Lasantha
08-16 12:33 PM
Australia is another option.
http://www.immi.gov.au/
http://www.immi.gov.au/
wallpaper lack ops logo png.
glen
04-09 04:42 PM
Approved I-140 is good enough for applying for three year extension. I don't think there is any rule to wait for 365 days after I-140. I guess the 365 day rule is for pending labour.
Thanks wellwishergc,
I need to clarify one thing though, my I-140 (which will be applied soon) is not pending for more than 365 days. Am I still eligible to file for 7th year?
Other thing is I also have a LC pending in PBEC (AD March 2005), but I am not with that employer and do not have any document/case number for that LC. Chances of getting these the that employer are bleak.
-Madhuri
Thanks wellwishergc,
I need to clarify one thing though, my I-140 (which will be applied soon) is not pending for more than 365 days. Am I still eligible to file for 7th year?
Other thing is I also have a LC pending in PBEC (AD March 2005), but I am not with that employer and do not have any document/case number for that LC. Chances of getting these the that employer are bleak.
-Madhuri
rolrblade
07-27 02:22 PM
I have a question, my attorney says that he has filed the application on 2nd July without my signature.
I have not given any authorization also.
I am worried if it is valid or not.
I don't know if they take authorization from my employer or it should be from me.
Please suggest.
Did he put a G-28 - Attorney representation form with it. If yes, then you are fine.
I have not given any authorization also.
I am worried if it is valid or not.
I don't know if they take authorization from my employer or it should be from me.
Please suggest.
Did he put a G-28 - Attorney representation form with it. If yes, then you are fine.
2011 lack ops logo png. lack ops
$eeGrEeN
05-15 09:31 AM
This is totally ludacris to me. Even though the bulletin expects movement going forward, there is no assurance that the dates will not go back. On the flip side, I am wondering if USCIS/DOS wanted to fully utilize the 140K visas this year and just moved the dates too much ahead. If thats the case, the dates might not move again or retrogress back further. DOS official Oppenheimer mentioned that atleast 10-11k were wasted last year. I still feel that the dates are going to go back some time sooner or later without congressional law changes.
This means that we have to stay put and work towards our common goal of getting the system fixed.
yup , rightly said....
This means that we have to stay put and work towards our common goal of getting the system fixed.
yup , rightly said....
more...
b2visahelp
06-15 06:22 PM
Hi,
My parents' and 2 brothers' B2 visas got rejected yesterday. The VO didn't state the refusal reason. He didn't stamp anything on their passports. I got my GC through asylum, and will get married in Nov. 2009. I supplied a formal letter from my pastor about the wedding that it's real. And my parents stated that they are not bringing my youngest brother to the US because he has school. During the interview, the VO asked them about me. He knew that I got my GC through asylum. He asked if I work or go to school. My parents answered honestly that I'm currently working to support myself.
My parents didn't show their bank account, certificate of properties and business because the VO didn't ask for it. Should they show them to VO eventhough he didn't ask to see it?
Now, we're preparing to apply B2 visa for a second time. Here are my questions:
1. When do you think they should apply for the visa again?
2. What can we prepare to show proofs that they will definitely go back to their country? Should we prepare a letter stating reasons why they won't immigrate to US?
3. They are taking care of my elderly grandfather, 80 years old. Should they bring a picture of him?
3. Will they have a better chance if they left all my 3 siblings at home to give more reason they will definitely go back?
My parents definitely don't want to immigrate to the US.
Help...help....please...I really want them to attend my wedding.
Thanks a bunch for all of your advise!
My parents' and 2 brothers' B2 visas got rejected yesterday. The VO didn't state the refusal reason. He didn't stamp anything on their passports. I got my GC through asylum, and will get married in Nov. 2009. I supplied a formal letter from my pastor about the wedding that it's real. And my parents stated that they are not bringing my youngest brother to the US because he has school. During the interview, the VO asked them about me. He knew that I got my GC through asylum. He asked if I work or go to school. My parents answered honestly that I'm currently working to support myself.
My parents didn't show their bank account, certificate of properties and business because the VO didn't ask for it. Should they show them to VO eventhough he didn't ask to see it?
Now, we're preparing to apply B2 visa for a second time. Here are my questions:
1. When do you think they should apply for the visa again?
2. What can we prepare to show proofs that they will definitely go back to their country? Should we prepare a letter stating reasons why they won't immigrate to US?
3. They are taking care of my elderly grandfather, 80 years old. Should they bring a picture of him?
3. Will they have a better chance if they left all my 3 siblings at home to give more reason they will definitely go back?
My parents definitely don't want to immigrate to the US.
Help...help....please...I really want them to attend my wedding.
Thanks a bunch for all of your advise!
sr123
02-15 10:43 AM
There are 2 kinds of posts...(1) Which add value to the forum. Threads started for 401K, selecting a lawyer etc add value since they attract new members. (2) The second kind of posts are the ones initiated by people who want to ask questions. This questions tend to be serving individuals.
I think we should not restrict the first type of posts. There could some kind of charge on the second kind. One suggestion which may work is as follows
1. Only paying members can initiate threads(or may be allow the first few for free ). Exceptions can be permitted by admins who can review if a post could be useful.
2. Anyone can post answers to existing threads.
By the way I am not sure of the technical aspect of the website operations. So please bear with me if my post reflects the same.
I think we should not restrict the first type of posts. There could some kind of charge on the second kind. One suggestion which may work is as follows
1. Only paying members can initiate threads(or may be allow the first few for free ). Exceptions can be permitted by admins who can review if a post could be useful.
2. Anyone can post answers to existing threads.
By the way I am not sure of the technical aspect of the website operations. So please bear with me if my post reflects the same.
more...
seeking_GC
09-23 06:31 PM
Thanks for this info. Would you mind sharing the fax number? Thanks in advance.
I assume you mean the fax number for NSC - it is 402-219-6171.
I assume you mean the fax number for NSC - it is 402-219-6171.
2010 File:CoD Black Ops cover.png
kshitijnt
04-23 08:23 AM
The statistics can be skewed in that people switch jobs after perm, people like me have filed 2nd perm application despite having an earlier 2005 application.
more...
PERM12
10-25 07:01 PM
Will USCIS release updated Pending I-485 numbers as published that they will do every quarter....
hair call-of-duty-lack-ops-logo-
hmehta
12-14 01:16 PM
Best course of action would be to go to your Home Country during that period....visa stamping is not a big deal at all.....njoy your vacation...for you might not get this much off/free time in the foreseeable future!!!!
You can not work after 7/9/2007.
The end of the OPT will determine when you must stop working.
The 60 days grace period is only for you to take care of business before you go back home. In your case you must wait for 2 months and 24 days before returning to work otherwise you will be in violation of your status.
andy
You can not work after 7/9/2007.
The end of the OPT will determine when you must stop working.
The 60 days grace period is only for you to take care of business before you go back home. In your case you must wait for 2 months and 24 days before returning to work otherwise you will be in violation of your status.
andy
more...
bheemi
03-15 11:32 AM
hi Super_Moderator,
Why cant we try to add now..instead of waiting for later time..to add this ammendment thru some senator or somebody for filing 485 during retrogression...
just to know whey we need to wait for later to add this...
Why cant we try to add now..instead of waiting for later time..to add this ammendment thru some senator or somebody for filing 485 during retrogression...
just to know whey we need to wait for later to add this...
hot lack ops logo png.
glus
06-28 04:47 PM
O MY GOD !! You are so right............guys.. check out Rajiv Khanna's web site, Check out Sheela Murthy's web site, USCIS.....everyone is saying the same.........we are royally screwed. God Helppppppppppp
You are as stupid as what you wrote.
You are as stupid as what you wrote.
more...
house lack ops logo png.
guygeek007
11-06 02:17 PM
Hang in there my friend. My 140 was first filed in Jan 2006 and was RFE'd for ability to pay. This 140 was withdrawn and was refiled by my company's sister concern in June 2006. We waited for a year and then in June 2007, applied for premium processing just before that was closed down. The check and request for premium were returned with the reason that the original labor app was not provided. Then we received an RFE for ability to pay yet once again in Sept 2007. This was addressed in a very detailed fashion by the HR & CPA working closely with my attorney. Finally on Oct 31st there was the approval notice. Thus, my advice to you would be stay put and patient and it'll all work out. Good Luck!
Congrats...I see hope from your case.
My case still remains stuck in security check at USCIS TSC...395 days and counting :)
Congrats...I see hope from your case.
My case still remains stuck in security check at USCIS TSC...395 days and counting :)
tattoo Black Ops Semtex.png
sledge_hammer
02-07 07:46 PM
Just put in my year.
When you sign for membership, there is a question you answer about EB category and PD, so I guess all 8600+ members have that. I mean we already have the information and most of the members seem to be in S/W.
Is there anyway we can use this information thats in out database already, to come up with numbers? I assume that it should be do-able, however I am practically ignorant when it comes to computers. I mean I can use word and surf on the net, but thats it, but among all the experts we have here, maybe someone can work something out.
The admin will be able to answer this ....
When you sign for membership, there is a question you answer about EB category and PD, so I guess all 8600+ members have that. I mean we already have the information and most of the members seem to be in S/W.
Is there anyway we can use this information thats in out database already, to come up with numbers? I assume that it should be do-able, however I am practically ignorant when it comes to computers. I mean I can use word and surf on the net, but thats it, but among all the experts we have here, maybe someone can work something out.
The admin will be able to answer this ....
more...
pictures lack ops logo png. lack ops
dalishi
10-13 02:54 PM
Thanks guys!!
dresses 2 logo png. lack ops ford
Tshelar
07-23 09:03 AM
I would always recommend choosing Career over GC. I am guessing you'll are a young couple. Most of us take risk of jumping jobs and carriers before we are married or before one starts a family. Believe me once you start a family and are raising kids all your drive to look for better prospect will start diminishing. You will be happy with you a 9 to 5 job.
So my 2 cents go for a better career now.
I understand it is a tough call but I am sure you will make a right one and whatever happens in future do not repent on your decision as future is unpredictable and one can only make decisions based on the current facts.
So my 2 cents go for a better career now.
I understand it is a tough call but I am sure you will make a right one and whatever happens in future do not repent on your decision as future is unpredictable and one can only make decisions based on the current facts.
more...
makeup BOEmblem2.png Black ops Emblem
anemmani
01-22 09:34 AM
Why should we fight about every issue that is posted? Cant we debate it like mature people? This tendency to fight (and get emotional) over irrelevant issues will not help us any better.
Most of us in this immigration thread are academically oriented. And I believe that this can be attributed to the way in which we were molded in our early life. Most of our parents would stress academic excellence over athletic and artistic abilities. They made all our choices all the way to college and maybe beyond. They would always trump every argument with the statement, "We know what is best for you."
That said, I think the comparison between western and eastern parenting in US is not completely fair. The section of Indians & Chinese immigrants in US are educated and were probably at the top of their classes in their respective countries. They excelled academically and it helped them (us) immigrate and be part of the successful strata of this country. We cannot compare these immigrants with the Western population as a whole. We should compare eastern and western parenting techniques among parents with similar backgrounds.
Successful American families produce successful kids. This is also true for families of all races. Each set of parents have their own method.
Getting greencard is not everything. We have lives beyond the greencard. We have (or will have) kids and have a responsibility towards raising them to give them the best possible skills (academic, artistic & social) to thrive in their lives. And a mature discussion in parenting methods is useful.
I urge everyone of you to make your arguments and highlight relative merits & de-merits. You may also argue whether this discussion has merit or not. But no name calling.
Nag
Most of us in this immigration thread are academically oriented. And I believe that this can be attributed to the way in which we were molded in our early life. Most of our parents would stress academic excellence over athletic and artistic abilities. They made all our choices all the way to college and maybe beyond. They would always trump every argument with the statement, "We know what is best for you."
That said, I think the comparison between western and eastern parenting in US is not completely fair. The section of Indians & Chinese immigrants in US are educated and were probably at the top of their classes in their respective countries. They excelled academically and it helped them (us) immigrate and be part of the successful strata of this country. We cannot compare these immigrants with the Western population as a whole. We should compare eastern and western parenting techniques among parents with similar backgrounds.
Successful American families produce successful kids. This is also true for families of all races. Each set of parents have their own method.
Getting greencard is not everything. We have lives beyond the greencard. We have (or will have) kids and have a responsibility towards raising them to give them the best possible skills (academic, artistic & social) to thrive in their lives. And a mature discussion in parenting methods is useful.
I urge everyone of you to make your arguments and highlight relative merits & de-merits. You may also argue whether this discussion has merit or not. But no name calling.
Nag
girlfriend Call of Duty Black Ops - Icon2
Blog Feeds
01-27 08:30 AM
Summary
(LINK TO FULL REPORT BELOW)
Congress created the H-1B program in 1990 to enable U.S. employers to hire temporary, foreign workers in specialty occupations. The law capped the number of H-1B visas issued per fiscal year at 65,000. Since then, the cap has fluctuated with legislative changes. Congress asked GAO to assess the impact of the cap on the ability of domestic companies to innovate, while ensuring that U.S. workers are not disadvantaged. In response, GAO examined what is known about (1) employer demand for H-1B workers; (2) how the cap affects employer costs and decisions to move operations overseas; (3) H-1B worker characteristics and the potential impact of raising the cap; and (4) how well requirements of the H-1B program protect U.S. workers. GAO analyzed data from 4 federal agencies; interviewed agency officials, experts, and H-1B employers; and reviewed agency documents and literature.
In most years, demand for new H-1B workers exceeded the cap: From 2000 to 2009, demand for new H-1B workers tended to exceed the cap, as measured by the numbers of initial petitions submitted by employers who are subject to the cap. There is no way to precisely determine the level of any unmet demand among employers, since they tend to stop submitting (and the Department of Homeland Security stops tracking) petitions once the cap is reached each year. When we consider all initial petitions, including those from universities and research institutions that are not subject to the cap, we find that demand for new H-1B workers is largely driven by a small number of employers. Over the decade, over 14 percent of all initial petitions were submitted by cap-exempt employers, and only a few employers (fewer than 1 percent) garnered over one-quarter of all H-1B approvals. Most interviewed companies said the H-1B cap and program created costs, but were not factors in their decisions to move R&D overseas: The 34 H-1B employers GAO interviewed reported that the cap has created some additional costs, though the cap's impact depended on the size and maturity of the company. For example, in years when visas were denied by the cap, most large firms reported finding other (sometimes more costly) ways to hire their preferred job candidates. On the other hand, small firms were more likely to fill their positions with different candidates, which they said resulted in delays and sometimes economic losses, particularly for firms in rapidly changing technology fields. Limitations in agency data and systems hinder tracking the cap and H-1B workers over time: The total number of H-1B workers in the U.S. at any one time--and information about the length of their stay--is unknown, because (1) data systems among the various agencies that process such individuals are not linked so individuals cannot be readily tracked, and (2) H-1B workers are not assigned a unique identifier that would allow for tracking them over time--particularly if and when their visa status changes. Restricted agency oversight and statutory changes weaken protections for U.S. workers: Elements of the H-1B program that could serve as worker protections--such as the requirement to pay prevailing wages, the visa's temporary status, and the cap itself--are weakened by several factors. First, program oversight is fragmented and restricted. Second, the H-1B program lacks a legal provision for holding employers accountable to program requirements when they obtain H-1B workers through a staffing company. Third, statutory changes made to the H-1B program have, in combination and in effect, increased the pool of H-1B workers beyond the cap and lowered the bar for eligibility. Taken together, the multifaceted challenges identified in this report show that the H-1B program, as currently structured, may not be used to its full potential and may be detrimental in some cases. This report offers several matters for congressional consideration, including that Congress re-examine key H-1B program provisions and make appropriate changes as needed. GAO also recommends that the Departments of Homeland Security and Labor take steps to improve efficiency, flexibility, and monitoring of the H-1B program. Homeland Security disagreed with two recommendations and one matter, citing logistical and other challenges; however, we believe such challenges can be overcome. Labor did not respond to our recommendations.
Recommendations
Our recommendations from this work are listed below with a Contact for more information. Status will change from "In process" to "Open," "Closed - implemented," or "Closed - not implemented" based on our follow up work.
Director:Andrew SherrillTeam:Government Accountability Office: Education, Workforce, and Income SecurityPhone:(202) 512-7252
Matters for Congressional Consideration
Recommendation: To ensure that the H-1B program continues to meet the needs of businesses in a global economy while maintaining a balance of protections for U.S. workers, Congress may wish to consider reviewing the merits and shortcomings of key program provisions and making appropriate changes as needed. Such a review may include, but would not necessarily be limited to (1) the qualifications required for workers eligible under the H-1B program, (2) exemptions from the cap, (3) the appropriateness of H-1B hiring by staffing companies, (4) the level of the cap, and (5) the role the program should play in the U.S. immigration system in relationship to permanent residency.
Status: In process
Comments: When we determine what steps the Congress has taken, we will provide updated information.
Recommendation: To reduce duplication and fragmentation in the administration and oversight of the H-1B application process, consistent with past GAO matters for congressional consideration, Congress may wish to consider eliminating the requirement that employers first submit a Labor Condition Application (LCA) to the Department of Labor for certification, and require instead that employers submit this application along with the I-129 application to the Department of Homeland Security's U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services for review.
Status: In process
Comments: When we determine what steps the Congress has taken, we will provide updated information.
Recommendation: To improve the Department of Labor's ability to investigate and enforce employer compliance with H-1B program requirements, Congress may wish to consider granting the department subpoena power to obtain employer records during investigations under the H-1B program.
Status: In process
Comments: When we determine what steps the Congress has taken, we will provide updated information.
Recommendation: To help ensure the full protection of H-1B workers employed through staffing companies, Congress may wish to consider holding the employer where an H-1B visa holder performs work accountable for meeting program requirements to the same extent as the employer that submitted the LCA form.
Status: In process
Comments: When we determine what steps the Congress has taken, we will provide updated information.
Recommendations for Executive Action
Recommendation: To help ensure that the number of new H-1B workers who are subject to the cap--both entering the United States and changing to H-1B status within the United States--does not exceed the cap each year, U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services should take steps to improve its tracking of the number of approved H-1B applications and the number of issued visas under the cap by fully leveraging the transformation effort currently under way, which involves the adoption of an electronic petition processing system that will be linked to the Department of State's tracking system. Such steps should ensure that linkages to the Department of State's tracking system will provide Homeland Security with timely access to data on visa issuances, and that mechanisms for tracking petitions and visas against the cap are incorporated into U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services' business rules to be developed for the new electronic petition system.
Agency Affected: Department of Homeland Security
Status: In process
Comments: When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.
Recommendation: To address business concerns without undermining program integrity, U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services should, to the extent permitted by its existing statutory authority, explore options for increasing the flexibility of the application process for H-1B employers, such as (1) allowing employers to rank their applications for visa candidates so that they can hire the best qualified worker for the jobs in highest need; (2) distributing the applications granted under the annual cap in allotments throughout the year (e.g. quarterly); and (3) establishing a system whereby businesses with a strong track-record of compliance with H-1B regulations may use a streamlined application process.
Agency Affected: Department of Homeland Security
Status: In process
Comments: When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.
Recommendation: To improve the transparency and oversight of the posting requirement on the Labor Condition Application (LCA), as part of its current oversight role, the Employment and Training Administration should develop and maintain a centralized Web site, accessible to the public, where businesses must post notice of the intent to hire H-1B workers. Such notices should continue to specify the job category and worksite location noted on the LCA and required by statute on current noncentralized postings.
Agency Affected: Department of Labor
Status: In process
Comments: When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.
Recommendation: To improve the efficiency and effectiveness of its investigations of employer compliance with H-1B requirements, the Employment and Training Administration should provide Labor's Wage and Hour Division searchable access to the LCA database.
Agency Affected: Department of Labor
Status: In process
Comments: When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.
VIEW FULL REPORT (http://www.gao.gov/new.items/d1126.pdf)
More... (http://ashwinsharma.com/2011/01/25/h-1b-visa-program-reforms-are-needed-to-minimize-the-risks-and-costs-of-current-program.aspx?ref=rss)
(LINK TO FULL REPORT BELOW)
Congress created the H-1B program in 1990 to enable U.S. employers to hire temporary, foreign workers in specialty occupations. The law capped the number of H-1B visas issued per fiscal year at 65,000. Since then, the cap has fluctuated with legislative changes. Congress asked GAO to assess the impact of the cap on the ability of domestic companies to innovate, while ensuring that U.S. workers are not disadvantaged. In response, GAO examined what is known about (1) employer demand for H-1B workers; (2) how the cap affects employer costs and decisions to move operations overseas; (3) H-1B worker characteristics and the potential impact of raising the cap; and (4) how well requirements of the H-1B program protect U.S. workers. GAO analyzed data from 4 federal agencies; interviewed agency officials, experts, and H-1B employers; and reviewed agency documents and literature.
In most years, demand for new H-1B workers exceeded the cap: From 2000 to 2009, demand for new H-1B workers tended to exceed the cap, as measured by the numbers of initial petitions submitted by employers who are subject to the cap. There is no way to precisely determine the level of any unmet demand among employers, since they tend to stop submitting (and the Department of Homeland Security stops tracking) petitions once the cap is reached each year. When we consider all initial petitions, including those from universities and research institutions that are not subject to the cap, we find that demand for new H-1B workers is largely driven by a small number of employers. Over the decade, over 14 percent of all initial petitions were submitted by cap-exempt employers, and only a few employers (fewer than 1 percent) garnered over one-quarter of all H-1B approvals. Most interviewed companies said the H-1B cap and program created costs, but were not factors in their decisions to move R&D overseas: The 34 H-1B employers GAO interviewed reported that the cap has created some additional costs, though the cap's impact depended on the size and maturity of the company. For example, in years when visas were denied by the cap, most large firms reported finding other (sometimes more costly) ways to hire their preferred job candidates. On the other hand, small firms were more likely to fill their positions with different candidates, which they said resulted in delays and sometimes economic losses, particularly for firms in rapidly changing technology fields. Limitations in agency data and systems hinder tracking the cap and H-1B workers over time: The total number of H-1B workers in the U.S. at any one time--and information about the length of their stay--is unknown, because (1) data systems among the various agencies that process such individuals are not linked so individuals cannot be readily tracked, and (2) H-1B workers are not assigned a unique identifier that would allow for tracking them over time--particularly if and when their visa status changes. Restricted agency oversight and statutory changes weaken protections for U.S. workers: Elements of the H-1B program that could serve as worker protections--such as the requirement to pay prevailing wages, the visa's temporary status, and the cap itself--are weakened by several factors. First, program oversight is fragmented and restricted. Second, the H-1B program lacks a legal provision for holding employers accountable to program requirements when they obtain H-1B workers through a staffing company. Third, statutory changes made to the H-1B program have, in combination and in effect, increased the pool of H-1B workers beyond the cap and lowered the bar for eligibility. Taken together, the multifaceted challenges identified in this report show that the H-1B program, as currently structured, may not be used to its full potential and may be detrimental in some cases. This report offers several matters for congressional consideration, including that Congress re-examine key H-1B program provisions and make appropriate changes as needed. GAO also recommends that the Departments of Homeland Security and Labor take steps to improve efficiency, flexibility, and monitoring of the H-1B program. Homeland Security disagreed with two recommendations and one matter, citing logistical and other challenges; however, we believe such challenges can be overcome. Labor did not respond to our recommendations.
Recommendations
Our recommendations from this work are listed below with a Contact for more information. Status will change from "In process" to "Open," "Closed - implemented," or "Closed - not implemented" based on our follow up work.
Director:Andrew SherrillTeam:Government Accountability Office: Education, Workforce, and Income SecurityPhone:(202) 512-7252
Matters for Congressional Consideration
Recommendation: To ensure that the H-1B program continues to meet the needs of businesses in a global economy while maintaining a balance of protections for U.S. workers, Congress may wish to consider reviewing the merits and shortcomings of key program provisions and making appropriate changes as needed. Such a review may include, but would not necessarily be limited to (1) the qualifications required for workers eligible under the H-1B program, (2) exemptions from the cap, (3) the appropriateness of H-1B hiring by staffing companies, (4) the level of the cap, and (5) the role the program should play in the U.S. immigration system in relationship to permanent residency.
Status: In process
Comments: When we determine what steps the Congress has taken, we will provide updated information.
Recommendation: To reduce duplication and fragmentation in the administration and oversight of the H-1B application process, consistent with past GAO matters for congressional consideration, Congress may wish to consider eliminating the requirement that employers first submit a Labor Condition Application (LCA) to the Department of Labor for certification, and require instead that employers submit this application along with the I-129 application to the Department of Homeland Security's U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services for review.
Status: In process
Comments: When we determine what steps the Congress has taken, we will provide updated information.
Recommendation: To improve the Department of Labor's ability to investigate and enforce employer compliance with H-1B program requirements, Congress may wish to consider granting the department subpoena power to obtain employer records during investigations under the H-1B program.
Status: In process
Comments: When we determine what steps the Congress has taken, we will provide updated information.
Recommendation: To help ensure the full protection of H-1B workers employed through staffing companies, Congress may wish to consider holding the employer where an H-1B visa holder performs work accountable for meeting program requirements to the same extent as the employer that submitted the LCA form.
Status: In process
Comments: When we determine what steps the Congress has taken, we will provide updated information.
Recommendations for Executive Action
Recommendation: To help ensure that the number of new H-1B workers who are subject to the cap--both entering the United States and changing to H-1B status within the United States--does not exceed the cap each year, U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services should take steps to improve its tracking of the number of approved H-1B applications and the number of issued visas under the cap by fully leveraging the transformation effort currently under way, which involves the adoption of an electronic petition processing system that will be linked to the Department of State's tracking system. Such steps should ensure that linkages to the Department of State's tracking system will provide Homeland Security with timely access to data on visa issuances, and that mechanisms for tracking petitions and visas against the cap are incorporated into U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services' business rules to be developed for the new electronic petition system.
Agency Affected: Department of Homeland Security
Status: In process
Comments: When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.
Recommendation: To address business concerns without undermining program integrity, U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services should, to the extent permitted by its existing statutory authority, explore options for increasing the flexibility of the application process for H-1B employers, such as (1) allowing employers to rank their applications for visa candidates so that they can hire the best qualified worker for the jobs in highest need; (2) distributing the applications granted under the annual cap in allotments throughout the year (e.g. quarterly); and (3) establishing a system whereby businesses with a strong track-record of compliance with H-1B regulations may use a streamlined application process.
Agency Affected: Department of Homeland Security
Status: In process
Comments: When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.
Recommendation: To improve the transparency and oversight of the posting requirement on the Labor Condition Application (LCA), as part of its current oversight role, the Employment and Training Administration should develop and maintain a centralized Web site, accessible to the public, where businesses must post notice of the intent to hire H-1B workers. Such notices should continue to specify the job category and worksite location noted on the LCA and required by statute on current noncentralized postings.
Agency Affected: Department of Labor
Status: In process
Comments: When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.
Recommendation: To improve the efficiency and effectiveness of its investigations of employer compliance with H-1B requirements, the Employment and Training Administration should provide Labor's Wage and Hour Division searchable access to the LCA database.
Agency Affected: Department of Labor
Status: In process
Comments: When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.
VIEW FULL REPORT (http://www.gao.gov/new.items/d1126.pdf)
More... (http://ashwinsharma.com/2011/01/25/h-1b-visa-program-reforms-are-needed-to-minimize-the-risks-and-costs-of-current-program.aspx?ref=rss)
hairstyles call of duty lack ops logo
immi2006
08-08 01:35 PM
I think it is /qtr basis, not based on salary, for instance if gates makes 1 Million a year, does not mean his SS contri is all done :-)
Irrespective of how much you make, the yearly deduction is always 4 K per anum,
It's not per quarter. It's based on your earnings. It was around $4000 per year gross or so for 4 credits. So if u arrived in December and left in Feb with 8 years in between you would be eligible if you get paid $4000 per month.
For a lot of finance information go to http://groups.msn.com/R2IClub. For 401K information, IRA, ROTH etc search google for "RRK Limits". RRK has tonnes and tonnes of info. By planning your departure from USA you can minimize the taxes on 401K. Penalty cannot be avoided.
Irrespective of how much you make, the yearly deduction is always 4 K per anum,
It's not per quarter. It's based on your earnings. It was around $4000 per year gross or so for 4 credits. So if u arrived in December and left in Feb with 8 years in between you would be eligible if you get paid $4000 per month.
For a lot of finance information go to http://groups.msn.com/R2IClub. For 401K information, IRA, ROTH etc search google for "RRK Limits". RRK has tonnes and tonnes of info. By planning your departure from USA you can minimize the taxes on 401K. Penalty cannot be avoided.
snathan
02-10 11:50 AM
Do RFE's for qualification and requirements comes only for LC or 140? I am with a similar profile but got LC and 140 approved and already filed for 485 last year. How much probablity is there that i might get an RFE for this for my 485 adjudication?
It will come only for I-140. You will get the approval in Perm.
It will come only for I-140. You will get the approval in Perm.
lp2007
01-19 07:40 PM
We are all proud of our accomplishments, EB2 or EB3 or EB1 , the degrees we have earned, the jobs we do and the achievements we have in our career. The relationships we have made and the list goes on.
I don't think being in a category of EB GC queue should define if you can be proud of an EB3 immigrant.
You almost make it sound like did a EB3 applicant become a "slumdog millionaire" ? :)
I don't think being in a category of EB GC queue should define if you can be proud of an EB3 immigrant.
You almost make it sound like did a EB3 applicant become a "slumdog millionaire" ? :)
No comments:
Post a Comment