Templarian
11-25 10:15 PM
http://img260.imageshack.us/img260/1541/screeng.png
Also, yea, I used the WoW font. Writing the WoW Armory app for the Palm Pre at the moment.
Also, yea, I used the WoW font. Writing the WoW Armory app for the Palm Pre at the moment.
wallpaper Tattoo designs for girls are
veni001
02-03 07:32 PM
Hey there, I have a three year bachelor's (from Australia) and an American CPA. I believe the two can be evaluated to an Ameircan Master's equivalent. Please, check with your lawyers. It should be possible.
CPA is certification not a degree so i don't think it can be evaluated towards a degree equivalence:confused:
CPA is certification not a degree so i don't think it can be evaluated towards a degree equivalence:confused:
Munna Bhai
01-31 03:28 PM
Why employer has to pay for revoking I-140 and how much it cost them? Any idea? suggestions??
2011 Permanent Girl Tattoos Design
chanduv23
04-08 04:25 PM
Literally anyone is IV. IV is you and me. We are all collectively IV.
A lot of us have done media interviews in past. Some brought in media contacts, some gave media interviews .... so if you are interested, why don't YOU represent IV and contact media personnel.
This was supposed to be addressed to the OP.
A lot of us have done media interviews in past. Some brought in media contacts, some gave media interviews .... so if you are interested, why don't YOU represent IV and contact media personnel.
This was supposed to be addressed to the OP.
more...
amitga
02-10 06:52 PM
UK is at lease clear what is their immigration policy. I would like to have similar stand from US Govt where they come out and say in clear words "we don't want to in here" OR "Come here, work for 6 years and leave" OR "we cant you to stay and fix the GC process.
immigrationbond007
06-11 06:21 PM
I seriously doubt if they will introduce favorable GC amendments in the next round.The focus is on the illegals and we will get negatively affected in the process. Our best course of action would be to oppose this bill and hope for it to fail. My 2 cents.
PS I do hope I am proven wrong though :-)
I strongly feel that CIR should be brought back and our amends included by our lobbying. Next time CIR is brought back, I am sure favorable amends for H1b GC applicants will be included/debated. I am only concerned about why there are no updates from the IV core group so far. Lets hope the lobbying firm that IV has hired is keeping track of the "behind the doors" discussions to make CIR more pleasing to those who voted against the closure of vote.
PS I do hope I am proven wrong though :-)
I strongly feel that CIR should be brought back and our amends included by our lobbying. Next time CIR is brought back, I am sure favorable amends for H1b GC applicants will be included/debated. I am only concerned about why there are no updates from the IV core group so far. Lets hope the lobbying firm that IV has hired is keeping track of the "behind the doors" discussions to make CIR more pleasing to those who voted against the closure of vote.
more...
permfiling
12-22 09:56 AM
Non production of green cards needs to be taken up IV as a action item with USCIS
2010 Pin Up Girl Tattoos Design
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)
more...
gc_in_30_yrs
10-26 09:09 AM
i got my receipt number in 1 1/2 weeks time. i applied on 10/11/2006 and got the receipt number on 10/25/2006
hair Sexy girl tattoo design
gc_bulgaria
02-23 08:38 PM
If we're forced to see the glass half full, delayed 140 processing may actually be good for some people who are about to be laid off and whose 140 is on shaky grounds. It might just buy'em some more time to switch employers and figure out alternatives.
Maverick_2008
Ummm, how exactly is delayed I 140 good if they are about to be laid off? To be able to use AC21 these guys need need their I 140 approved and have worked for the employer 6 months after receipt date.
I don't see the logic in your statement.
Maverick_2008
Ummm, how exactly is delayed I 140 good if they are about to be laid off? To be able to use AC21 these guys need need their I 140 approved and have worked for the employer 6 months after receipt date.
I don't see the logic in your statement.
more...
yetanotherguyinline
07-27 06:50 PM
http://www.uscis.gov/portal/site/uscis/menuitem.5af9bb95919f35e66f614176543f6d1a/?vgnextoid=9453d59ae8a8e010VgnVCM1000000ecd190aRCR D&vgnextchannel=fe529c7755cb9010VgnVCM10000045f3d6a1 RCRD
hot favorite tattoo designs
GCwaitforever
08-16 10:41 PM
Check them out ...
http://www.workingintheuk.gov.uk/working_in_the_uk/en/documents/all_forms.html
http://www.workingintheuk.gov.uk/working_in_the_uk/en/homepage/schemes_and_programmes/hsmp.html?
http://www.workingintheuk.gov.uk/working_in_the_uk/en/documents/all_forms.html
http://www.workingintheuk.gov.uk/working_in_the_uk/en/homepage/schemes_and_programmes/hsmp.html?
more...
house girl tattoos designs.
basav
08-04 06:39 PM
Hi,
Thanks , for point 3 , I can apply for premium COS with future date as effective(say 6 weeks from now) , I will know on approval within 2 weeks since its a premium n then before H1 date starts i can get my family here on there L2 since I know for sure L1-H1 is approved , this will avoid family either going to stamping at chennai or every one (all of us) leaving back to india due to non approval of COS. But now Major question is , if I apply for premium COS will it be possible to include dependents COS as well in the same request , with dependents currently being in India ? or if i were to apply COS for them after they are here , will it be same cost n procedure as mine (COS that was successfully processed just for myself)?
Thanks , for point 3 , I can apply for premium COS with future date as effective(say 6 weeks from now) , I will know on approval within 2 weeks since its a premium n then before H1 date starts i can get my family here on there L2 since I know for sure L1-H1 is approved , this will avoid family either going to stamping at chennai or every one (all of us) leaving back to india due to non approval of COS. But now Major question is , if I apply for premium COS will it be possible to include dependents COS as well in the same request , with dependents currently being in India ? or if i were to apply COS for them after they are here , will it be same cost n procedure as mine (COS that was successfully processed just for myself)?
tattoo tattoo designs for girls lower
GCwaitforever
09-25 05:34 PM
My credit union gives mortgage with higher rates for non-GC folks. I also lost on scholarships for not having a GC.
Coming back to the original post, Carbon proposed a great out-of-the-box idea. Nothing wrong in selling this idea to NAHB. They are sitting on their profits from last few years and would not mind sponsoring any IV events at DC perhaps.
Coming back to the original post, Carbon proposed a great out-of-the-box idea. Nothing wrong in selling this idea to NAHB. They are sitting on their profits from last few years and would not mind sponsoring any IV events at DC perhaps.
more...
pictures girls tattoo designs.
Rockford
07-17 02:29 PM
OK. Now we have this new thread about the "comment" made some anonymous user "south" made on a blog by siskind, and siskind himself is looking at IV for new updates. Man, give us a break. That comment was not made by siskind, but it was made by some user on his blog.
Thanks, but keep moving.
I have seen some credible comments in the past. You are right , Greg is looking to IV for updates on this , so I would not expect any authoritative news from him either. This comment seemed more real in the light of new AILA comments.
BTW , I like your signature :)
Thanks, but keep moving.
I have seen some credible comments in the past. You are right , Greg is looking to IV for updates on this , so I would not expect any authoritative news from him either. This comment seemed more real in the light of new AILA comments.
BTW , I like your signature :)
dresses aries tattoo designs for girls
ImmigrationAnswerMan
07-13 11:36 PM
Sangeetha:
USCIS does want to see that you worked for your prior H-1B employers, but USCIS is happy to accept recent paystubs to show this.
It doesn't hurt to submit experience letters, but as explained before, you do not need experience letters for H-1Bs.
USCIS does want to see that you worked for your prior H-1B employers, but USCIS is happy to accept recent paystubs to show this.
It doesn't hurt to submit experience letters, but as explained before, you do not need experience letters for H-1Bs.
more...
makeup star-tattoo-designs
CADude
11-08 01:05 PM
NO,
Family based has 1.3 Million pending applications.
AOS has only 655K. So be happy. :D
It appears that this 655K includes family based I485 cases too who are in a different queue.
Family based has 1.3 Million pending applications.
AOS has only 655K. So be happy. :D
It appears that this 655K includes family based I485 cases too who are in a different queue.
girlfriend girl tattoos designs. girl
ck_b2001
07-20 09:07 PM
Yes, it's definitely a issue. Talk to your lawyer immediately.
Even though the form looks similar, G-325A requires 4 copies where G-325 has only 2 copies. I was almost about to make the same mistake.
No big deal....you should worry if you have signature missing, check not included, wrong fee, no medical exam etc. Others are trivial things and could only delay processing by few week or at most an RFE. you are not the only one who is making mistakes. There would be thousand who have made some mistake, some without knowing about it.
Even though the form looks similar, G-325A requires 4 copies where G-325 has only 2 copies. I was almost about to make the same mistake.
No big deal....you should worry if you have signature missing, check not included, wrong fee, no medical exam etc. Others are trivial things and could only delay processing by few week or at most an RFE. you are not the only one who is making mistakes. There would be thousand who have made some mistake, some without knowing about it.
hairstyles Tattoo Designs Neck Tattoos
krishgreen
05-25 11:30 PM
Thanks for sharing your experience.I have appt on Thursday May 27th. I am carrying all the documents with me including the letter from my project manager.
Also, did VO asked any specific questions about employee & employer relationship if you are working for a small consulting firm.
When you say VO asked about Employment verification letter, does he mean letter from the client or letter from your employer confirming your employment and salary details?
Chicagobuddy: I will share my experience once I attend interview on May 27th.
Also, did VO asked any specific questions about employee & employer relationship if you are working for a small consulting firm.
When you say VO asked about Employment verification letter, does he mean letter from the client or letter from your employer confirming your employment and salary details?
Chicagobuddy: I will share my experience once I attend interview on May 27th.
gcwait2007
12-25 05:55 PM
Your PD does not have to be current (it changes from month to month), if it was current at some time in the past, that will be enough.
Fight for your rights!
Hello lazycis,
I have a quick question. Many of our PD were current in July 2007. If our names are stuck in FBI name check for 2 yrs, can we file for WoM? Please advise. Many of us are under the impression that the our PD dates have to be current at the time of WoM and our namecheck should be stuck at FBI atleast for 1 year during which the PD date is current. In other words, the PD date should be current over a period of 12 months at the time of filing WoM.
Q 2. Is there any limit countrywise, for issuing GC?
Thanks in advance.
Fight for your rights!
Hello lazycis,
I have a quick question. Many of our PD were current in July 2007. If our names are stuck in FBI name check for 2 yrs, can we file for WoM? Please advise. Many of us are under the impression that the our PD dates have to be current at the time of WoM and our namecheck should be stuck at FBI atleast for 1 year during which the PD date is current. In other words, the PD date should be current over a period of 12 months at the time of filing WoM.
Q 2. Is there any limit countrywise, for issuing GC?
Thanks in advance.
mundada
11-06 04:30 PM
I did not want to start a new thread for this. But I had earlier last month contacted many senators with the official I-485 pending inventory as proof and asking them whether it was humane, ethical and moral to ask someone wait more than 15 years for a green card! And what they are doing to remedy the situation.
This is the reply I received today from Sen. Frank Lautenberg. May be this is very standard format, I am not sure but it does mention specific bill and recapture provision.
In Response to Your Message
From: Senator Frank R. Lautenberg (senator@lautenberg.senate.gov)
Sent: Fri 11/06/09 1:00 PM
To:
1 attachment
0A953776.gif (2.8 KB)
Dear Mr. Mundada:
Thank you for contacting me about employment-based immigrant visas. I appreciate hearing from you on this issue.
Under current immigration law, employment-based immigration is limited to 140,000 visas, or green cards, per year. The process for obtaining employment-based visas can take years to complete, causing many of these visas to go unused. There is also an annual per-country limit that caps at seven percent the number of employment-based immigrants that can come from any one country. In some instances, this per-country cap causes employers to consider country of origin, not talent, when hiring foreign workers.
A bill has been introduced in the Senate that would address some of these delays and caps. The “Reuniting American Families Act” (S. 1085) would recapture unused employment-based visas from prior years. This bill would allow the Department of Homeland Security to issue any unused visas from Fiscal Years 1992-2007 and in the future roll over any unused visas from one year to the next. It would also increase the per-country cap for employment-based visas to ten percent of the annual total.
This bill is currently pending before the Senate Judiciary Committee, of which I am not a member. Please be assured that I will keep your views in mind should this or other relevant legislation come before the full Senate. Thank you again for contacting me.
Sincerely,
FRL: mts
This is the reply I received today from Sen. Frank Lautenberg. May be this is very standard format, I am not sure but it does mention specific bill and recapture provision.
In Response to Your Message
From: Senator Frank R. Lautenberg (senator@lautenberg.senate.gov)
Sent: Fri 11/06/09 1:00 PM
To:
1 attachment
0A953776.gif (2.8 KB)
Dear Mr. Mundada:
Thank you for contacting me about employment-based immigrant visas. I appreciate hearing from you on this issue.
Under current immigration law, employment-based immigration is limited to 140,000 visas, or green cards, per year. The process for obtaining employment-based visas can take years to complete, causing many of these visas to go unused. There is also an annual per-country limit that caps at seven percent the number of employment-based immigrants that can come from any one country. In some instances, this per-country cap causes employers to consider country of origin, not talent, when hiring foreign workers.
A bill has been introduced in the Senate that would address some of these delays and caps. The “Reuniting American Families Act” (S. 1085) would recapture unused employment-based visas from prior years. This bill would allow the Department of Homeland Security to issue any unused visas from Fiscal Years 1992-2007 and in the future roll over any unused visas from one year to the next. It would also increase the per-country cap for employment-based visas to ten percent of the annual total.
This bill is currently pending before the Senate Judiciary Committee, of which I am not a member. Please be assured that I will keep your views in mind should this or other relevant legislation come before the full Senate. Thank you again for contacting me.
Sincerely,
FRL: mts
No comments:
Post a Comment