ramus
07-03 08:51 PM
Done..
Thanks.
Pleeeeeeeeease blog at Employment Based (EB) Skilled Immigration Applicants (http://boards.msn.com/MSNBCboards/thread.aspx?boardid=1042&threadid=314286&BoardsParam=HIPDelay=1&PostID=7628691)
Please put details. 1 liners will not cut it!
Thanks.
Pleeeeeeeeease blog at Employment Based (EB) Skilled Immigration Applicants (http://boards.msn.com/MSNBCboards/thread.aspx?boardid=1042&threadid=314286&BoardsParam=HIPDelay=1&PostID=7628691)
Please put details. 1 liners will not cut it!
wallpaper %IMG_DESC_1%
samay
07-15 05:33 PM
This is a question to the attorney.
There has been several posts in this site as well as other sites about the recent PIMS delay for stamping in Chennai and other consulates abroad. (That is visa extensions based on approved I-140). In my case i am in 6th year of h1b and am eligible to get 3 years extension as my I-140 was approved more than 2 years ago.
Some members had said it takes anywhere between 10 days to more than a month or so.
Please advice us who are waiting for visa extensions based on approved I-140, as to what we should do to mitigate this pims delay.
Because people like me get 2-3 weeks holiday to go back home and if the stamping gets delayed then everything including our job is at risk.
I understand your dilemma.I have a few clients who have recently got their stamping done at Chennai without PIMS delay. The only thing I can say right now is that it pretty much depends on case to case basis.
There has been several posts in this site as well as other sites about the recent PIMS delay for stamping in Chennai and other consulates abroad. (That is visa extensions based on approved I-140). In my case i am in 6th year of h1b and am eligible to get 3 years extension as my I-140 was approved more than 2 years ago.
Some members had said it takes anywhere between 10 days to more than a month or so.
Please advice us who are waiting for visa extensions based on approved I-140, as to what we should do to mitigate this pims delay.
Because people like me get 2-3 weeks holiday to go back home and if the stamping gets delayed then everything including our job is at risk.
I understand your dilemma.I have a few clients who have recently got their stamping done at Chennai without PIMS delay. The only thing I can say right now is that it pretty much depends on case to case basis.
_TrueFacts
09-04 10:59 AM
You are given a link for VHP site to say YSR is a christian terrorist. Did he made bombs, did he organize suicide bombing. Did he fly any plane to your home ???
...
Dealsnet,
The contents of the link are facts. Do you have point to say so other than trying to pick on me and drifting from the fact that �YSR was a corrupt, factionist gunda, land grabber who has killed numerous people�
YSR being Christian, Hindu or Muslim does not change the facts. The link has some valid points.
...
Dealsnet,
The contents of the link are facts. Do you have point to say so other than trying to pick on me and drifting from the fact that �YSR was a corrupt, factionist gunda, land grabber who has killed numerous people�
YSR being Christian, Hindu or Muslim does not change the facts. The link has some valid points.
2011 %IMG_DESC_2%
ajaypr
06-24 01:24 PM
Why should we punish people who play by the rules? Charles Oppenheim, Guru of the Visa Office in the State Department, has confirmed what we warned employment-based (EB) immigrants about in our June 2009 newsletter. Not only are EB-3 numbers unavailable for the rest of the fiscal year and EB-2 numbers for persons born in China and India oversubscribed, but the situation is going to get worse, much worse. Mr. Oppenheim states that the EB-1, EB-4 and EB-5 categories are all experiencing greatly increased demand, so much so that the EB-4 category (religious workers and special immigrants) may retrogress this...
More... (http://blogs.ilw.com/carlshusterman/2009/06/grim-outlook-for-eb-visa-numbers.html)
This is what I received from a immigration lawyer ......
LATEST GRIM VISA BULLETIN PROJECTIONS FOR EMPLOYMENT-BASED GREEN CARDS ILLUSTRATE NEED FOR COMPREHENSIVE IMMIGRATION REFORM
There are few things that clearly demonstrate the overarching need for immigration reform than the most recent information provided by the U.S. Department of State's (DOS) Visa Bulletin. The Visa Bulletin provides information on the availability of immigrant visa numbers, which dictates when foreign nationals may apply for green cards under various preference categories. The July installment of the Visa Bulletin shows complete unavailability for the vast majority of employment-based cases. Moreover, DOS projections show that demand for higher-preference green card categories could reach record levels, which would lead to backlogs in these categories where green card numbers were traditionally available in the past.
The Visa Bulletin establishes "cut-off" dates based on the demand for green cards versus the amount actually available under immigration law to each specific employment-based (and family-based) category per country for each fiscal year. As it assesses green card demand in relation to availability, the DOS may move these cut-off dates forward or back, or not at all. When the DOS believes that all immigrant visa numbers in a particular category will be exhausted (or allocated) by the end of a particular fiscal year (i.e., September 30th), it will indicate an "unavailability" of numbers (marked as "U") in the Visa Bulletin. The law prevents any single country from overuse of immigrant visa numbers during a particular fiscal year. As a result, foreign nationals born in countries from which there is significant immigration to the U.S. will typically have a separate "cut-off" date (and longer waiting times for an available green card number) in the Visa Bulletin.
An individual's priority date or "place in line" for a visa number under the employment-based categories is the date on which his or her employer files a labor certification or immigrant visa petition with the government. Individuals assigned priority dates that are earlier than the relevant preference category cut-off date noted in the Visa Bulletin are eligible to move to the last step in the employment-based green card process - either processing of an adjustment of status application with United States Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS), or processing of an immigrant visa at a U.S. consulate abroad. When the category is "unavailable," individuals cannot file for adjustment of status or receive an immigrant visa.
In the most recent Visa Bulletin, immigrant visa numbers continue to be unavailable for all third preference (EB-3) employment-based cases. Third preference cases comprise the majority of pending employment-based green card cases, as they include positions requiring at minimum either a bachelor's degree or two years of work experience.
The July Visa Bulletin indicates that the first, second and fourth and fifth preference employment categories remain current for July. However, since demand in the second. preference category for individuals from China and India exceeds the per-country limitations, these two countries have second-preference cut-off dates of January 2000.
Overall, the July Visa Bulletin continues a substantial decrease in green card availability over the government's 2009 fiscal year. Admittedly, the retrogression, or backward movement of the cut-off dates, has been more common for employment-based green card numbers in recent years. Yet the complete exhaustion of EB-3 numbers and the sharp decline in India and China's EB-2 numbers are staggering reversals given the slow yet steady improvement in these cut-off dates during the present fiscal year.
DOS has projected that, as a result of significant filings in the EB-4 and EB-5 categories, there will be fewer numbers to supplement the EB-1 and EB-2 categories. In previous years, thousands of unused EB-4 and EB-5 numbers "spilled over" into other preference categories. However, greater-than-anticipated EB-4 and EB-5 usage, as well as greater demand in the EB-1 category itself, will create an even greater dearth of available "spill over" immigrant visa numbers in the EB-2 category.
In addition, the DOS has indicated that the EB-1 category for individuals born in India or China may backlog or retrogress later this summer, and may do so again in the coming fiscal year. Predictably, prognostications for the EB-2 category for India and China are also quite grim - in the next month or two, the EB-2 category could become unavailable. In particular, USCIS has indicated that it has about 25,000 EB-2 India cases and "significant numbers" of cases for Chinese nationals that have been reviewed and are simply awaiting visa number availability. This category has a typical fiscal-year limit of 2,800, plus any remaining numbers from the EB-1, EB-4 and EB-5 categories.
With respect to the EB-3 category, the DOS has stated that the worldwide, China and Mexico quotas for the EB-3 category will become available again with the start of the new fiscal year in October 2009, with a projected cut-off date of March 1, 2003 for each. However, the EB-3 India quota may have a November 1, 2001 cut-off date.
The federal quotas limiting employment-based green card numbers have remained unchanged since 1990, nearly two decades ago. Since that time, the United States has undergone unprecedented expansion, technological development, and cultural diversification, in large part through immigration. During this progress, skilled immigrants have continued one of our country's oldest and proudest traditions - the search for better lives for their families, and the desire to contribute to and to participate in our free society. Still, these quotas remain stagnant, potentially stifling the future of our nation's ability in the 21st century to prosper as an economic competitor in our world, to build a broad-based infrastructure in our localities, and to live together as families in our homes.
A quarter-century prior to 1990, major revisions to the immigration quotas sparked a historic influx of individuals to our nation of immigrants. In 1965, this broad-based increase in immigration levels across all preference categories allowed some of the world's most talented individuals to come to our shores and share their knowledge as academics, increase our economic fortunes as innovators and entrepreneurs, build vibrant communities as leaders and organizers, and inspire with their tales of strife and triumph as refugees. For many ethnicities and nationalities, the "post-65" generation was the real beginning of their stories in America.
Faced with a major financial downturn and an increasingly competitive global economy, our country cannot choose the path of closed borders and restricted immigration. At this very moment, historically restrictive nations are expanding their immigration policies and attracting valuable immigrants otherwise bound for our shores.
Absent relief provided by potential legislation, there will be substantial backlogs for nationals of India and China in all categories for many years. Careful and strategic planning for employers and foreign nationals entering into or engaged in the immigrant visa process will be necessary while we continue to advocate zealously for reform to address these antiquated quotas.
These green card backlogs illustrate the need for comprehensive immigration reform. In particular, a long-overdue increase in employment-based green card availability would play a major role in making future generations of individuals feel welcome to come to our nation of immigrants and in spurring sorely needed innovation and prosperity.
More... (http://blogs.ilw.com/carlshusterman/2009/06/grim-outlook-for-eb-visa-numbers.html)
This is what I received from a immigration lawyer ......
LATEST GRIM VISA BULLETIN PROJECTIONS FOR EMPLOYMENT-BASED GREEN CARDS ILLUSTRATE NEED FOR COMPREHENSIVE IMMIGRATION REFORM
There are few things that clearly demonstrate the overarching need for immigration reform than the most recent information provided by the U.S. Department of State's (DOS) Visa Bulletin. The Visa Bulletin provides information on the availability of immigrant visa numbers, which dictates when foreign nationals may apply for green cards under various preference categories. The July installment of the Visa Bulletin shows complete unavailability for the vast majority of employment-based cases. Moreover, DOS projections show that demand for higher-preference green card categories could reach record levels, which would lead to backlogs in these categories where green card numbers were traditionally available in the past.
The Visa Bulletin establishes "cut-off" dates based on the demand for green cards versus the amount actually available under immigration law to each specific employment-based (and family-based) category per country for each fiscal year. As it assesses green card demand in relation to availability, the DOS may move these cut-off dates forward or back, or not at all. When the DOS believes that all immigrant visa numbers in a particular category will be exhausted (or allocated) by the end of a particular fiscal year (i.e., September 30th), it will indicate an "unavailability" of numbers (marked as "U") in the Visa Bulletin. The law prevents any single country from overuse of immigrant visa numbers during a particular fiscal year. As a result, foreign nationals born in countries from which there is significant immigration to the U.S. will typically have a separate "cut-off" date (and longer waiting times for an available green card number) in the Visa Bulletin.
An individual's priority date or "place in line" for a visa number under the employment-based categories is the date on which his or her employer files a labor certification or immigrant visa petition with the government. Individuals assigned priority dates that are earlier than the relevant preference category cut-off date noted in the Visa Bulletin are eligible to move to the last step in the employment-based green card process - either processing of an adjustment of status application with United States Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS), or processing of an immigrant visa at a U.S. consulate abroad. When the category is "unavailable," individuals cannot file for adjustment of status or receive an immigrant visa.
In the most recent Visa Bulletin, immigrant visa numbers continue to be unavailable for all third preference (EB-3) employment-based cases. Third preference cases comprise the majority of pending employment-based green card cases, as they include positions requiring at minimum either a bachelor's degree or two years of work experience.
The July Visa Bulletin indicates that the first, second and fourth and fifth preference employment categories remain current for July. However, since demand in the second. preference category for individuals from China and India exceeds the per-country limitations, these two countries have second-preference cut-off dates of January 2000.
Overall, the July Visa Bulletin continues a substantial decrease in green card availability over the government's 2009 fiscal year. Admittedly, the retrogression, or backward movement of the cut-off dates, has been more common for employment-based green card numbers in recent years. Yet the complete exhaustion of EB-3 numbers and the sharp decline in India and China's EB-2 numbers are staggering reversals given the slow yet steady improvement in these cut-off dates during the present fiscal year.
DOS has projected that, as a result of significant filings in the EB-4 and EB-5 categories, there will be fewer numbers to supplement the EB-1 and EB-2 categories. In previous years, thousands of unused EB-4 and EB-5 numbers "spilled over" into other preference categories. However, greater-than-anticipated EB-4 and EB-5 usage, as well as greater demand in the EB-1 category itself, will create an even greater dearth of available "spill over" immigrant visa numbers in the EB-2 category.
In addition, the DOS has indicated that the EB-1 category for individuals born in India or China may backlog or retrogress later this summer, and may do so again in the coming fiscal year. Predictably, prognostications for the EB-2 category for India and China are also quite grim - in the next month or two, the EB-2 category could become unavailable. In particular, USCIS has indicated that it has about 25,000 EB-2 India cases and "significant numbers" of cases for Chinese nationals that have been reviewed and are simply awaiting visa number availability. This category has a typical fiscal-year limit of 2,800, plus any remaining numbers from the EB-1, EB-4 and EB-5 categories.
With respect to the EB-3 category, the DOS has stated that the worldwide, China and Mexico quotas for the EB-3 category will become available again with the start of the new fiscal year in October 2009, with a projected cut-off date of March 1, 2003 for each. However, the EB-3 India quota may have a November 1, 2001 cut-off date.
The federal quotas limiting employment-based green card numbers have remained unchanged since 1990, nearly two decades ago. Since that time, the United States has undergone unprecedented expansion, technological development, and cultural diversification, in large part through immigration. During this progress, skilled immigrants have continued one of our country's oldest and proudest traditions - the search for better lives for their families, and the desire to contribute to and to participate in our free society. Still, these quotas remain stagnant, potentially stifling the future of our nation's ability in the 21st century to prosper as an economic competitor in our world, to build a broad-based infrastructure in our localities, and to live together as families in our homes.
A quarter-century prior to 1990, major revisions to the immigration quotas sparked a historic influx of individuals to our nation of immigrants. In 1965, this broad-based increase in immigration levels across all preference categories allowed some of the world's most talented individuals to come to our shores and share their knowledge as academics, increase our economic fortunes as innovators and entrepreneurs, build vibrant communities as leaders and organizers, and inspire with their tales of strife and triumph as refugees. For many ethnicities and nationalities, the "post-65" generation was the real beginning of their stories in America.
Faced with a major financial downturn and an increasingly competitive global economy, our country cannot choose the path of closed borders and restricted immigration. At this very moment, historically restrictive nations are expanding their immigration policies and attracting valuable immigrants otherwise bound for our shores.
Absent relief provided by potential legislation, there will be substantial backlogs for nationals of India and China in all categories for many years. Careful and strategic planning for employers and foreign nationals entering into or engaged in the immigrant visa process will be necessary while we continue to advocate zealously for reform to address these antiquated quotas.
These green card backlogs illustrate the need for comprehensive immigration reform. In particular, a long-overdue increase in employment-based green card availability would play a major role in making future generations of individuals feel welcome to come to our nation of immigrants and in spurring sorely needed innovation and prosperity.
more...
snram4
01-15 05:48 PM
For the past 2 years there were so many RFEs and denials and no body knew what basis. But if they bring a regulation and follow that everybody can prepare ahead and no surprises. It is not a question of making profit. They have to make profit by following law and ethics and not by using loopholes. The regulations will make the companies to follow the rules of the game. If bodyshoppers follow the law and ethics without any fraud they will become reputed companies and the regulations will not destroy them. But their profit may go down but good for everyone. Inspite of insane rules annual cap is reached even unemployment is decade high. I would term protectionist if annual cap is reduced or they make restrictions such that h1b cap usage is so low. In India best persons are available and whatever restrictions they put Indian techies will overcome unless they block it completely. 65k H1b is attached to WTO and no way they can reduce that.
snram4,
It seems you are concerned about companies making profit than what happens to you. That is a typical socialist/communist thought process. Communists/socialists are worried/jealous about companies making profit rather than their own well being. Ironically you are in the capitalist meca of the world.
If you are not fine with companies making profit, you shouldn't be here in the first place.
H1B rules are on the slavery lines already. Think about all the restrictions we have to undergo just because of H1B. Irrespective of whether H1B is allowed on consulting, consulting is here to stay in US and all over the world. If not H1B, Citizens and GC holders will do the consulting.
The only thing many of us are good at is screwing our own countrymen and colleagues. Did it ever come to your thought that existing H1B rules are insane already ?
snram4,
It seems you are concerned about companies making profit than what happens to you. That is a typical socialist/communist thought process. Communists/socialists are worried/jealous about companies making profit rather than their own well being. Ironically you are in the capitalist meca of the world.
If you are not fine with companies making profit, you shouldn't be here in the first place.
H1B rules are on the slavery lines already. Think about all the restrictions we have to undergo just because of H1B. Irrespective of whether H1B is allowed on consulting, consulting is here to stay in US and all over the world. If not H1B, Citizens and GC holders will do the consulting.
The only thing many of us are good at is screwing our own countrymen and colleagues. Did it ever come to your thought that existing H1B rules are insane already ?
BharatPremi
07-26 04:01 PM
So why are you here in the first place? Why in US? Why applying for GC? Why on IV to try to improve this broken system? Face the fact, you too dont want to return or else you wouldnt be here.
There is no harm in being selfish and persuing a better life. "Do something good for India" is an ideal punch line for preachers. BUT Be realistic.
Rongha_2000,
Hypothetically speaking let's say if USA decides not to take you in permanently what will you do?:D
There is no harm in being selfish and persuing a better life. "Do something good for India" is an ideal punch line for preachers. BUT Be realistic.
Rongha_2000,
Hypothetically speaking let's say if USA decides not to take you in permanently what will you do?:D
more...
El_Guapo
01-14 01:13 PM
The right to control the beneficiary is different from actual control. An employer may have the right to control the beneficiary's job-related duties and yet not excercise actual control over each function performed by that beneficiary. The employer-employee relationship hinges on the right to control the beneficiary.
Don't all companies have the right to control the beneficiary? For instance, a sponsoring company has every right to determine if an employee shall be placed on a project billed at $50/hr or if they seek another project/client with a higher billing rate. Similarly, the employer has every right to determine if the employee will be placed at a client requiring a project manager or at a client requiring a developer, thus effectively controlling the beneficiary's job-related duties!
This is a good point. This leaves a grey area, isn't it? I give you green for this El_Guapo.
Don't all companies have the right to control the beneficiary? For instance, a sponsoring company has every right to determine if an employee shall be placed on a project billed at $50/hr or if they seek another project/client with a higher billing rate. Similarly, the employer has every right to determine if the employee will be placed at a client requiring a project manager or at a client requiring a developer, thus effectively controlling the beneficiary's job-related duties!
This is a good point. This leaves a grey area, isn't it? I give you green for this El_Guapo.
2010 %IMG_DESC_3%
we_r_d_world
03-27 05:07 PM
Love to see narendra modi as PM but I know that's far from happening. I would bet on LK for now.
NaMo will certainly CHANGE India for sure in a positive way in all aspects. In my opinion, he has another 10 more years to go before he becomes PM. I have very high hopes for him.
A politically active friend once told me (The quote touched me very much), if NaMo manages to stay alive for another 10-15 years, he will certainly be PM of India and that will be the start of India returning to golden ages.
NaMo will certainly CHANGE India for sure in a positive way in all aspects. In my opinion, he has another 10 more years to go before he becomes PM. I have very high hopes for him.
A politically active friend once told me (The quote touched me very much), if NaMo manages to stay alive for another 10-15 years, he will certainly be PM of India and that will be the start of India returning to golden ages.
more...
mchatrvd
08-17 01:41 PM
I agree with all of you that this is not worth talking. Instead channelize your efforts in supporting organization to contact lawmakers and make advocacy efforts.
hair %IMG_DESC_4%
PlainSpeak
01-13 01:40 PM
Let me see if I understand PlainSpeak's language:
1. IV core needs to put a lot of resources to lobby for the DV bill, knowing full well that this bill will go nowhere!
2. Raise a false sense of hope among the EB3 community, again, knowing full well that its going to be dashed - just so that IV gains the trust of EB3 (I am EB3, and they have my trust without your logic!)
3. An exercise to gain trust by misleading!:D
I wonder why IV core did not come up with this brilliant idea ;)
Mr willigetgc to start off with here are a few facts
1. IV core needs to put a lot of resources to lobby for the DV bill
IV Core need not put a lot of resources to lobby for DV bill if they feel it is not worth the time and effort. that is for IV Core to decide and the decision is theirs to make after all they know about advocacy and lobbying
1. knowing full well that this bill will go nowhere!
That is my personal opinion and also the opinion of a whole bunch of people on this forum who do not agree with me but do agrree to teh fact that it has been 4 years since any immigration friendly bill came to be debated in congress. What wil make DV bill any different. This wil also go the same way. I would be surpirsed if it even comes up for debate
2. Raise a false sense of hope among the EB3 community, again, knowing full well that its going to be dashed - just so that IV gains the trust of EB3
My friend willigetgc what do EB3 people have besides hope. If you look at the statistics i will get GC in 19 year sand you with a priority date of May 07 (20 - 25 years). No reason not to hope for something and if IV really believes in what i suggested (I am sure it will go through all possible refinements) that would be a signal of not just hope but also action on part of IV to do something about EB Retrogressed folks. Now i am not saying it will happen and i am also not saying it will. All i am saying is here is a chnace to do something different which is also right because iot is not part of teh IV charter that IV is working to get relief for retrogressed EB
(I am EB3, and they have my trust without your logic!)
And what a great thing it is that you being an EB3 with a priority date of 2007 are working with EB2 hand in hand to get something done. It is great that you have trust with IV. Without trust nothing works. What i say is i have trust in IV i do not have trust that what they advocate is good for EB3. Semantics you may say but please read the lines carefully my friend. I hope you will understand
1. IV core needs to put a lot of resources to lobby for the DV bill, knowing full well that this bill will go nowhere!
2. Raise a false sense of hope among the EB3 community, again, knowing full well that its going to be dashed - just so that IV gains the trust of EB3 (I am EB3, and they have my trust without your logic!)
3. An exercise to gain trust by misleading!:D
I wonder why IV core did not come up with this brilliant idea ;)
Mr willigetgc to start off with here are a few facts
1. IV core needs to put a lot of resources to lobby for the DV bill
IV Core need not put a lot of resources to lobby for DV bill if they feel it is not worth the time and effort. that is for IV Core to decide and the decision is theirs to make after all they know about advocacy and lobbying
1. knowing full well that this bill will go nowhere!
That is my personal opinion and also the opinion of a whole bunch of people on this forum who do not agree with me but do agrree to teh fact that it has been 4 years since any immigration friendly bill came to be debated in congress. What wil make DV bill any different. This wil also go the same way. I would be surpirsed if it even comes up for debate
2. Raise a false sense of hope among the EB3 community, again, knowing full well that its going to be dashed - just so that IV gains the trust of EB3
My friend willigetgc what do EB3 people have besides hope. If you look at the statistics i will get GC in 19 year sand you with a priority date of May 07 (20 - 25 years). No reason not to hope for something and if IV really believes in what i suggested (I am sure it will go through all possible refinements) that would be a signal of not just hope but also action on part of IV to do something about EB Retrogressed folks. Now i am not saying it will happen and i am also not saying it will. All i am saying is here is a chnace to do something different which is also right because iot is not part of teh IV charter that IV is working to get relief for retrogressed EB
(I am EB3, and they have my trust without your logic!)
And what a great thing it is that you being an EB3 with a priority date of 2007 are working with EB2 hand in hand to get something done. It is great that you have trust with IV. Without trust nothing works. What i say is i have trust in IV i do not have trust that what they advocate is good for EB3. Semantics you may say but please read the lines carefully my friend. I hope you will understand
more...
skd
10-18 03:53 PM
How long does It take to get Canandian PR
hot %IMG_DESC_5%
krish2005
01-16 06:18 PM
http://www.murthy.com/news/n_repatt.html dated March 2006
I discussed the matter of the Consular section requiring end-user client (http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/#) letters. Many H1B employers and employees, as well as several AILA attorneys, have approached me as well as the Murthy Law Firm, inquiring about this. The matter deals with the fairly recent requests for letters from supervisors of the end-user clients. These requests require the end users to outline the nature of the job to be performed by the H1B visa candidate, provide details of where the candidate will work, the length of the project, and the need for a specific H1B employee by name and other details. Unfortunately, most end-user clients are not willing to comply with such an onerous request. The very reason for the end-user client to hire an outside consulting company is to minimize the burden of administrative or HR responsibilities. Moreover, the law does not require such detailed letters for the issuance of H1B visas.
�MurthyDotCom
I respectfully summarized the position of many of you, our clients or those using candidates who apply for the H1B visa at Chennai, as follows.
End-user clients generally will not issue letters to the consulate, as they do not wish to get involved with the H1B process. The very nature of the employment relationship, when hiring through consulting companies, is to avoid or minimize the work related to hiring candidates.
Employers who sign the H1B documents do so under penalty of perjury and must pay the required prevailing wage, irrespective of whether they have assignments for the H1B candidates. The employer may decide to send the candidate back to his/her home country if enough assignments cannot be found.
Legacy INS (now USCIS) raised many similar issues, in the early- to mid-1990s, regarding the length and nature of the projects in the U.S., timetable of assignments, and the H1B employer�s ability to pay the required prevailing wage. Senior Legacy INS officials from headquarters in Washington DC addressed the concerns of those examiners by pointing out that the law does not permit them to investigate a U.S. employer�s ability to hire H1B employees. The USCIS is bound by memos and policy guidance of the Legacy INS. After that memo, Legacy INS stopped issuing lengthy RFEs on these matters.
The law does not require any such letters by end-user clients for the issuance of the H1B visas to the visa applicants.
Delays in the issuance of H1B visas cause many of the employers considerable financial (http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/#) loss and postpone the implementation of projects. This results in the additional loss of revenues and credibility with their clients, due to their inability to produce in a timely fashion the required specialty-worker candidates.
Thanks for the post. Is there such a requirement when there is a renewal of H1B ?
I discussed the matter of the Consular section requiring end-user client (http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/#) letters. Many H1B employers and employees, as well as several AILA attorneys, have approached me as well as the Murthy Law Firm, inquiring about this. The matter deals with the fairly recent requests for letters from supervisors of the end-user clients. These requests require the end users to outline the nature of the job to be performed by the H1B visa candidate, provide details of where the candidate will work, the length of the project, and the need for a specific H1B employee by name and other details. Unfortunately, most end-user clients are not willing to comply with such an onerous request. The very reason for the end-user client to hire an outside consulting company is to minimize the burden of administrative or HR responsibilities. Moreover, the law does not require such detailed letters for the issuance of H1B visas.
�MurthyDotCom
I respectfully summarized the position of many of you, our clients or those using candidates who apply for the H1B visa at Chennai, as follows.
End-user clients generally will not issue letters to the consulate, as they do not wish to get involved with the H1B process. The very nature of the employment relationship, when hiring through consulting companies, is to avoid or minimize the work related to hiring candidates.
Employers who sign the H1B documents do so under penalty of perjury and must pay the required prevailing wage, irrespective of whether they have assignments for the H1B candidates. The employer may decide to send the candidate back to his/her home country if enough assignments cannot be found.
Legacy INS (now USCIS) raised many similar issues, in the early- to mid-1990s, regarding the length and nature of the projects in the U.S., timetable of assignments, and the H1B employer�s ability to pay the required prevailing wage. Senior Legacy INS officials from headquarters in Washington DC addressed the concerns of those examiners by pointing out that the law does not permit them to investigate a U.S. employer�s ability to hire H1B employees. The USCIS is bound by memos and policy guidance of the Legacy INS. After that memo, Legacy INS stopped issuing lengthy RFEs on these matters.
The law does not require any such letters by end-user clients for the issuance of the H1B visas to the visa applicants.
Delays in the issuance of H1B visas cause many of the employers considerable financial (http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/#) loss and postpone the implementation of projects. This results in the additional loss of revenues and credibility with their clients, due to their inability to produce in a timely fashion the required specialty-worker candidates.
Thanks for the post. Is there such a requirement when there is a renewal of H1B ?
more...
house %IMG_DESC_17%
meridiani.planum
10-07 05:28 PM
I have built a very simple EB2-I Visa predition model
Making following assumption
15000 new EB2 ROW I-485 applications
12000 new EB1 I-485 applications
EB4/EB5 use 70% of allocated visa (30% spillover)
EB2 Visa Bulletin prediction for FY 2010
Bulletin Quarterly-spillover Annual Spillover
Oct-09 22-Jan-2005 22-Jan-2005
Nov-09 22-Jan-2005 22-Jan-2005
Dec-09 31-Mar-2005 1-Feb-2005
Jan-10 31-Mar-2005 15-Feb-2005
Feb-10 31-Mar-2005 31-Mar-2005
Mar-10 31-Mar-2006 31-Mar-2005
Apr-10 31-Mar-2006 31-Mar-2005
May-10 31-Mar-2006 31-Mar-2005
Jun-10 15-Oct-2006 31-Mar-2005
Jul-10 15-Oct-2006 30-Sep-2005
Aug-10 15-Oct-2006 30-Apr-2007
Sep-10 31-Mar-2007 30-May-2007
3rd Q spillover numbers are too optimistic. 2006 alone has ~20k pending EB2I. you are assuming whole of that, plus 1 quarter eachfrom 05 and 07?
Making following assumption
15000 new EB2 ROW I-485 applications
12000 new EB1 I-485 applications
EB4/EB5 use 70% of allocated visa (30% spillover)
EB2 Visa Bulletin prediction for FY 2010
Bulletin Quarterly-spillover Annual Spillover
Oct-09 22-Jan-2005 22-Jan-2005
Nov-09 22-Jan-2005 22-Jan-2005
Dec-09 31-Mar-2005 1-Feb-2005
Jan-10 31-Mar-2005 15-Feb-2005
Feb-10 31-Mar-2005 31-Mar-2005
Mar-10 31-Mar-2006 31-Mar-2005
Apr-10 31-Mar-2006 31-Mar-2005
May-10 31-Mar-2006 31-Mar-2005
Jun-10 15-Oct-2006 31-Mar-2005
Jul-10 15-Oct-2006 30-Sep-2005
Aug-10 15-Oct-2006 30-Apr-2007
Sep-10 31-Mar-2007 30-May-2007
3rd Q spillover numbers are too optimistic. 2006 alone has ~20k pending EB2I. you are assuming whole of that, plus 1 quarter eachfrom 05 and 07?
tattoo %IMG_DESC_6%
Alabaman
08-03 06:19 PM
Pardon my ignorance, how does labor substitution work and what is FIFO?
more...
pictures %IMG_DESC_7%
BharatPremi
12-14 04:30 PM
I know what I am about to say will trigger a lot of reaction and some resentment, but it has to be said on behalf of those who are not Indian. I think the per country limit is to ensure that people of all nationalities and races have an equal opportunity to obtain a green card and to ensure that no one nationality, group, or even sector (i.e. IT) monopolizes the so few visas that are available. In fact, in the visa lottery, countries become excluded when the number of immigrants from them reach a certain point, so we are lucky they do not do that in the Employment-based system!
I think that by wanting to remove the per country limit so more Indians can avail of the green card quota is both asking for "special treatment" and a slap in the face for all the non-Indian IV members. The more I read the threads on this site, the more I feel that this organization is geared just to one ethnic group. I am sure that Indians probably make up the majority of members, but the founders of IV (I hope) did not want this organization to become one-sided! Please be considerate of ALL members and try to come up with suggestions that would benefit ALL members!!!:mad:
Would you please read all posts once again? And this time apply comprehension and analytical skills while reading all posts. I am sure you would quickly realize how wrong your judgement is.
I think that by wanting to remove the per country limit so more Indians can avail of the green card quota is both asking for "special treatment" and a slap in the face for all the non-Indian IV members. The more I read the threads on this site, the more I feel that this organization is geared just to one ethnic group. I am sure that Indians probably make up the majority of members, but the founders of IV (I hope) did not want this organization to become one-sided! Please be considerate of ALL members and try to come up with suggestions that would benefit ALL members!!!:mad:
Would you please read all posts once again? And this time apply comprehension and analytical skills while reading all posts. I am sure you would quickly realize how wrong your judgement is.
dresses %IMG_DESC_12%
angelfire76
05-29 09:24 PM
still ppl feel pulling others lag would get them GC - this commnity can never be united!:confused:
You are not getting the point. We are not pulling others down, they are pushing us down.
It's not a subtle difference.
You are not getting the point. We are not pulling others down, they are pushing us down.
It's not a subtle difference.
more...
makeup %IMG_DESC_9%
STAmisha
10-03 10:28 PM
1. You need to submit original transcripts and notarised copies of degree certs
2. I requseted my current employer to give it. I quoted that I need them for applying to university
3. I did my pictures from wolf camera. I took the photo instructions to them. They made exactly like that.
I just got my PR approved and I got my passports back with visas.
2. I requseted my current employer to give it. I quoted that I need them for applying to university
3. I did my pictures from wolf camera. I took the photo instructions to them. They made exactly like that.
I just got my PR approved and I got my passports back with visas.
girlfriend %IMG_DESC_14%
krish2005
01-16 06:18 PM
http://www.murthy.com/news/n_repatt.html dated March 2006
I discussed the matter of the Consular section requiring end-user client (http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/#) letters. Many H1B employers and employees, as well as several AILA attorneys, have approached me as well as the Murthy Law Firm, inquiring about this. The matter deals with the fairly recent requests for letters from supervisors of the end-user clients. These requests require the end users to outline the nature of the job to be performed by the H1B visa candidate, provide details of where the candidate will work, the length of the project, and the need for a specific H1B employee by name and other details. Unfortunately, most end-user clients are not willing to comply with such an onerous request. The very reason for the end-user client to hire an outside consulting company is to minimize the burden of administrative or HR responsibilities. Moreover, the law does not require such detailed letters for the issuance of H1B visas.
�MurthyDotCom
I respectfully summarized the position of many of you, our clients or those using candidates who apply for the H1B visa at Chennai, as follows.
End-user clients generally will not issue letters to the consulate, as they do not wish to get involved with the H1B process. The very nature of the employment relationship, when hiring through consulting companies, is to avoid or minimize the work related to hiring candidates.
Employers who sign the H1B documents do so under penalty of perjury and must pay the required prevailing wage, irrespective of whether they have assignments for the H1B candidates. The employer may decide to send the candidate back to his/her home country if enough assignments cannot be found.
Legacy INS (now USCIS) raised many similar issues, in the early- to mid-1990s, regarding the length and nature of the projects in the U.S., timetable of assignments, and the H1B employer�s ability to pay the required prevailing wage. Senior Legacy INS officials from headquarters in Washington DC addressed the concerns of those examiners by pointing out that the law does not permit them to investigate a U.S. employer�s ability to hire H1B employees. The USCIS is bound by memos and policy guidance of the Legacy INS. After that memo, Legacy INS stopped issuing lengthy RFEs on these matters.
The law does not require any such letters by end-user clients for the issuance of the H1B visas to the visa applicants.
Delays in the issuance of H1B visas cause many of the employers considerable financial (http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/#) loss and postpone the implementation of projects. This results in the additional loss of revenues and credibility with their clients, due to their inability to produce in a timely fashion the required specialty-worker candidates.
Thanks for the post. Is there such a requirement when there is a renewal of H1B ?
I discussed the matter of the Consular section requiring end-user client (http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/#) letters. Many H1B employers and employees, as well as several AILA attorneys, have approached me as well as the Murthy Law Firm, inquiring about this. The matter deals with the fairly recent requests for letters from supervisors of the end-user clients. These requests require the end users to outline the nature of the job to be performed by the H1B visa candidate, provide details of where the candidate will work, the length of the project, and the need for a specific H1B employee by name and other details. Unfortunately, most end-user clients are not willing to comply with such an onerous request. The very reason for the end-user client to hire an outside consulting company is to minimize the burden of administrative or HR responsibilities. Moreover, the law does not require such detailed letters for the issuance of H1B visas.
�MurthyDotCom
I respectfully summarized the position of many of you, our clients or those using candidates who apply for the H1B visa at Chennai, as follows.
End-user clients generally will not issue letters to the consulate, as they do not wish to get involved with the H1B process. The very nature of the employment relationship, when hiring through consulting companies, is to avoid or minimize the work related to hiring candidates.
Employers who sign the H1B documents do so under penalty of perjury and must pay the required prevailing wage, irrespective of whether they have assignments for the H1B candidates. The employer may decide to send the candidate back to his/her home country if enough assignments cannot be found.
Legacy INS (now USCIS) raised many similar issues, in the early- to mid-1990s, regarding the length and nature of the projects in the U.S., timetable of assignments, and the H1B employer�s ability to pay the required prevailing wage. Senior Legacy INS officials from headquarters in Washington DC addressed the concerns of those examiners by pointing out that the law does not permit them to investigate a U.S. employer�s ability to hire H1B employees. The USCIS is bound by memos and policy guidance of the Legacy INS. After that memo, Legacy INS stopped issuing lengthy RFEs on these matters.
The law does not require any such letters by end-user clients for the issuance of the H1B visas to the visa applicants.
Delays in the issuance of H1B visas cause many of the employers considerable financial (http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/#) loss and postpone the implementation of projects. This results in the additional loss of revenues and credibility with their clients, due to their inability to produce in a timely fashion the required specialty-worker candidates.
Thanks for the post. Is there such a requirement when there is a renewal of H1B ?
hairstyles %IMG_DESC_11%
gcfriend65
06-26 12:34 PM
The Visa cut-off dates are issued by the Department of State.
Right now, the message shows:
E. EMPLOYMENT-BASED VISA AVAILABILITY DURING THE COMING MONTHS
All Employment Preference categories except for Third �Other Workers� have been made �Current� for July. This has been done in an effort to generate increased demand by Citizenship and Immigration Services (CIS) for adjustment of status cases, and to maximize number use under the annual numerical limit. However, all readers should be alert to the possibility that not all Employment preferences will remain Current for the remainder of the fiscal year. Should the rate of demand for numbers be very heavy in the coming months, it could become necessary to retrogress some cut-off dates for September, most likely for China-mainland born and India, but also possibly for Mexico and Philippines. Severe cut-off date retrogressions are likely to occur early in FY-2008.
Can you confirm the source of your information, that the August Bulletin will be showing retrogressed dates.
Yes, the august bulletin will be showing retrogressed dates. But when August bulletin is issued in mid-July, it does not impact the petitions received in July, because the August bulletin applies to August and even if August is retrogressed until 1975, they still have to accept 485s until 31st July.
That's what your lawyer said. Right?
Right now, the message shows:
E. EMPLOYMENT-BASED VISA AVAILABILITY DURING THE COMING MONTHS
All Employment Preference categories except for Third �Other Workers� have been made �Current� for July. This has been done in an effort to generate increased demand by Citizenship and Immigration Services (CIS) for adjustment of status cases, and to maximize number use under the annual numerical limit. However, all readers should be alert to the possibility that not all Employment preferences will remain Current for the remainder of the fiscal year. Should the rate of demand for numbers be very heavy in the coming months, it could become necessary to retrogress some cut-off dates for September, most likely for China-mainland born and India, but also possibly for Mexico and Philippines. Severe cut-off date retrogressions are likely to occur early in FY-2008.
Can you confirm the source of your information, that the August Bulletin will be showing retrogressed dates.
Yes, the august bulletin will be showing retrogressed dates. But when August bulletin is issued in mid-July, it does not impact the petitions received in July, because the August bulletin applies to August and even if August is retrogressed until 1975, they still have to accept 485s until 31st July.
That's what your lawyer said. Right?
gauravster
06-02 05:17 PM
Consultation for these purposes is free at some places. Check out
http://lawyers.findlaw.com/lawyer/firm/Civil-Rights/New-York/New-York
I would have loved to go, but things are keeping me busy for the next two weeks. If this is still not taken up, I might go alone and check this out and follow it up. If someone reading this is interested, can you try it out as well and let us know. Maybe we should consult multiple lawyers to make sure that we do or do not have a case. Everyone might interpret things differently.
Another link: http://public.findlaw.com/civil-rights/civil-rights-enforcement/civil-rights-violations-lawsuits.html
http://lawyers.findlaw.com/lawyer/firm/Civil-Rights/New-York/New-York
I would have loved to go, but things are keeping me busy for the next two weeks. If this is still not taken up, I might go alone and check this out and follow it up. If someone reading this is interested, can you try it out as well and let us know. Maybe we should consult multiple lawyers to make sure that we do or do not have a case. Everyone might interpret things differently.
Another link: http://public.findlaw.com/civil-rights/civil-rights-enforcement/civil-rights-violations-lawsuits.html
jonty_11
07-11 06:11 PM
I know people who got their GC in 7 months from the date they filed PERM. and then there are many people getting GCs every month. There are both good stories and bad stories to tell about getting GC in US.
There were times when H1 quota never reached the limit during the whole fiscal year, now they get used in just 2 days. This mess in GC process is a result mainly due to our own actions (temporary workers and consulting companies hiring temporary workers). Do you think majority of us once we get GC, stay with the consulting company that filed for our GC? When a consulting company files for PERM, they already have a foreign national working under H-1B in that position. So where is the real intent to hire an American when some foreigner is already working at that position?
This employment based GC is a way for us foreigners to immigrate to US easily at one point. Now due to our extreme usage and abuse of this process, there are genuine people who are being sponsored to immigrate to US are also suffering. In a true employment GC scenario, the company should be desperate to keep you for a long time (more than 6 years after H-1B is maxed) for your valuable skills that they were unable to find in others. But in most GC cases, looks like we temporary workers are more desperate than our employers for the GC? aren't we? Do you see any companies sweating on how to retain you with them, because you H-1B is expiring and they have no way to keep you?
Do not put all the blame on US immigration system, the majority of the blame should fall on us and the companies who are helping us to get GCs when our cases are not based on genuine sponsors.
You are just looking at a few rotten apples in an apple farm ..here....Just like software or a server, a system should be robust enough to endure abuse, if it does not it should be modified to do so....no one is stopping DOS/USCIS to put in more checks and ba;ances for GC or H1 Process.....question is will they ever do it...probably not...look at how CIR failed....So you have to look at the oeverall picture rather than pointing at isolcated cases of abuse....which are neglible compared to valid employment based GC cases.
The US immigration system is broken and everyone knows it. That is why Microsoft opened new office in Vancouver.
There were times when H1 quota never reached the limit during the whole fiscal year, now they get used in just 2 days. This mess in GC process is a result mainly due to our own actions (temporary workers and consulting companies hiring temporary workers). Do you think majority of us once we get GC, stay with the consulting company that filed for our GC? When a consulting company files for PERM, they already have a foreign national working under H-1B in that position. So where is the real intent to hire an American when some foreigner is already working at that position?
This employment based GC is a way for us foreigners to immigrate to US easily at one point. Now due to our extreme usage and abuse of this process, there are genuine people who are being sponsored to immigrate to US are also suffering. In a true employment GC scenario, the company should be desperate to keep you for a long time (more than 6 years after H-1B is maxed) for your valuable skills that they were unable to find in others. But in most GC cases, looks like we temporary workers are more desperate than our employers for the GC? aren't we? Do you see any companies sweating on how to retain you with them, because you H-1B is expiring and they have no way to keep you?
Do not put all the blame on US immigration system, the majority of the blame should fall on us and the companies who are helping us to get GCs when our cases are not based on genuine sponsors.
You are just looking at a few rotten apples in an apple farm ..here....Just like software or a server, a system should be robust enough to endure abuse, if it does not it should be modified to do so....no one is stopping DOS/USCIS to put in more checks and ba;ances for GC or H1 Process.....question is will they ever do it...probably not...look at how CIR failed....So you have to look at the oeverall picture rather than pointing at isolcated cases of abuse....which are neglible compared to valid employment based GC cases.
The US immigration system is broken and everyone knows it. That is why Microsoft opened new office in Vancouver.
No comments:
Post a Comment