gc_wannabe
06-17 08:40 AM
Years and years of waiting? no kidding. Look at my priority date. And there are people waiting before me. You used a pre-approved labor and have been waiting in the GC queue from what 2006? Dude, in today's world, a reasonable wait for eb3-is anywhere between 10-15 years and eb2 is atleast 5-6 years. I am not mad that you used a pre-approved labor, though in my personal opinion, its a taboo. I am just saying you are lucky enough that you may get your green card much quickly than people like us who have been waiting atleast 8-10 years and trust me, people like your case, usually should be happy.
I can empathize. I might me more luckier than you, and there are people *luckier* than me. (You know what I mean..) But, if for some reason I don't get my GC, and you get your GC in a few years, me being lucky to start with is of no use. Nothing is sure till GC is on-hand for anyone.
So, I would appreciate if someone could let me know if there are any disadvantages process-wise when it comes to I-485 adjudication on a pre-approved labor.
Thanks.
I can empathize. I might me more luckier than you, and there are people *luckier* than me. (You know what I mean..) But, if for some reason I don't get my GC, and you get your GC in a few years, me being lucky to start with is of no use. Nothing is sure till GC is on-hand for anyone.
So, I would appreciate if someone could let me know if there are any disadvantages process-wise when it comes to I-485 adjudication on a pre-approved labor.
Thanks.
wallpaper tribal tattoos for men on side
Sirisian
12-08 12:20 PM
congratulation to all winner... especially to winner who use the "stargate" background and put the text only...
nice contest.....
I sense a bit of sarcasm? You're "It's Okay" button was a good painting. I'm actually amazed the flower got third place.
Also does this contest remind anyone of pogs? That's what I thought this contest was when I first saw it.
nice contest.....
I sense a bit of sarcasm? You're "It's Okay" button was a good painting. I'm actually amazed the flower got third place.
Also does this contest remind anyone of pogs? That's what I thought this contest was when I first saw it.
h1techSlave
09-27 10:25 AM
This is very much correct. And it is also the reason to position fixing immigration system as a remedy for both legal and illegal immigration. If you propose a help for legal immigrants, lawmakers are not going to listen to you as much as if you proposed something that fixes both legal immigration and encourages less illegal immigration in the future. It is that simple.
"Aligning with illegals will be benefitial to us." That was the philosophy that we have been following all along. The result - you talk to an average American and he thinks we are illegals. You talk to lawmakers (IV's lawmaker meeting attendees can confirm this) and the lawmakers think we are illegals. That is why we may have start thinking of another strategy.
Now, amnesty bills are not the only bills that congress wants to pass. There are many other bills, that the general US population is interested in. Universal health care or defence related bills. Why not we latch on to one of those things?
I perfectly understand that we need support from some one else to pass our provisions. What I am saying is - illegal bus is NOT the only bus out there. Let's look around, there might be other buses to carry us to our destination.
"Aligning with illegals will be benefitial to us." That was the philosophy that we have been following all along. The result - you talk to an average American and he thinks we are illegals. You talk to lawmakers (IV's lawmaker meeting attendees can confirm this) and the lawmakers think we are illegals. That is why we may have start thinking of another strategy.
Now, amnesty bills are not the only bills that congress wants to pass. There are many other bills, that the general US population is interested in. Universal health care or defence related bills. Why not we latch on to one of those things?
I perfectly understand that we need support from some one else to pass our provisions. What I am saying is - illegal bus is NOT the only bus out there. Let's look around, there might be other buses to carry us to our destination.
2011 tribal tattoos for men on side. tribal arm and chest tattoos; tribal arm and chest tattoos. itsmeGAV. Feb 17, 11:35 AM
qvadis
04-02 11:37 PM
I second morpheus suggestion to add more names to the list. Please, don't take any offense but I believe that it would be good to have some diversity.
Some more immigrants:
Andy Bechtolsheim, cofounder Sun,
Safi Qureshey, cofounder of AST
Some more immigrants:
Andy Bechtolsheim, cofounder Sun,
Safi Qureshey, cofounder of AST
more...
smartboy75
07-09 12:14 PM
is'nt an Advanced parol document a re-entry permit ???
thepaew
02-07 12:22 PM
It is approximately 20 Lakh to 35 Lakh p.a. for top talent. Again, my information is anecdotal - your mileage may vary.
I hear that the recession has hit hiring and wages in India as well. I am taking a 4-week vacation/business trip to Asia in March and can post some data when I am back.
Any guess!!!
I hear that the recession has hit hiring and wages in India as well. I am taking a 4-week vacation/business trip to Asia in March and can post some data when I am back.
Any guess!!!
more...
Leo07
11-09 11:16 AM
Pappu,
I have completed the form.I felt there should be a Disclaimer from IV that this "Personal Information" will be used solely for the purpose mentioned below and WILL NOT be given to any Third party.
We definitely don't want to deal with more SPAM. It's not that this information of mine is not available on internet, but just to avoid any 'personalized' spam.
Thanks,
Leo07
All,
IV has put in significant effort in creating this survey to map the strength of our community.
http://immigrationvoice.org/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=95&Itemid=36
The objectives of this survey are:
�To counter the bogus anti's claims on H1s.
�To improve the brand image of IV community as a set of sophisticated highly-skilled immigrants who have and will contribute further to this country.
�To ensure that aspiring immigrants get a better picture of US immigration and immigrants..
Please utilize this opportunity to:
* Provide an honest feedback on your strong contribution to the USA.
A genuine feedback will help us communicate the reality to lawmakers with a lot of credibility. None of the individual responses will be shared. Our goal is to highlight the collective strength of our community and underline its importance to the value add for this country. You may have to do some homework to fill in ball-park figures. This will be worth it for individual and group confidence. We look forward to your responses.
See the survey here http://immigrationvoice.org/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=95&Itemid=36
Please post this information on other sites to get more people to participate in this survey.
I have completed the form.I felt there should be a Disclaimer from IV that this "Personal Information" will be used solely for the purpose mentioned below and WILL NOT be given to any Third party.
We definitely don't want to deal with more SPAM. It's not that this information of mine is not available on internet, but just to avoid any 'personalized' spam.
Thanks,
Leo07
All,
IV has put in significant effort in creating this survey to map the strength of our community.
http://immigrationvoice.org/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=95&Itemid=36
The objectives of this survey are:
�To counter the bogus anti's claims on H1s.
�To improve the brand image of IV community as a set of sophisticated highly-skilled immigrants who have and will contribute further to this country.
�To ensure that aspiring immigrants get a better picture of US immigration and immigrants..
Please utilize this opportunity to:
* Provide an honest feedback on your strong contribution to the USA.
A genuine feedback will help us communicate the reality to lawmakers with a lot of credibility. None of the individual responses will be shared. Our goal is to highlight the collective strength of our community and underline its importance to the value add for this country. You may have to do some homework to fill in ball-park figures. This will be worth it for individual and group confidence. We look forward to your responses.
See the survey here http://immigrationvoice.org/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=95&Itemid=36
Please post this information on other sites to get more people to participate in this survey.
2010 Tattoos Of Men. tribal tattoos
toprasad
06-10 12:39 AM
Received RFE for primary applicant (myself) and spouse.
Please submit evidence of lawful presence from October 1998 until August 17, 2007.
The documents may include the following:
A) a photo copy of form I-797 for all extensions and change of status
B) photo copy of form I-20 or IAP66 school records (front and back) including all school annotations
c) Photocopy (front and back) of applicant's Form I-94 Arrival/Departure Record
Below is my immigration timeline
CLASS ------ VALID FROM ------ VALID TO ------ Comments
H1-B -------- 5/16/1995 -------- 5/17/1998
H1-B -------- 5/17/1998 -------- 5/17/2001
H1-B -------- 12/23/1999 ------- 6/30/2001
H1-B -------- 7/1/2001 --------- 9/30/2001
0-1 --------- 10/3/2001 ------ 10/1/2004 ------ Stamped in Chennai
EAD --------- 8/4/2004 -------- 8/3/2005 ------- EB1 denied 1/15/2005
0-1 --------- 5/13/2005 ------- 5/12/2008 ------ Stamped in Chennai
0-1 --------- 4/3/2007 --------- 3/13/2010
0-1 ---------- 5/2/2207 --------- 5/12/2009
After 1/15/05 (EB-1 denial)
- Left the country on 6/15/05 (less than 6 months)
- During this time, applied for O-1 visa and got approved
- Got visa stamping in Chennai with O-1 visa
Do you see any issues with my response ?
Please submit evidence of lawful presence from October 1998 until August 17, 2007.
The documents may include the following:
A) a photo copy of form I-797 for all extensions and change of status
B) photo copy of form I-20 or IAP66 school records (front and back) including all school annotations
c) Photocopy (front and back) of applicant's Form I-94 Arrival/Departure Record
Below is my immigration timeline
CLASS ------ VALID FROM ------ VALID TO ------ Comments
H1-B -------- 5/16/1995 -------- 5/17/1998
H1-B -------- 5/17/1998 -------- 5/17/2001
H1-B -------- 12/23/1999 ------- 6/30/2001
H1-B -------- 7/1/2001 --------- 9/30/2001
0-1 --------- 10/3/2001 ------ 10/1/2004 ------ Stamped in Chennai
EAD --------- 8/4/2004 -------- 8/3/2005 ------- EB1 denied 1/15/2005
0-1 --------- 5/13/2005 ------- 5/12/2008 ------ Stamped in Chennai
0-1 --------- 4/3/2007 --------- 3/13/2010
0-1 ---------- 5/2/2207 --------- 5/12/2009
After 1/15/05 (EB-1 denial)
- Left the country on 6/15/05 (less than 6 months)
- During this time, applied for O-1 visa and got approved
- Got visa stamping in Chennai with O-1 visa
Do you see any issues with my response ?
more...
pappu
04-13 11:16 AM
We have to first have confidence on our own strengths. We are a 10.5K strong group and well poised to become the largest grassroots advocacy organization of high skilled immigrants.
Key lawmaker offices now know us. We have appeared in top media. We have the best Lobbyists in the country working for us.
No other organization can claim such success in 1 year since inception. All we need is support of $20/month from members in order to continue this effort and grow it.
Key lawmaker offices now know us. We have appeared in top media. We have the best Lobbyists in the country working for us.
No other organization can claim such success in 1 year since inception. All we need is support of $20/month from members in order to continue this effort and grow it.
hair tattoos for men. tribal
larryking
10-22 06:55 PM
485Mbe4001 thanks for your reply. If you look at visa bulletin - Priority date for EB 3 is 1 Aug 2002. So from your reply, I gather, that they would look at processing all the applications they have on file from 2002 upto 2007 for "Latvia". And only if they end up with some visa numbers remaining due to lack of applicants, will those number be transferred to other countries.... Right??
more...
mps
05-13 01:09 AM
Well I was just thinking about it -
1) Can we form a labor union?
I think H1 worker has equal rights as any other native worker
2) Other idea is to form a Credit union with multiple goals -
a) Immigration reforms (funded by the Credit Union)
b) Providing financial services such as - credit cards, mortgage, car and home insurance, other personal loans etc.
c) Credit union will provide us financial strength at the same time attract others to join as they stand to gain all financial benefits from day 1, after landing in US of A.
just my thoughts ...
1) Can we form a labor union?
I think H1 worker has equal rights as any other native worker
2) Other idea is to form a Credit union with multiple goals -
a) Immigration reforms (funded by the Credit Union)
b) Providing financial services such as - credit cards, mortgage, car and home insurance, other personal loans etc.
c) Credit union will provide us financial strength at the same time attract others to join as they stand to gain all financial benefits from day 1, after landing in US of A.
just my thoughts ...
hot tribal tattoos for men on side
gc_chahiye
10-31 03:22 AM
WTF are you talking about, man??? It was said hundreds times: once one use EAD, h(is|er) H(1|4) is GONE!!! Per my lawyer, if you filed H1 extension before expiration, you are ok, in this case ext. filing date make sense.
H1 status does end when you use the EAD, but that does not mean that you can never ever go back to H1. By getting a new petition, or your extension approved, and possibly having to re-enter the US, you can reactivate the H1 anytime. Its not all a one-way street.
See http://www.murthy.com/chatlogs/chat0106_P.html
Chat User : While in AOS, after using EAD and 6 years of H1B is expired, can the person change from EAD to H1B (1 year extension) if person's EAD extension is taking time?
Attorney Murthy : Although there is no specific mention in the INS law or regulations on this specific issue, the INS has alluded that a person should be able to file an H1B 1-year extension, even from outside the U.S. or within the U.S. Worst case scenario is that the person may have to travel abroad and reenter on the H1B status by applying for the H1B visa abroad, but we believe even that should not be necessary as long as the person always maintained valid legal status until filing the AOS and thereafter.
H1 status does end when you use the EAD, but that does not mean that you can never ever go back to H1. By getting a new petition, or your extension approved, and possibly having to re-enter the US, you can reactivate the H1 anytime. Its not all a one-way street.
See http://www.murthy.com/chatlogs/chat0106_P.html
Chat User : While in AOS, after using EAD and 6 years of H1B is expired, can the person change from EAD to H1B (1 year extension) if person's EAD extension is taking time?
Attorney Murthy : Although there is no specific mention in the INS law or regulations on this specific issue, the INS has alluded that a person should be able to file an H1B 1-year extension, even from outside the U.S. or within the U.S. Worst case scenario is that the person may have to travel abroad and reenter on the H1B status by applying for the H1B visa abroad, but we believe even that should not be necessary as long as the person always maintained valid legal status until filing the AOS and thereafter.
more...
house cross tattoos for men on arm.
glus
03-19 09:25 AM
i am switching job using ac21. my current employer trusts immigration attorneys. and as expected attorneys suggested (since they get paid) that company should withdraws both H1 and I-140 after I leave. I know I am safe, however USCIS will definitly send me an RFE at time of processing my application and I will have to answer that. So I am trying to put my side to them saying that if it is optional, they should not.
So my question is, does the Law say that an employer has to withdraw all (or some) immigration petitions after employee leaves ? I was trying to search but I couldn't find anywhere where it said that it is mandated.
Also as far I could tell from forum posts, there is no set form which needs to be filled by employeers to withdraw the application. That would seem to suggest that it is not mandated.
On flip side, if it is mandated, then why most of the employers do not withdraw the application ?
NO, period.
So my question is, does the Law say that an employer has to withdraw all (or some) immigration petitions after employee leaves ? I was trying to search but I couldn't find anywhere where it said that it is mandated.
Also as far I could tell from forum posts, there is no set form which needs to be filled by employeers to withdraw the application. That would seem to suggest that it is not mandated.
On flip side, if it is mandated, then why most of the employers do not withdraw the application ?
NO, period.
tattoo tribal tattoos for men on side
slc_ut
05-28 05:31 PM
I am planning to take visa appointment in Chennai consulate for my 8th year H-1B extension and my wife's H-4. When i checked the vfs website yesterday, dates were open for last week of Sep'2006. Today it is already showing only dates in Nov'2006 as open dates. Howcome Oct'2006 dates never showed up. Were the appointments finished that fast for Oct'2006 ? Any other members who observed this, please post your thoughts.
more...
pictures Tribal Tattoos For Men
gc2009gc
10-30 03:05 PM
I have future GC filed from Company X, the priority date is February 2006.
I am currently working for Company Y on H1B. This H1B will expire in April 2009. Company Y is also ready to file my GC and I would like to work with Company Y till by future GC is approved, my question is
If I have already filed for 485, EAD and AP through Company X, scenario will it be advisable to file another labour and I-140 through Company Y now?
What could be the implications?
I am currently working for Company Y on H1B. This H1B will expire in April 2009. Company Y is also ready to file my GC and I would like to work with Company Y till by future GC is approved, my question is
If I have already filed for 485, EAD and AP through Company X, scenario will it be advisable to file another labour and I-140 through Company Y now?
What could be the implications?
dresses Tribal Tattoos For Men - The
Berkeleybee
09-01 08:39 PM
Michael Cutler is a Fellow of the Center for Immigration Studies, a notoriously anti-immigrant organization.
It is part of the John Tanton network of anti-immigrant organizations (includes NumbersUSA, FAIR etc.). See here (http://www.splcenter.org/intel/intelreport/article.jsp?sid=72)
He is not currently at CIS, he is an ex-employee of the INS, and given his sentiments I am glad he is an ex-employee.
Google the guy, you'll see his rage all over the web.
These hearings were organized by our best friend Sensenbrenner. Other policymakers by now ought to recognize FAIR, NumbersUSA and its ilk what what they are.
best,
Berkeleybee
It is part of the John Tanton network of anti-immigrant organizations (includes NumbersUSA, FAIR etc.). See here (http://www.splcenter.org/intel/intelreport/article.jsp?sid=72)
He is not currently at CIS, he is an ex-employee of the INS, and given his sentiments I am glad he is an ex-employee.
Google the guy, you'll see his rage all over the web.
These hearings were organized by our best friend Sensenbrenner. Other policymakers by now ought to recognize FAIR, NumbersUSA and its ilk what what they are.
best,
Berkeleybee
more...
makeup tribal tattoos for men on
santb1975
02-15 10:28 PM
^^^
girlfriend tribal tattoos for men on
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)
hairstyles mens tribal tattoos. side dragon tribal tattoos mens tribal tattoos. side
GCard_Dream
01-31 01:09 PM
Hmmm.. I wonder if that's really the case. H1B extensions past 6 years is only allowed if the petitioner :
1. has a approved labor and 365 days have passed. OR
2. has a approved I-140
Now if the underlying I-140 is revoked which was the basis for the H1B extension then I would think that H1B itself would be invalid. However, if that's not the case and USCIS doesn't invalidate the H1B then it's really great. The only other remaining issue I can see is how do you further extend your H1B after the current on expires because you won't have a approved 140 to support it. Are you just out of luck?
As per the law, your H1B will still be valid even in if I-140 is revoked. However, the only flip side is one will lose the old priority date.
For sure, this is exactly outlined in the law. I have known some cases who are working successfully and legally on H1Bs even after their I-140s revoked (by the way one of them is in 8th year of H1B)
Im 100% sure about what i said. For better clarification, one can contact murthy.com or rajiv.s.khanna
1. has a approved labor and 365 days have passed. OR
2. has a approved I-140
Now if the underlying I-140 is revoked which was the basis for the H1B extension then I would think that H1B itself would be invalid. However, if that's not the case and USCIS doesn't invalidate the H1B then it's really great. The only other remaining issue I can see is how do you further extend your H1B after the current on expires because you won't have a approved 140 to support it. Are you just out of luck?
As per the law, your H1B will still be valid even in if I-140 is revoked. However, the only flip side is one will lose the old priority date.
For sure, this is exactly outlined in the law. I have known some cases who are working successfully and legally on H1Bs even after their I-140s revoked (by the way one of them is in 8th year of H1B)
Im 100% sure about what i said. For better clarification, one can contact murthy.com or rajiv.s.khanna
gcformeornot
04-07 01:48 PM
I hope it doesn't affect Employee (original labor) who have left GC employer using AC-21 with approved I-140 and after 180 days.
This interpretation is game changer for life of many EB immigrants. It should be implemented for going forward but at least should not affect those who used it by the interpretation of that time.
it affects the ORIGINAL applicant. AAO says the burden is on original applicant to prove wrongdoing by either employer or substituted new employee...
"applicant failed to establish that the substituted alien improperly adjusted status"
This interpretation is game changer for life of many EB immigrants. It should be implemented for going forward but at least should not affect those who used it by the interpretation of that time.
it affects the ORIGINAL applicant. AAO says the burden is on original applicant to prove wrongdoing by either employer or substituted new employee...
"applicant failed to establish that the substituted alien improperly adjusted status"
sobers
04-07 09:09 PM
Yes this is funny indeed:-)
Seems this guy is like an Ogre...
Anyhow, faxes is only one aspect. We need to try to make some personal contact with the staff, perhaps visit his DC/Milwaukee offices. If we can focus our energies there, i sincerely think we can reap greater rewards.
I sent you guys a pm. check it out.
Seems this guy is like an Ogre...
Anyhow, faxes is only one aspect. We need to try to make some personal contact with the staff, perhaps visit his DC/Milwaukee offices. If we can focus our energies there, i sincerely think we can reap greater rewards.
I sent you guys a pm. check it out.
No comments:
Post a Comment