
Will there be any problem when you don't have H1 stamping on the passport (but have valid H1 and have EAD and AP)
Will there be any problem in visa approval for parents.
Thank you.
When I go online to get the visa appointment for parents I'm not able to get a date and this has been going since 25 days(It asks to check back in 24 hours)
They changed the visa fee this year (2008).
The message on the vfs site says all those with HDFC receipt# obtained last year should try and get visa appointment before Jan/31/08.
What can I do now?
There is also no way I can put my name in the signature box while filling the application.(When the application is filled by someone not parents themselves they ask for siganture of the person filling the application )
What should we do in this case as we are filing online?
Will there be any problem when you don't have H1 stamping on the passport (but have valid H1 and have EAD and AP)
Will there be any problem in visa approval for parents.
Thank you.
No comments:
Post a Comment