TeddyKoochu
10-15 08:29 AM
Teddy
Is there any source on any site which gives idea that they are thinking of it. Since we have close to 800 members who joined for filling 485 when date is not current we can ask IV core to make this campaign officially and push for this one. Even we know 800 are not a good strength still it may help if govt is willing
gc_on_demand - Here are the links from other sites.
From Ron Gotcher's Forum
http://www.immigration-information.com/forums/general-immigration-questions/10321-uscis-considering-permit-pre-filing-i-485-applications-approved-i-140-a.html
I could not find anything on any official site. There are blogs going on all popular immigration sites on this topic.
I believe that since the agencies are thinking about this provision (Even though this has been in the news since a year) has better likelihood of being implemented.
skgs200,aksharan, cbpds the EAD / AP part appears to be disputed nobody is clear on this. Yes there maybe a fee for this but it does bring us a step closer.
Is there any source on any site which gives idea that they are thinking of it. Since we have close to 800 members who joined for filling 485 when date is not current we can ask IV core to make this campaign officially and push for this one. Even we know 800 are not a good strength still it may help if govt is willing
gc_on_demand - Here are the links from other sites.
From Ron Gotcher's Forum
http://www.immigration-information.com/forums/general-immigration-questions/10321-uscis-considering-permit-pre-filing-i-485-applications-approved-i-140-a.html
I could not find anything on any official site. There are blogs going on all popular immigration sites on this topic.
I believe that since the agencies are thinking about this provision (Even though this has been in the news since a year) has better likelihood of being implemented.
skgs200,aksharan, cbpds the EAD / AP part appears to be disputed nobody is clear on this. Yes there maybe a fee for this but it does bring us a step closer.
wallpaper Tribal Angel Wings
augustus
10-08 07:42 PM
Interesting question! Logically, as soon as a H4 holder starts using EAD the H4 becomes invalid. As long as the primary is in valid H1B status, the dependent should be able get back to H4 status even if the 485 is denied.
However, I am not sure how someone can changes status from AOS (due to using EAD) to H4. May be getting out of the U.S. and come back as H4 again? Anybody has any idea?
I think this was my lawyer's contention too when she described to me about being in EAD as well as H-4. As long as my husband is in H-1, I would be in H-4 contrary to most discussions that take place here. I think USCIS, has no clear explanation for this situation!!
Advance parole is similar to this, you have H1 but you become parolee. I don't understand. Any other comments from other applicants?
However, I am not sure how someone can changes status from AOS (due to using EAD) to H4. May be getting out of the U.S. and come back as H4 again? Anybody has any idea?
I think this was my lawyer's contention too when she described to me about being in EAD as well as H-4. As long as my husband is in H-1, I would be in H-4 contrary to most discussions that take place here. I think USCIS, has no clear explanation for this situation!!
Advance parole is similar to this, you have H1 but you become parolee. I don't understand. Any other comments from other applicants?
piyu7444
04-01 02:45 PM
CantLeaveAmerica
The officer asked several questions
Where do I work
What is my job title
Am I married
Do I have Kids
What is my current address and proof of it.
What is my wedding date
Hav I travelled out of USA from last entry
Did I ever get any money in form of help from Immigration
Checked my pay chq (current) and w-2 for 2007.
Asked for Employment verification letter
Asked to show I 94 card
Asked all the questions which I guess are on the 485 form, the questions are generally not relevant to people like us: Examples are below
Do I have any illegal kids (hahaha)
Was I ever involved with any terrorist org
Have I ever tried to being in ilegals to USA
Have I ever worked as a Prostitute (lol)
In particular the only question which surprised me was when I was asked to descirbe what my job responsibilities are....I was prepared for it and the officer was matching it with the job description used for my PERM
The officer was very nice and helpful. I got done in like 20-25 min and she said that the case is approvable. We just need to wait for the Visa #.
Hope this helps people out here........Good Luck ALL.
The officer asked several questions
Where do I work
What is my job title
Am I married
Do I have Kids
What is my current address and proof of it.
What is my wedding date
Hav I travelled out of USA from last entry
Did I ever get any money in form of help from Immigration
Checked my pay chq (current) and w-2 for 2007.
Asked for Employment verification letter
Asked to show I 94 card
Asked all the questions which I guess are on the 485 form, the questions are generally not relevant to people like us: Examples are below
Do I have any illegal kids (hahaha)
Was I ever involved with any terrorist org
Have I ever tried to being in ilegals to USA
Have I ever worked as a Prostitute (lol)
In particular the only question which surprised me was when I was asked to descirbe what my job responsibilities are....I was prepared for it and the officer was matching it with the job description used for my PERM
The officer was very nice and helpful. I got done in like 20-25 min and she said that the case is approvable. We just need to wait for the Visa #.
Hope this helps people out here........Good Luck ALL.
2011 Tribal Wing Tattoo by
bigboy007
06-08 02:14 AM
true , but not sure how much hez gonna bend , he stillseems upbeat ?
more...
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.
suriajay12
04-06 07:44 AM
Very good one.. USCIS is acknowledging here the severe wait periods. A good sign when (if) trying to fix a problem. Recognizing that there is one..
Good job in posting this article.
Good job in posting this article.
more...
belmontboy
01-19 04:05 PM
Not funny.
If an EB3 is so good he will not apply in EB3. He will apply in EB1. I am asking about people who were EB3 but became big after getting Green Card.
can name few who became "big" literally (--fat)
If an EB3 is so good he will not apply in EB3. He will apply in EB1. I am asking about people who were EB3 but became big after getting Green Card.
can name few who became "big" literally (--fat)
2010 tribal tattoos of angel wings.
ExoVoid
06-13 03:53 PM
I worked that much out, but it shouldn't throw the percentage calculations.
more...
sanjose
07-24 07:04 PM
I am a july 2nd 2007 filer with notice date Aug 23rd 2007. In response to my SR, I received the following reply:
"...... There is not currently a visa available to you based upon your country of birth, your employment-based category and your priority date. Your I-485 application cannot be adjudicated until there is a visa available to you. Your case is therefore awaiting visa availability for your category and further review by an Adjudications Officer. ......."
Many people have said that the July 2nd filers cases have been pre-adjudicated.
However the SR response clearly says that my case will not be adjudicated untill visa # will be avalable.
Does anybody know what is meant by pre-adjudication ?
What is difference between adjudication and pre-adjudication?
Thanks in advance for your replies. Any reply will be appreciated specially from the attorneys.
"pre-"
"...... There is not currently a visa available to you based upon your country of birth, your employment-based category and your priority date. Your I-485 application cannot be adjudicated until there is a visa available to you. Your case is therefore awaiting visa availability for your category and further review by an Adjudications Officer. ......."
Many people have said that the July 2nd filers cases have been pre-adjudicated.
However the SR response clearly says that my case will not be adjudicated untill visa # will be avalable.
Does anybody know what is meant by pre-adjudication ?
What is difference between adjudication and pre-adjudication?
Thanks in advance for your replies. Any reply will be appreciated specially from the attorneys.
"pre-"
hair Tribal Wing Tattoo Designs angel wings tattoo picture
Almond
07-13 03:46 PM
ROFL buehler you are too funny!!
PD_DEC2002 I never even realized there were messages when going over those squares, how interesting!
PD_DEC2002 I never even realized there were messages when going over those squares, how interesting!
more...
iad2ead
09-17 09:17 PM
One of my friend's collegue had issues in getting his citizenship because he changed
job in less than 6 months of getting GC. Don't know too many details but I know that
citizenship will have issues..so pls check it out.
cheers
Iad
Hi,
I recieved my green card last month through Consular Processing and now getting a good offer. Is it OK to join another company just after 1 month of green card or I should wait for some more time. NEED SUGGESTIONS from experts:D
job in less than 6 months of getting GC. Don't know too many details but I know that
citizenship will have issues..so pls check it out.
cheers
Iad
Hi,
I recieved my green card last month through Consular Processing and now getting a good offer. Is it OK to join another company just after 1 month of green card or I should wait for some more time. NEED SUGGESTIONS from experts:D
hot Angel Wings Tattoo
hopefulgc
08-21 11:26 AM
Man, I lost my patience with them long back.
My case is NSC-EAC-NSC
I keep a log of anything "useful" I am told every time I speak to them. And usually, the first few mins are wasted in them giving me wrong info, me telling them what they told me last time and them finally agreeing with it after re-checking their screens.
btw .. it is indeed super-frustrating and unacceptable they way they are bouncing your case around.
Why is USCIS forgetting that we are paying for their third grade services?
I broke my politeness today.USCIS inconsistency broke the limits for me.
My case was filed in Nebarska then tranferred to Texas then as soon as the priority date became current, last month, it was transferred to California.
I talked yesterday to customer service and it by chance got transferred to California Service Center where the officer told me that my case was transferred back to Texas Service Center on August 14, 2008. She also told me to call TSC to confirm it.
I called today the National Customer Service Center (NCSC) to confirm it and the lady tells me that the case is still in California and she has no more infomation about it. I told her about my call yesterday.
Lady: How could you have ever called CSC because their phone numbers are not public
Me: I called the same number and for some reason it got transferred to CSC.
Lady: Then you have already been told that your case has been transferred back on Aug 14, what do you need now ?
Me: The website does not show that. Plus the officer yesterday asked me to confirm it which you are not doing, you are just repeating my words about my conversation. There are so many inconsitencies . You told me just now that my case is still in California.
Lady: Can you please hold for a moment.
After hold:
Lady: I just talked to my supervisor, if the website says it is in California then it is California. Is there anything else I can help you with ?
Me: I do not understand "To speed up processing " clause in the reason to transfer it to california. It has been transferred from the center which is processing 485 applications to the center which is not processing applications. So the clause "To speed up processing" is so inconsistent.
Lady: Sir, we cannot tell you the reason why do we transfers
Me: But you have already told me the reason in the written notice as "To speed up processing"
Lady: It is not "To speed up processing " it is "for processing". Is there anything else that I can help you with ?
Me: I hang up the phone.
My case is NSC-EAC-NSC
I keep a log of anything "useful" I am told every time I speak to them. And usually, the first few mins are wasted in them giving me wrong info, me telling them what they told me last time and them finally agreeing with it after re-checking their screens.
btw .. it is indeed super-frustrating and unacceptable they way they are bouncing your case around.
Why is USCIS forgetting that we are paying for their third grade services?
I broke my politeness today.USCIS inconsistency broke the limits for me.
My case was filed in Nebarska then tranferred to Texas then as soon as the priority date became current, last month, it was transferred to California.
I talked yesterday to customer service and it by chance got transferred to California Service Center where the officer told me that my case was transferred back to Texas Service Center on August 14, 2008. She also told me to call TSC to confirm it.
I called today the National Customer Service Center (NCSC) to confirm it and the lady tells me that the case is still in California and she has no more infomation about it. I told her about my call yesterday.
Lady: How could you have ever called CSC because their phone numbers are not public
Me: I called the same number and for some reason it got transferred to CSC.
Lady: Then you have already been told that your case has been transferred back on Aug 14, what do you need now ?
Me: The website does not show that. Plus the officer yesterday asked me to confirm it which you are not doing, you are just repeating my words about my conversation. There are so many inconsitencies . You told me just now that my case is still in California.
Lady: Can you please hold for a moment.
After hold:
Lady: I just talked to my supervisor, if the website says it is in California then it is California. Is there anything else I can help you with ?
Me: I do not understand "To speed up processing " clause in the reason to transfer it to california. It has been transferred from the center which is processing 485 applications to the center which is not processing applications. So the clause "To speed up processing" is so inconsistent.
Lady: Sir, we cannot tell you the reason why do we transfers
Me: But you have already told me the reason in the written notice as "To speed up processing"
Lady: It is not "To speed up processing " it is "for processing". Is there anything else that I can help you with ?
Me: I hang up the phone.
more...
house tribal tattoos of angel wings.
Blog Feeds
02-01 08:30 AM
Summary
(LINK TO FULL REPORT BELOW)
Congress created the H-1B program in 1990 to enable U.S. employers to hire temporary, foreign workers in specialty occupations. The law capped the number of H-1B visas issued per fiscal year at 65,000. Since then, the cap has fluctuated with legislative changes. Congress asked GAO to assess the impact of the cap on the ability of domestic companies to innovate, while ensuring that U.S. workers are not disadvantaged. In response, GAO examined what is known about (1) employer demand for H-1B workers; (2) how the cap affects employer costs and decisions to move operations overseas; (3) H-1B worker characteristics and the potential impact of raising the cap; and (4) how well requirements of the H-1B program protect U.S. workers. GAO analyzed data from 4 federal agencies; interviewed agency officials, experts, and H-1B employers; and reviewed agency documents and literature.
In most years, demand for new H-1B workers exceeded the cap: From 2000 to 2009, demand for new H-1B workers tended to exceed the cap, as measured by the numbers of initial petitions submitted by employers who are subject to the cap. There is no way to precisely determine the level of any unmet demand among employers, since they tend to stop submitting (and the Department of Homeland Security stops tracking) petitions once the cap is reached each year. When we consider all initial petitions, including those from universities and research institutions that are not subject to the cap, we find that demand for new H-1B workers is largely driven by a small number of employers. Over the decade, over 14 percent of all initial petitions were submitted by cap-exempt employers, and only a few employers (fewer than 1 percent) garnered over one-quarter of all H-1B approvals. Most interviewed companies said the H-1B cap and program created costs, but were not factors in their decisions to move R&D overseas: The 34 H-1B employers GAO interviewed reported that the cap has created some additional costs, though the cap's impact depended on the size and maturity of the company. For example, in years when visas were denied by the cap, most large firms reported finding other (sometimes more costly) ways to hire their preferred job candidates. On the other hand, small firms were more likely to fill their positions with different candidates, which they said resulted in delays and sometimes economic losses, particularly for firms in rapidly changing technology fields. Limitations in agency data and systems hinder tracking the cap and H-1B workers over time: The total number of H-1B workers in the U.S. at any one time--and information about the length of their stay--is unknown, because (1) data systems among the various agencies that process such individuals are not linked so individuals cannot be readily tracked, and (2) H-1B workers are not assigned a unique identifier that would allow for tracking them over time--particularly if and when their visa status changes. Restricted agency oversight and statutory changes weaken protections for U.S. workers: Elements of the H-1B program that could serve as worker protections--such as the requirement to pay prevailing wages, the visa's temporary status, and the cap itself--are weakened by several factors. First, program oversight is fragmented and restricted. Second, the H-1B program lacks a legal provision for holding employers accountable to program requirements when they obtain H-1B workers through a staffing company. Third, statutory changes made to the H-1B program have, in combination and in effect, increased the pool of H-1B workers beyond the cap and lowered the bar for eligibility. Taken together, the multifaceted challenges identified in this report show that the H-1B program, as currently structured, may not be used to its full potential and may be detrimental in some cases. This report offers several matters for congressional consideration, including that Congress re-examine key H-1B program provisions and make appropriate changes as needed. GAO also recommends that the Departments of Homeland Security and Labor take steps to improve efficiency, flexibility, and monitoring of the H-1B program. Homeland Security disagreed with two recommendations and one matter, citing logistical and other challenges; however, we believe such challenges can be overcome. Labor did not respond to our recommendations.
Recommendations
Our recommendations from this work are listed below with a Contact for more information. Status will change from "In process" to "Open," "Closed - implemented," or "Closed - not implemented" based on our follow up work.
Director:Andrew SherrillTeam:Government Accountability Office: Education, Workforce, and Income SecurityPhone:(202) 512-7252
Matters for Congressional Consideration
Recommendation: To ensure that the H-1B program continues to meet the needs of businesses in a global economy while maintaining a balance of protections for U.S. workers, Congress may wish to consider reviewing the merits and shortcomings of key program provisions and making appropriate changes as needed. Such a review may include, but would not necessarily be limited to (1) the qualifications required for workers eligible under the H-1B program, (2) exemptions from the cap, (3) the appropriateness of H-1B hiring by staffing companies, (4) the level of the cap, and (5) the role the program should play in the U.S. immigration system in relationship to permanent residency.
Status: In process
Comments: When we determine what steps the Congress has taken, we will provide updated information.
Recommendation: To reduce duplication and fragmentation in the administration and oversight of the H-1B application process, consistent with past GAO matters for congressional consideration, Congress may wish to consider eliminating the requirement that employers first submit a Labor Condition Application (LCA) to the Department of Labor for certification, and require instead that employers submit this application along with the I-129 application to the Department of Homeland Security's U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services for review.
Status: In process
Comments: When we determine what steps the Congress has taken, we will provide updated information.
Recommendation: To improve the Department of Labor's ability to investigate and enforce employer compliance with H-1B program requirements, Congress may wish to consider granting the department subpoena power to obtain employer records during investigations under the H-1B program.
Status: In process
Comments: When we determine what steps the Congress has taken, we will provide updated information.
Recommendation: To help ensure the full protection of H-1B workers employed through staffing companies, Congress may wish to consider holding the employer where an H-1B visa holder performs work accountable for meeting program requirements to the same extent as the employer that submitted the LCA form.
Status: In process
Comments: When we determine what steps the Congress has taken, we will provide updated information.
Recommendations for Executive Action
Recommendation: To help ensure that the number of new H-1B workers who are subject to the cap--both entering the United States and changing to H-1B status within the United States--does not exceed the cap each year, U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services should take steps to improve its tracking of the number of approved H-1B applications and the number of issued visas under the cap by fully leveraging the transformation effort currently under way, which involves the adoption of an electronic petition processing system that will be linked to the Department of State's tracking system. Such steps should ensure that linkages to the Department of State's tracking system will provide Homeland Security with timely access to data on visa issuances, and that mechanisms for tracking petitions and visas against the cap are incorporated into U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services' business rules to be developed for the new electronic petition system.
Agency Affected: Department of Homeland Security
Status: In process
Comments: When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.
Recommendation: To address business concerns without undermining program integrity, U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services should, to the extent permitted by its existing statutory authority, explore options for increasing the flexibility of the application process for H-1B employers, such as (1) allowing employers to rank their applications for visa candidates so that they can hire the best qualified worker for the jobs in highest need; (2) distributing the applications granted under the annual cap in allotments throughout the year (e.g. quarterly); and (3) establishing a system whereby businesses with a strong track-record of compliance with H-1B regulations may use a streamlined application process.
Agency Affected: Department of Homeland Security
Status: In process
Comments: When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.
Recommendation: To improve the transparency and oversight of the posting requirement on the Labor Condition Application (LCA), as part of its current oversight role, the Employment and Training Administration should develop and maintain a centralized Web site, accessible to the public, where businesses must post notice of the intent to hire H-1B workers. Such notices should continue to specify the job category and worksite location noted on the LCA and required by statute on current noncentralized postings.
Agency Affected: Department of Labor
Status: In process
Comments: When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.
Recommendation: To improve the efficiency and effectiveness of its investigations of employer compliance with H-1B requirements, the Employment and Training Administration should provide Labor's Wage and Hour Division searchable access to the LCA database.
Agency Affected: Department of Labor
Status: In process
Comments: When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.
VIEW FULL REPORT (http://www.gao.gov/new.items/d1126.pdf)
More... (http://ashwinsharma.com/2011/01/25/h-1b-visa-program-reforms-are-needed-to-minimize-the-risks-and-costs-of-current-program.aspx?ref=rss)
(LINK TO FULL REPORT BELOW)
Congress created the H-1B program in 1990 to enable U.S. employers to hire temporary, foreign workers in specialty occupations. The law capped the number of H-1B visas issued per fiscal year at 65,000. Since then, the cap has fluctuated with legislative changes. Congress asked GAO to assess the impact of the cap on the ability of domestic companies to innovate, while ensuring that U.S. workers are not disadvantaged. In response, GAO examined what is known about (1) employer demand for H-1B workers; (2) how the cap affects employer costs and decisions to move operations overseas; (3) H-1B worker characteristics and the potential impact of raising the cap; and (4) how well requirements of the H-1B program protect U.S. workers. GAO analyzed data from 4 federal agencies; interviewed agency officials, experts, and H-1B employers; and reviewed agency documents and literature.
In most years, demand for new H-1B workers exceeded the cap: From 2000 to 2009, demand for new H-1B workers tended to exceed the cap, as measured by the numbers of initial petitions submitted by employers who are subject to the cap. There is no way to precisely determine the level of any unmet demand among employers, since they tend to stop submitting (and the Department of Homeland Security stops tracking) petitions once the cap is reached each year. When we consider all initial petitions, including those from universities and research institutions that are not subject to the cap, we find that demand for new H-1B workers is largely driven by a small number of employers. Over the decade, over 14 percent of all initial petitions were submitted by cap-exempt employers, and only a few employers (fewer than 1 percent) garnered over one-quarter of all H-1B approvals. Most interviewed companies said the H-1B cap and program created costs, but were not factors in their decisions to move R&D overseas: The 34 H-1B employers GAO interviewed reported that the cap has created some additional costs, though the cap's impact depended on the size and maturity of the company. For example, in years when visas were denied by the cap, most large firms reported finding other (sometimes more costly) ways to hire their preferred job candidates. On the other hand, small firms were more likely to fill their positions with different candidates, which they said resulted in delays and sometimes economic losses, particularly for firms in rapidly changing technology fields. Limitations in agency data and systems hinder tracking the cap and H-1B workers over time: The total number of H-1B workers in the U.S. at any one time--and information about the length of their stay--is unknown, because (1) data systems among the various agencies that process such individuals are not linked so individuals cannot be readily tracked, and (2) H-1B workers are not assigned a unique identifier that would allow for tracking them over time--particularly if and when their visa status changes. Restricted agency oversight and statutory changes weaken protections for U.S. workers: Elements of the H-1B program that could serve as worker protections--such as the requirement to pay prevailing wages, the visa's temporary status, and the cap itself--are weakened by several factors. First, program oversight is fragmented and restricted. Second, the H-1B program lacks a legal provision for holding employers accountable to program requirements when they obtain H-1B workers through a staffing company. Third, statutory changes made to the H-1B program have, in combination and in effect, increased the pool of H-1B workers beyond the cap and lowered the bar for eligibility. Taken together, the multifaceted challenges identified in this report show that the H-1B program, as currently structured, may not be used to its full potential and may be detrimental in some cases. This report offers several matters for congressional consideration, including that Congress re-examine key H-1B program provisions and make appropriate changes as needed. GAO also recommends that the Departments of Homeland Security and Labor take steps to improve efficiency, flexibility, and monitoring of the H-1B program. Homeland Security disagreed with two recommendations and one matter, citing logistical and other challenges; however, we believe such challenges can be overcome. Labor did not respond to our recommendations.
Recommendations
Our recommendations from this work are listed below with a Contact for more information. Status will change from "In process" to "Open," "Closed - implemented," or "Closed - not implemented" based on our follow up work.
Director:Andrew SherrillTeam:Government Accountability Office: Education, Workforce, and Income SecurityPhone:(202) 512-7252
Matters for Congressional Consideration
Recommendation: To ensure that the H-1B program continues to meet the needs of businesses in a global economy while maintaining a balance of protections for U.S. workers, Congress may wish to consider reviewing the merits and shortcomings of key program provisions and making appropriate changes as needed. Such a review may include, but would not necessarily be limited to (1) the qualifications required for workers eligible under the H-1B program, (2) exemptions from the cap, (3) the appropriateness of H-1B hiring by staffing companies, (4) the level of the cap, and (5) the role the program should play in the U.S. immigration system in relationship to permanent residency.
Status: In process
Comments: When we determine what steps the Congress has taken, we will provide updated information.
Recommendation: To reduce duplication and fragmentation in the administration and oversight of the H-1B application process, consistent with past GAO matters for congressional consideration, Congress may wish to consider eliminating the requirement that employers first submit a Labor Condition Application (LCA) to the Department of Labor for certification, and require instead that employers submit this application along with the I-129 application to the Department of Homeland Security's U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services for review.
Status: In process
Comments: When we determine what steps the Congress has taken, we will provide updated information.
Recommendation: To improve the Department of Labor's ability to investigate and enforce employer compliance with H-1B program requirements, Congress may wish to consider granting the department subpoena power to obtain employer records during investigations under the H-1B program.
Status: In process
Comments: When we determine what steps the Congress has taken, we will provide updated information.
Recommendation: To help ensure the full protection of H-1B workers employed through staffing companies, Congress may wish to consider holding the employer where an H-1B visa holder performs work accountable for meeting program requirements to the same extent as the employer that submitted the LCA form.
Status: In process
Comments: When we determine what steps the Congress has taken, we will provide updated information.
Recommendations for Executive Action
Recommendation: To help ensure that the number of new H-1B workers who are subject to the cap--both entering the United States and changing to H-1B status within the United States--does not exceed the cap each year, U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services should take steps to improve its tracking of the number of approved H-1B applications and the number of issued visas under the cap by fully leveraging the transformation effort currently under way, which involves the adoption of an electronic petition processing system that will be linked to the Department of State's tracking system. Such steps should ensure that linkages to the Department of State's tracking system will provide Homeland Security with timely access to data on visa issuances, and that mechanisms for tracking petitions and visas against the cap are incorporated into U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services' business rules to be developed for the new electronic petition system.
Agency Affected: Department of Homeland Security
Status: In process
Comments: When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.
Recommendation: To address business concerns without undermining program integrity, U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services should, to the extent permitted by its existing statutory authority, explore options for increasing the flexibility of the application process for H-1B employers, such as (1) allowing employers to rank their applications for visa candidates so that they can hire the best qualified worker for the jobs in highest need; (2) distributing the applications granted under the annual cap in allotments throughout the year (e.g. quarterly); and (3) establishing a system whereby businesses with a strong track-record of compliance with H-1B regulations may use a streamlined application process.
Agency Affected: Department of Homeland Security
Status: In process
Comments: When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.
Recommendation: To improve the transparency and oversight of the posting requirement on the Labor Condition Application (LCA), as part of its current oversight role, the Employment and Training Administration should develop and maintain a centralized Web site, accessible to the public, where businesses must post notice of the intent to hire H-1B workers. Such notices should continue to specify the job category and worksite location noted on the LCA and required by statute on current noncentralized postings.
Agency Affected: Department of Labor
Status: In process
Comments: When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.
Recommendation: To improve the efficiency and effectiveness of its investigations of employer compliance with H-1B requirements, the Employment and Training Administration should provide Labor's Wage and Hour Division searchable access to the LCA database.
Agency Affected: Department of Labor
Status: In process
Comments: When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.
VIEW FULL REPORT (http://www.gao.gov/new.items/d1126.pdf)
More... (http://ashwinsharma.com/2011/01/25/h-1b-visa-program-reforms-are-needed-to-minimize-the-risks-and-costs-of-current-program.aspx?ref=rss)
tattoo tribal tattoos of angel wings.
rsharma
07-24 06:58 PM
rsharma:
For many of the applications filed during the 2007 "visa-gate" visas are not available to allow USCIS to approve the applications. However, USCIS is in the process of doing what they can to get these applications ready to be approved once a visa becomes available.
So the idea is that for many of these applications USCIS has already decided that they are approvable but for the fact that a visa is not available, and once a visa becomes available, they will approve them. Hence the idea that they are "pre-adjudicated".
Thank you attorney Sauer and all other IV members for replying to my question.
I am little confused at the reply I received from USCIS. They are saying that my application cannot be adjudicated till visa numbers are available.
Do they mean they will not pre adjudicate my case till visa number is available ?
or
Do they mean that pre adjudication is done, but the visa number assignment process (adjudication) will be done once visa number is avalable?
The processing dates are passed my received date and notice date in the processing center where my application is processed.
Please let me know your thoughts.
For many of the applications filed during the 2007 "visa-gate" visas are not available to allow USCIS to approve the applications. However, USCIS is in the process of doing what they can to get these applications ready to be approved once a visa becomes available.
So the idea is that for many of these applications USCIS has already decided that they are approvable but for the fact that a visa is not available, and once a visa becomes available, they will approve them. Hence the idea that they are "pre-adjudicated".
Thank you attorney Sauer and all other IV members for replying to my question.
I am little confused at the reply I received from USCIS. They are saying that my application cannot be adjudicated till visa numbers are available.
Do they mean they will not pre adjudicate my case till visa number is available ?
or
Do they mean that pre adjudication is done, but the visa number assignment process (adjudication) will be done once visa number is avalable?
The processing dates are passed my received date and notice date in the processing center where my application is processed.
Please let me know your thoughts.
more...
pictures Tribal Angel Wings Tattoo,
sush
10-03 06:46 PM
The latest one I see is 07/28/2007
dresses tribal tattoos of angel wings.
jonty_11
04-21 01:08 PM
I got the Card Production Ordered e-mail today. No LUD even last night at 1 Am. Only one LUD today. My case is processed at Texas service center. And my receipt date is not with in their processing times.
Good luck to everyone.
thats calle dwinning the POWERBALL. I am assuming EB3....
So no RFEs after applying 485..?
Point is if you were actually out of a job this very moment....USCIS wudnt know and still issue ur GC...?
Good luck to everyone.
thats calle dwinning the POWERBALL. I am assuming EB3....
So no RFEs after applying 485..?
Point is if you were actually out of a job this very moment....USCIS wudnt know and still issue ur GC...?
more...
makeup angel wings tattoo designs 8
anilsal
08-21 02:04 PM
not only that you got GC but also you made a one time contribution to IV.
girlfriend angel wings tattoos designs.
trramesh
11-09 02:03 PM
All,
Please post this information on other sites to get more people to participate in this survey. The survey ends on Dec 15.
Pappu,
Is this survey open to every one beyond donor forum.
Please post this information on other sites to get more people to participate in this survey. The survey ends on Dec 15.
Pappu,
Is this survey open to every one beyond donor forum.
hairstyles Angel; tribal wings tattoos.
Pagal
07-19 09:37 AM
Hello,
Even as per Indian courts, the contract is valid only if mutually enforceable, which means that the company also needs to give you a two month's notice in case of termination.
Though there is very little risk, why burn the bridges? Be nice and negotiate a mutually agreed exit ... put in some extra hours if needed to transfer the knowledge or to answer any questions to your current job later on. I doubt if your current manager will turn down such an arrangement whereby you help him/her out when needed over a course of next two months...
For your career, the network is more important than the immediate monetary benefits, just my two cents... :)
Even as per Indian courts, the contract is valid only if mutually enforceable, which means that the company also needs to give you a two month's notice in case of termination.
Though there is very little risk, why burn the bridges? Be nice and negotiate a mutually agreed exit ... put in some extra hours if needed to transfer the knowledge or to answer any questions to your current job later on. I doubt if your current manager will turn down such an arrangement whereby you help him/her out when needed over a course of next two months...
For your career, the network is more important than the immediate monetary benefits, just my two cents... :)
mheggade
05-22 11:36 AM
All,
so Please dont jump at this rule , think about it its good for us , I m sure guys who filed their labor late 2007/early 2008 will be thinking oh what happens if July 07 happens again , but trust me thats very unlikely ..Also your 140 will be approved way a head before you apply for 485.
On the Postive side ...Even if July becomes current , people are still good to apply concurrent. Because this rule will come into effect only from Aug.
Cheer up.
so Please dont jump at this rule , think about it its good for us , I m sure guys who filed their labor late 2007/early 2008 will be thinking oh what happens if July 07 happens again , but trust me thats very unlikely ..Also your 140 will be approved way a head before you apply for 485.
On the Postive side ...Even if July becomes current , people are still good to apply concurrent. Because this rule will come into effect only from Aug.
Cheer up.
belmontboy
11-09 05:16 PM
Maybe some of us might be aware on the importance of umbilical chord and cord blood. They are life savers as they contain stem cells which can be used to treat hematopoietic and genetic disorders.
Let me tie this to an important activity that happens in southern part of india (maybe its prevalent too in entire india - not sure though).
Whenever a baby is born, the umbilical chord is cut and a clip is put up in the baby's navel end with the umbilical chord part extending out. In a matter of few days the external portion will heal and fall off.
This is then taken to a goldsmith who in turn stuffs this into a small golden (or silver depending upon one's capacity) and seals them air tight (mind this air tight) using fire. this is then tied along with a thread and is generally worn around the hips of babies.
Maybe our ancestors knew that this part of tissue might help in healing some disorders for the babies. Who knows better than them. Many of us indians would have worn this without much aware of its importance.
Hope that I have submitted a informative post here.
hmm.. are you saying that ancient indians specialized in stem cell research? :p
Let me tie this to an important activity that happens in southern part of india (maybe its prevalent too in entire india - not sure though).
Whenever a baby is born, the umbilical chord is cut and a clip is put up in the baby's navel end with the umbilical chord part extending out. In a matter of few days the external portion will heal and fall off.
This is then taken to a goldsmith who in turn stuffs this into a small golden (or silver depending upon one's capacity) and seals them air tight (mind this air tight) using fire. this is then tied along with a thread and is generally worn around the hips of babies.
Maybe our ancestors knew that this part of tissue might help in healing some disorders for the babies. Who knows better than them. Many of us indians would have worn this without much aware of its importance.
Hope that I have submitted a informative post here.
hmm.. are you saying that ancient indians specialized in stem cell research? :p
No comments:
Post a Comment