ujjvalkoul
01-25 04:01 PM
Wow!! Thats great guys...way to go!!
ArunAntonio
08-31 12:33 AM
And I can get your country registered.
The registration comes with
- A free template to help you draft a constition
- Free template designs for the flag of the nation
- A dummies guide on how to make your country the most powerful nation.
- A dummies guide on fool proof immigration laws to your country
- A free guide on the mistakes of the empires of the past.
To avail the above you will have to send a cashiers cheque in $$ (Your countries currency is not accepted .. yet)
-- All monies from this transaction will go towards sponsoring IV members for the Rally.
-- Vote here --> http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/showthread.php?t=12441
The registration comes with
- A free template to help you draft a constition
- Free template designs for the flag of the nation
- A dummies guide on how to make your country the most powerful nation.
- A dummies guide on fool proof immigration laws to your country
- A free guide on the mistakes of the empires of the past.
To avail the above you will have to send a cashiers cheque in $$ (Your countries currency is not accepted .. yet)
-- All monies from this transaction will go towards sponsoring IV members for the Rally.
-- Vote here --> http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/showthread.php?t=12441
santb1975
02-15 04:35 PM
^^^
Blog Feeds
01-26 08:40 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)
more...
frostrated
09-14 04:35 PM
I got it.
I think it will take like 1month atleast to get LCA. After LCA approval they can apply for H1 .
At this stage they might have spend money on LCA only + for attorney fee if any.
Attorneys may charge the full fee upfront so they may have incurred full legal fee , minus H1 fees.
H1 Govt fee is payid by employer so they cannot ask that . but if they paid for attorney , then they may ask for it.
Your concern about a additional insert into the contract papers. Are the contract pages numbered? if so you are safe. if not :rolleyes:
Any money spent by the employer for employment related expenses are employer expenses. you are not liable for them. If they push, inform DoL. Employment in the US is At-Will. The only clause they can enforce is to prevent you from using any of the knowledge you acquired with them (non-compete contract). As you have not worked with them, you are not yet an employee, and there is no legal standing for them to come after you.
I think it will take like 1month atleast to get LCA. After LCA approval they can apply for H1 .
At this stage they might have spend money on LCA only + for attorney fee if any.
Attorneys may charge the full fee upfront so they may have incurred full legal fee , minus H1 fees.
H1 Govt fee is payid by employer so they cannot ask that . but if they paid for attorney , then they may ask for it.
Your concern about a additional insert into the contract papers. Are the contract pages numbered? if so you are safe. if not :rolleyes:
Any money spent by the employer for employment related expenses are employer expenses. you are not liable for them. If they push, inform DoL. Employment in the US is At-Will. The only clause they can enforce is to prevent you from using any of the knowledge you acquired with them (non-compete contract). As you have not worked with them, you are not yet an employee, and there is no legal standing for them to come after you.
purgan
02-18 12:02 AM
Actually I had suggested a phone/fax campaign to Durbins office. The Anti-immigration/protectionist organizations such as Programmers Guild have targeted this senator for a reason.....but no one is getting our point of view across to him.
I don't think he's anti-immigrant, but the fact is no one from our community has reached out to him in an organized manner.
I suggest we start a phone/fax and flower compaign....
I don't think he's anti-immigrant, but the fact is no one from our community has reached out to him in an organized manner.
I suggest we start a phone/fax and flower compaign....
more...
psaxena
06-10 05:39 PM
wow thats a news.. as your alias is "vivid" write something "different"(vividh) which we dun know.
USCIS tops any other US pubic office in these 3 qualities
1. Most greedy
2. Most arrogant
3. Most inefficient
Reason is simple, their customers are mostly non-US citizens. Their prime objective is to earn as much money as they can for the US treasury, if that means 'Screw Immigrants' than let it be, who cares ?
So any positive things like 10 years EAD/AP are dreams which will never come true...We should certainly put our case for 3 years EAD/AP combined document.
USCIS tops any other US pubic office in these 3 qualities
1. Most greedy
2. Most arrogant
3. Most inefficient
Reason is simple, their customers are mostly non-US citizens. Their prime objective is to earn as much money as they can for the US treasury, if that means 'Screw Immigrants' than let it be, who cares ?
So any positive things like 10 years EAD/AP are dreams which will never come true...We should certainly put our case for 3 years EAD/AP combined document.
cjain
11-13 09:32 AM
Tom,
This is completely false. Even if the employer revokes an un approved i-140, the I-485 is not affected if the following conditions are met:
- I-140 should've been "approvable when filed"
- New job should be in same/similar field
Read the Aytes Memo (google: aytes memo) for more clarification.
and stop spreading lies
The AC21 can be used only if the following 2 conditions are met:
a. I140 is approved.
b. 180 days after the receipt date of I1485.
One may leave the employer even before the 180 days or before the 140 approval with a risk that the emploeyer will not revoke I140 and no RFE comes for 485. The safest is to use AC21 only after the I140 approval.
If 180 days passed (485 receipt date) and if I140 is approved, there is no problem even if the employer revokes the I140 after you move the company. You may get an RFE to produce the offer letter from the new company.
This is completely false. Even if the employer revokes an un approved i-140, the I-485 is not affected if the following conditions are met:
- I-140 should've been "approvable when filed"
- New job should be in same/similar field
Read the Aytes Memo (google: aytes memo) for more clarification.
and stop spreading lies
The AC21 can be used only if the following 2 conditions are met:
a. I140 is approved.
b. 180 days after the receipt date of I1485.
One may leave the employer even before the 180 days or before the 140 approval with a risk that the emploeyer will not revoke I140 and no RFE comes for 485. The safest is to use AC21 only after the I140 approval.
If 180 days passed (485 receipt date) and if I140 is approved, there is no problem even if the employer revokes the I140 after you move the company. You may get an RFE to produce the offer letter from the new company.
more...
humdesi
02-17 03:59 AM
Which was effectively nullified by
"Default Re: Predicted Visa Bulletin movement
Nothing was said, but logically, unless there is worldwide EB3 movement, EB2 for China and India can't advance. EB for India and China have already maxed out for the year and all additional movement is based on leftovers from the rest of the world."
"Default Re: Predicted Visa Bulletin movement
Nothing was said, but logically, unless there is worldwide EB3 movement, EB2 for China and India can't advance. EB for India and China have already maxed out for the year and all additional movement is based on leftovers from the rest of the world."
pitha
06-11 12:25 PM
if you saw any of the news shows over the weekend everybody says the chances of this passing the senate are about 33% and even if it passes the senate it might not pass the house. even kyl was skeptical about its chances. this is our chance, lets oppose this bill tooth and nail. no bill is better bill for us as long as kennedy, kyl and durbin are around. please oppose this bill
more...
japs19
01-22 11:18 AM
Red my other posts where I wrote my experience as I was asked the same question. But here's the answers to your questions in nut shell.
If you have a valid H-1 visa then just stick to it and don't us AP unless you have to.
If CBP officer don't ask, you don't tell, but if s/he does, be HONEST and tell them that you don't. It will really stir the pot but politely tell them that GC on Employment Base is for future employment and that has been my understanding and in good faith my intentions are to go and work for that employer.
They can really harass you for hours like they did me for 6 hrs and then was told to go downtown office. BTW just on a positive note, my AP has been stamped and I am good to go.
There is no law that defines that you have to be working for the original petitioner while your application is being processed but just ethically it's a much better situation if you are employed by the same employer. CBP offficer's argument was that "what's the guarantee that you will go and work for that employer after approval of your GC? or what is the guarantee that they will have that position open for all these years as it may take a very long time?" I told them with a chuckle on my face that if it hadn't taken USCIS 3-4 years to process that application, that wouldn't be the question but they are still processing my file...I mean how many people you gave an offer letter who you want to start after 4 years as a CBP officer?" He gave me a rude smile and walked away to secondary check section.
Anyways....long story short, be honest, have patience and don't show desperation to enter the country.
Good luck...
Looks like Immigration Officers at Port of Entry are asking the AP entry individuals if they are still working from the GC sponsoring company.
I am planning to travel on AP and is not working anymore for the GC sponsoring company.
1. What would be the reaction of the Immigration Officer if he finds out that I am NOT working from the sponsoring company?
2. What documents should I carry to ensure the I will be allowed to re-enter to US on AP with my current non-GC sponsoring company offer letter, pay-stubs etc?
PLease advise
If you have a valid H-1 visa then just stick to it and don't us AP unless you have to.
If CBP officer don't ask, you don't tell, but if s/he does, be HONEST and tell them that you don't. It will really stir the pot but politely tell them that GC on Employment Base is for future employment and that has been my understanding and in good faith my intentions are to go and work for that employer.
They can really harass you for hours like they did me for 6 hrs and then was told to go downtown office. BTW just on a positive note, my AP has been stamped and I am good to go.
There is no law that defines that you have to be working for the original petitioner while your application is being processed but just ethically it's a much better situation if you are employed by the same employer. CBP offficer's argument was that "what's the guarantee that you will go and work for that employer after approval of your GC? or what is the guarantee that they will have that position open for all these years as it may take a very long time?" I told them with a chuckle on my face that if it hadn't taken USCIS 3-4 years to process that application, that wouldn't be the question but they are still processing my file...I mean how many people you gave an offer letter who you want to start after 4 years as a CBP officer?" He gave me a rude smile and walked away to secondary check section.
Anyways....long story short, be honest, have patience and don't show desperation to enter the country.
Good luck...
Looks like Immigration Officers at Port of Entry are asking the AP entry individuals if they are still working from the GC sponsoring company.
I am planning to travel on AP and is not working anymore for the GC sponsoring company.
1. What would be the reaction of the Immigration Officer if he finds out that I am NOT working from the sponsoring company?
2. What documents should I carry to ensure the I will be allowed to re-enter to US on AP with my current non-GC sponsoring company offer letter, pay-stubs etc?
PLease advise
hpandey
06-07 11:27 AM
Thx a lot. I was so scared abt tht. I already have a job luckily my previous employer dind't cancel my H1 so used it and joined in a new firm
But these people started sendin' mails and callin' me so was jst scared will i have to loose tht money for nuthin' as well movin' from PHX to NY coseted me almost like $15000 more over tension in findin' a new job i was totally screwed for the past 2 months...
Thanks a lot again i will contact DOL @ the earliest
Why are you writing as if you are writing a text message ? Are you writing from a computer or your phone ? I have a doubt about your authenticity. When did you come to US. Is this your first employer ? If you are not new you should be knowing the answers to all these questions ..
But these people started sendin' mails and callin' me so was jst scared will i have to loose tht money for nuthin' as well movin' from PHX to NY coseted me almost like $15000 more over tension in findin' a new job i was totally screwed for the past 2 months...
Thanks a lot again i will contact DOL @ the earliest
Why are you writing as if you are writing a text message ? Are you writing from a computer or your phone ? I have a doubt about your authenticity. When did you come to US. Is this your first employer ? If you are not new you should be knowing the answers to all these questions ..
more...
royus77
07-12 06:58 PM
fellow legal immigrations - this is my first posting on immigrationvoice.
i have been following this site very closely and first of all let me congratulate the IV team - you are all doing a terrific job!
now, i have read a lot of threads where employees say their employers do not give them the I-140 receipt numbers or the approved I-140s. this is sick! this is worse than bonded labor. employers with good ethics do not play such dirty tricks. this just plain sucks :mad:
clearly, there are rules from the uscis itself that you can port your priority date to another firm as long as your labor + 140 have been approved. so NOBODY has the moral right to withhold your 140 or labor approvals. i keep hearing that "140 belongs to the company" .. good.. but what the heck does that mean ? does that mean there are laws that permit PD porting but in a way you cannot really do that coz certain companies are not willing to give u the approved 140s?... is this FAIR ? or is it time to put this as another ACTION ITEM to make it illegal for companies to withold 140 from their employees especially if they want to switch jobs ??? something to chew on...
peace!
You are trying to fight against Business Lobby ...It wont work
i have been following this site very closely and first of all let me congratulate the IV team - you are all doing a terrific job!
now, i have read a lot of threads where employees say their employers do not give them the I-140 receipt numbers or the approved I-140s. this is sick! this is worse than bonded labor. employers with good ethics do not play such dirty tricks. this just plain sucks :mad:
clearly, there are rules from the uscis itself that you can port your priority date to another firm as long as your labor + 140 have been approved. so NOBODY has the moral right to withhold your 140 or labor approvals. i keep hearing that "140 belongs to the company" .. good.. but what the heck does that mean ? does that mean there are laws that permit PD porting but in a way you cannot really do that coz certain companies are not willing to give u the approved 140s?... is this FAIR ? or is it time to put this as another ACTION ITEM to make it illegal for companies to withold 140 from their employees especially if they want to switch jobs ??? something to chew on...
peace!
You are trying to fight against Business Lobby ...It wont work
admin
04-08 09:22 AM
I have changed the title of this thread to make it less controversial.
more...
JeffDG
01-27 07:09 AM
This bill is probably stuck in some committee and will not see the light!
Everyone here is talking about the DV if eliminated would benefit the EB, does the FB have a say in it?
The bill in question specifically allocates the 55,000 visas from the DV Lottery to EB visas.
Everyone here is talking about the DV if eliminated would benefit the EB, does the FB have a say in it?
The bill in question specifically allocates the 55,000 visas from the DV Lottery to EB visas.
![justin bieber eyes. [Photos] Justin Bieber Getting](https://lh3.googleusercontent.com/blogger_img_proxy/AEn0k_ucb9gvwrqxQv7mrGy7mMEK1lWLkR07vWptYHuPKQ_U3mgpZ8cCEA8HHsLAc7ppkPFRDQJstNviTwKm55lrnb3o1POoa5l6ulajFVr9wLOu0OrB5JwVhY66aGHWOuOSaGH5chQ_2Rr4bpUkpfo3RbEibc3EP6Ve2SAGV_QjivDvUOuC9tqe2LZoWQ=s0-d "[Photos] Justin Bieber Getting")
wait_2010
07-25 02:39 PM
I believe people who suggest that they follow career before GC are right to an extent. But to me the you have to chose..losing freedom to chose ur employer vs losing one career oppoertunity ...If u have GC you can chose from other opportunities and surely there will be plenty..Especially u r close to GC, it might be worth the risk and wait to get GC..even if u get an EAD , it will make life simple for ur wife and urself as she can get a job in any place and any employer and u will have the same option...Nothing beats freedom...
It seems odd that the BIG consulting company wants to use EB3 to tie u for long time as they know the advantage for themselves..Ironical ..rules to protect americans end up hurting them because companies love H1Bs as they can use them as they want...
It seems odd that the BIG consulting company wants to use EB3 to tie u for long time as they know the advantage for themselves..Ironical ..rules to protect americans end up hurting them because companies love H1Bs as they can use them as they want...
more...
EB3-Philippines
08-30 09:48 AM
Hi
tanx for ur reply. I already quit the job since i could not bear him..any more nd his mental torture...I ma planing to give a compliant to DOL and wanna c if it can be helpful to me..Si i cnat record anymore i tohught of recording it but never really got a courage to do that. I will c if i cna sue him...
All the Best. Remember that you are legal resident in this country paying Taxes. Go for it in filing a complaint with DOL , Better Business Bureau. Atleast you can have a good night sleep after that.
tanx for ur reply. I already quit the job since i could not bear him..any more nd his mental torture...I ma planing to give a compliant to DOL and wanna c if it can be helpful to me..Si i cnat record anymore i tohught of recording it but never really got a courage to do that. I will c if i cna sue him...
All the Best. Remember that you are legal resident in this country paying Taxes. Go for it in filing a complaint with DOL , Better Business Bureau. Atleast you can have a good night sleep after that.
natrajs
04-16 12:11 PM
Hi folks,
Just got back from UK on Friday after a month of family time, medicals and our embassy interview! Wanted to let you all know that we were approved and happily back in the US!!
Congrats on the latest admin wins and movements in campaigns/projects. I wanted to say a huge thank you but not farewell to the many kind folks who kept my spirits high in the short time I have been with IV:
abhijitp, needhelp, digital2k, paskal, gsc999, waiting4gc, pappu, chanduv23, santb1975, nolaindian32, walking dude, ja1hind, logiclife and many more. All of you rock and America is very lucky to have such genuine and brilliant people like you. I wish you the very best for your own journey.
I will be around for sure, just have to concentrate on securing some work and life for a bit, finally!
my best :)
Congrats and Best Wishes. Continue to support IV
Just got back from UK on Friday after a month of family time, medicals and our embassy interview! Wanted to let you all know that we were approved and happily back in the US!!
Congrats on the latest admin wins and movements in campaigns/projects. I wanted to say a huge thank you but not farewell to the many kind folks who kept my spirits high in the short time I have been with IV:
abhijitp, needhelp, digital2k, paskal, gsc999, waiting4gc, pappu, chanduv23, santb1975, nolaindian32, walking dude, ja1hind, logiclife and many more. All of you rock and America is very lucky to have such genuine and brilliant people like you. I wish you the very best for your own journey.
I will be around for sure, just have to concentrate on securing some work and life for a bit, finally!
my best :)
Congrats and Best Wishes. Continue to support IV
leoindiano
07-09 05:26 PM
What is strange ?? He used PP in June when it was still available. USCIS suspended PP only for new cases to process what they already had.
I can't wait to get the chance to upgrade mine .... not that I will do anything with it for a while (other than H1B extension) but is nice to have the approval in your pocket.
:rolleyes:
Dude, please read completely. He said there was no update on USCIS case status check online but he got approval notice. Isnt that strange?
I can't wait to get the chance to upgrade mine .... not that I will do anything with it for a while (other than H1B extension) but is nice to have the approval in your pocket.
:rolleyes:
Dude, please read completely. He said there was no update on USCIS case status check online but he got approval notice. Isnt that strange?
Becks
08-16 05:51 PM
I had my PA DL renewed last year. All they asked was the original I-485 receipt, Passport. They dont consider EADs.
binadh
10-06 09:40 AM
Your's is crossed 15 month stage, so you can ask your lawyer to enquire about it...
Hope fully DOL will approve yours soon...
Good luck
Is there anything specific that can be done after 15 months? I was justing waiting for someone to look at my case at DOL. Can you please shed some more light on this?
I tried to find information on the web, but I could not find anything anything particular to a case pending for 15 months or more.
Please share your understanding with us all. I'm sure there are a lot of people who are in the similar situation.
Thanks.
Hope fully DOL will approve yours soon...
Good luck
Is there anything specific that can be done after 15 months? I was justing waiting for someone to look at my case at DOL. Can you please shed some more light on this?
I tried to find information on the web, but I could not find anything anything particular to a case pending for 15 months or more.
Please share your understanding with us all. I'm sure there are a lot of people who are in the similar situation.
Thanks.
No comments:
Post a Comment