vaishalikumar
08-05 09:33 PM
Who gets the AP (Advance parole) document from USCIS , candidate or lawyer who filed it ?
wallpaper Phantom Menace .
nitkad
03-20 05:07 PM
Thanks, according to your reply, it seems it will be good if I leave the company before the I140 gets revoked. Also, what happens if it gets revoked after I leave the company?
ArunAntonio
10-17 01:37 PM
Do women have to fill in the DS 157?
It shows up as a required to fill form for my wife?
It shows up as a required to fill form for my wife?
2011 keira knightley phantom menace
rrajasekar
08-11 09:38 AM
We have written a letter to our congressman asking if he could help expediting the process. They called us yesterday and said that they would try to do their best though they couldn't promise on the outcome.
more...
meridiani.planum
12-13 06:26 PM
you are a sheer genius (or should I say genie-ASS).
Yesterday you posted a link from Murthys website:
http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/showthread.php?t=16081
got beatings for that. Went away for a while. Now you come back with a posting from Mathhew Oh's website.
In neither case you posted a link to where you go the information from (also removed the copyright notice that Murthy puts up on all her postings), act as if its some "breaking news" when we have all read it ages ago, and are barely recovering from the hangover.
You are probably expecting flowers, but will receive brickbats. Again.
Yesterday you posted a link from Murthys website:
http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/showthread.php?t=16081
got beatings for that. Went away for a while. Now you come back with a posting from Mathhew Oh's website.
In neither case you posted a link to where you go the information from (also removed the copyright notice that Murthy puts up on all her postings), act as if its some "breaking news" when we have all read it ages ago, and are barely recovering from the hangover.
You are probably expecting flowers, but will receive brickbats. Again.
whitecollarslave
03-17 10:58 AM
I checked the full text of this bill, it does not have anything else besides temporary quota increase for H-1B.
How can we actively participate in this process? How can we find out about such bills when they are still in the works and make suggestions to the lawmakers to include relief for EB issues?
How can we actively participate in this process? How can we find out about such bills when they are still in the works and make suggestions to the lawmakers to include relief for EB issues?
more...
ntpatil
04-27 10:44 AM
Yes,
And that is the reason I wanted maximum check-in luggage with no carry on, so that she does not have any hassle while traveling.
And that is the reason I wanted maximum check-in luggage with no carry on, so that she does not have any hassle while traveling.
2010 make Keira Knightley an
anirudh74
03-18 12:09 PM
Don't count on it.Even if it is introduced it will hit a road block in the house.So go and do what you need to do.Its foolish to base all your plans on CIR. I am sorry to say this , but this is the reality and there is very little that anybody can do to influence this.
more...
chvramana
04-23 01:57 PM
I�m in EB2 and My I-140 was approved September 2008 through Employer A. My priority date is March 2008. I moved to Employer B. My old Employer A will not revoke my I-140. He is ready to hire me again, If I want to go back. I am completing 5 years in January 2011.
It would be great if I get answer the below my Question:
1. Do I need to go back to my old employer A to apply my I-485. If yes is there any specific time period to go back to my old employer A.
2. If I stay with my current Employer B. will I get 6th extension and will my old priority date will be considered with new processs.
3. which one is best choice, like staying with employer B or going back to Employer A.
Thanks for your help.
Ram
It would be great if I get answer the below my Question:
1. Do I need to go back to my old employer A to apply my I-485. If yes is there any specific time period to go back to my old employer A.
2. If I stay with my current Employer B. will I get 6th extension and will my old priority date will be considered with new processs.
3. which one is best choice, like staying with employer B or going back to Employer A.
Thanks for your help.
Ram
hair Keira Knightley
pappu
01-20 06:09 PM
Thanks everyone who showed up. We actually did better than we had expected.
A total of 55 letters signed today, and will be dispatched tomorrow to the White House and to IV.
Go NORCAL, go IV!
Wonderful. Thanks CA chapter.
All state chapters must do the same so that we can get maximum possible letters.
A total of 55 letters signed today, and will be dispatched tomorrow to the White House and to IV.
Go NORCAL, go IV!
Wonderful. Thanks CA chapter.
All state chapters must do the same so that we can get maximum possible letters.
more...
jonty_11
08-15 01:16 PM
see my post - 4th above...and you will know why u got a red..!!!!!!!!!!!
hot Keira Knightley Picture
panini
06-11 03:48 PM
If you have not been to Canada or lived in Canada since your landing I would assume that your Canadian PR would have been automatically cancelled because of the 3 years out of 5 years rule.
I was wondering if anyone here who had a canadian PR (i.e. did a landing), got GC later has travelled again to Canada again?
We got canadian PR in 2005 and did a landing while we were waiting for our GC. We got a our GC last year and are planning to visit canada using our GC. Are there going to be any issue in entering canada?
Also, we travelled to India last year and received new I-94 when we got back into US using AP. Very soon (days) we received our GC's. I am not sure what do with these I-94's when we leave US. Do we still need to surrender these as in the past?
I was wondering if anyone here who had a canadian PR (i.e. did a landing), got GC later has travelled again to Canada again?
We got canadian PR in 2005 and did a landing while we were waiting for our GC. We got a our GC last year and are planning to visit canada using our GC. Are there going to be any issue in entering canada?
Also, we travelled to India last year and received new I-94 when we got back into US using AP. Very soon (days) we received our GC's. I am not sure what do with these I-94's when we leave US. Do we still need to surrender these as in the past?
more...
house Knightley (right) poses nude
go_guy123
02-28 09:53 AM
Silicon Valley Immigration Lawyer Blog Has Just Posted the Following:
The Federal government is about to start knocking on the doors of employers, demanding to see I-9 records and more. The Wall Street Journal reported that more than 1,000 audit notices (http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748703961104576148590023309196.html?K EYWORDS=miriam+jordan), or notices of inspection, are to be sent out by Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE), part of the Department of Homeland Security, within the next few days. These "audit notices" are actually subpoenas, requiring employers to present original I-9 employment verification forms and payroll documentation. An employer is usually required to produce this documentation within three days. A sample I-9 subpoena is below.
Sample I-9 Subpoena (2-2011) (http://www.scribd.com/doc/49508862/Sample-I-9-Subpoena-2-2011)
The second page of this subpoena shows that ICE demands more than I-9 forms. They request records of all employees hired within the past three years, copies of the documents the employee provided when completing the I-9, detailed information about independent contractors, any Social Security no-match letters, and detailed payroll filings.
Employers should realize that these I-9 audits can target any employer, of any size and in any sector, whether or not the employer has H-1B (http://www.geelaw.com/lawyer-attorney-1054805.html)workers, L-1 (http://www.geelaw.com/lawyer-attorney-1054809.html) workers, or sponsors foreign nationals for employment-based green cards (http://www.geelaw.com/lawyer-attorney-1054839.html). As all employers must complete I-9's for new hires and maintain payroll records, all employers should be prepared for an audit. Fines for uncorrected technical and substantive errors on the I-9 forms range from $110 to $1,100. If an employer had technical or substantive errors on their I-9 forms, they might not necessarily realize this and could be exposing themselves to substantial fines.
These audits come as ICE has created an Employment Compliance Inspection Center. The Head of ICE recently explained that this new center would "address a need to conduct audits even of the largest employers with a very large number of employees." (http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748703951704576092381196958362.html?K EYWORDS=I-9+audit)The center is supposed to be staffed with specialists to pore over I-9 employee files of targeted companies.
http://feeds.feedburner.com/~ff/SiliconValleyImmigrationLawyerBlogCom?d=yIl2AUoC8z A (http://rss.justia.com/~ff/SiliconValleyImmigrationLawyerBlogCom?a=DpyqOn5n_U s:BRsSWNtzAz8:yIl2AUoC8zA) http://feeds.feedburner.com/~ff/SiliconValleyImmigrationLawyerBlogCom?d=qj6IDK7rIT s (http://rss.justia.com/~ff/SiliconValleyImmigrationLawyerBlogCom?a=DpyqOn5n_U s:BRsSWNtzAz8:qj6IDK7rITs) http://feeds.feedburner.com/~ff/SiliconValleyImmigrationLawyerBlogCom?i=DpyqOn5n_U s:BRsSWNtzAz8:V_sGLiPBpWU (http://rss.justia.com/~ff/SiliconValleyImmigrationLawyerBlogCom?a=DpyqOn5n_U s:BRsSWNtzAz8:V_sGLiPBpWU) http://feeds.feedburner.com/~ff/SiliconValleyImmigrationLawyerBlogCom?d=7Q72WNTAKB A (http://rss.justia.com/~ff/SiliconValleyImmigrationLawyerBlogCom?a=DpyqOn5n_U s:BRsSWNtzAz8:7Q72WNTAKBA)
http://feeds.feedburner.com/~r/SiliconValleyImmigrationLawyerBlogCom/~4/DpyqOn5n_Us
More... (http://rss.justia.com/~r/SiliconValleyImmigrationLawyerBlogCom/~3/DpyqOn5n_Us/silicon-valley-employers-must.html)
In the era of big government and job growth mainly through increased government payrolls, we will see more of such jobs being "created" and "invented" and in case of the USCIS the costs being passed on in term of increased fees etc.
Unless US is dragged to WTO over these out of control H1B/ L1 fees this will never stop.
The Federal government is about to start knocking on the doors of employers, demanding to see I-9 records and more. The Wall Street Journal reported that more than 1,000 audit notices (http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748703961104576148590023309196.html?K EYWORDS=miriam+jordan), or notices of inspection, are to be sent out by Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE), part of the Department of Homeland Security, within the next few days. These "audit notices" are actually subpoenas, requiring employers to present original I-9 employment verification forms and payroll documentation. An employer is usually required to produce this documentation within three days. A sample I-9 subpoena is below.
Sample I-9 Subpoena (2-2011) (http://www.scribd.com/doc/49508862/Sample-I-9-Subpoena-2-2011)
The second page of this subpoena shows that ICE demands more than I-9 forms. They request records of all employees hired within the past three years, copies of the documents the employee provided when completing the I-9, detailed information about independent contractors, any Social Security no-match letters, and detailed payroll filings.
Employers should realize that these I-9 audits can target any employer, of any size and in any sector, whether or not the employer has H-1B (http://www.geelaw.com/lawyer-attorney-1054805.html)workers, L-1 (http://www.geelaw.com/lawyer-attorney-1054809.html) workers, or sponsors foreign nationals for employment-based green cards (http://www.geelaw.com/lawyer-attorney-1054839.html). As all employers must complete I-9's for new hires and maintain payroll records, all employers should be prepared for an audit. Fines for uncorrected technical and substantive errors on the I-9 forms range from $110 to $1,100. If an employer had technical or substantive errors on their I-9 forms, they might not necessarily realize this and could be exposing themselves to substantial fines.
These audits come as ICE has created an Employment Compliance Inspection Center. The Head of ICE recently explained that this new center would "address a need to conduct audits even of the largest employers with a very large number of employees." (http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748703951704576092381196958362.html?K EYWORDS=I-9+audit)The center is supposed to be staffed with specialists to pore over I-9 employee files of targeted companies.
http://feeds.feedburner.com/~ff/SiliconValleyImmigrationLawyerBlogCom?d=yIl2AUoC8z A (http://rss.justia.com/~ff/SiliconValleyImmigrationLawyerBlogCom?a=DpyqOn5n_U s:BRsSWNtzAz8:yIl2AUoC8zA) http://feeds.feedburner.com/~ff/SiliconValleyImmigrationLawyerBlogCom?d=qj6IDK7rIT s (http://rss.justia.com/~ff/SiliconValleyImmigrationLawyerBlogCom?a=DpyqOn5n_U s:BRsSWNtzAz8:qj6IDK7rITs) http://feeds.feedburner.com/~ff/SiliconValleyImmigrationLawyerBlogCom?i=DpyqOn5n_U s:BRsSWNtzAz8:V_sGLiPBpWU (http://rss.justia.com/~ff/SiliconValleyImmigrationLawyerBlogCom?a=DpyqOn5n_U s:BRsSWNtzAz8:V_sGLiPBpWU) http://feeds.feedburner.com/~ff/SiliconValleyImmigrationLawyerBlogCom?d=7Q72WNTAKB A (http://rss.justia.com/~ff/SiliconValleyImmigrationLawyerBlogCom?a=DpyqOn5n_U s:BRsSWNtzAz8:7Q72WNTAKBA)
http://feeds.feedburner.com/~r/SiliconValleyImmigrationLawyerBlogCom/~4/DpyqOn5n_Us
More... (http://rss.justia.com/~r/SiliconValleyImmigrationLawyerBlogCom/~3/DpyqOn5n_Us/silicon-valley-employers-must.html)
In the era of big government and job growth mainly through increased government payrolls, we will see more of such jobs being "created" and "invented" and in case of the USCIS the costs being passed on in term of increased fees etc.
Unless US is dragged to WTO over these out of control H1B/ L1 fees this will never stop.
tattoo Ms. Knightley#39;s from Middlesex
ski_dude12
12-22 12:29 PM
Please contribute to IV.
Thanks for the info, i too got my recpt# by calling...
Thanks for the info, i too got my recpt# by calling...
more...
pictures Keira Knightley In Phantom
ghost
02-07 03:13 PM
Hi
I clicked on the link provided but unfortunately I was not able to watch the video, can you please share what was concluded at the end of the session, any measures that they plan to take?
Thx
It's a long discussion but the summary in the last 2-3 mins suggests that
a) the temporary worker visas issue should not be tied to backlog reduction issue
b) other countries like canada and australia have already changed their immigration policies for high-skilled immigrants and US is falling behind
c) that the US government needs to provide clarity on the GC process one way or the other instead of keeping us in limbo
d) interesting observation by canadian economics lady professor - clearing the immigration backlog is the only immigration reform that is needed for US economy.
You've to understand that this is just a panel discussion and they can only make recommendations for execution by the politicians...they themselves cannot take any measures to resolve the issues.
Next steps are for us to support IV Advocacy (see separate threads for the April Advocacy) and lobby hard for the necessary legislative changes...this is a good presentation that can be used to to lobby for a piecemeal legislation/amendment for legal immigrant backlog reduction!
I clicked on the link provided but unfortunately I was not able to watch the video, can you please share what was concluded at the end of the session, any measures that they plan to take?
Thx
It's a long discussion but the summary in the last 2-3 mins suggests that
a) the temporary worker visas issue should not be tied to backlog reduction issue
b) other countries like canada and australia have already changed their immigration policies for high-skilled immigrants and US is falling behind
c) that the US government needs to provide clarity on the GC process one way or the other instead of keeping us in limbo
d) interesting observation by canadian economics lady professor - clearing the immigration backlog is the only immigration reform that is needed for US economy.
You've to understand that this is just a panel discussion and they can only make recommendations for execution by the politicians...they themselves cannot take any measures to resolve the issues.
Next steps are for us to support IV Advocacy (see separate threads for the April Advocacy) and lobby hard for the necessary legislative changes...this is a good presentation that can be used to to lobby for a piecemeal legislation/amendment for legal immigrant backlog reduction!
dresses fetch dickson. Keira Knightley
Blog Feeds
07-08 11:30 AM
AILA Leadership Has Just Posted the Following:
While the 1986 Immigration Reform and Control Act (�IRCA�) prohibits employers from knowingly hiring or continuing to employ unauthorized workers, the Obama Administration�s decision to vigorously enforce employer sanction laws against employers, before providing a path to U.S. employers to legalize critical essential workers, is plain bad policy. �Immigration officers are investigating workplaces in every state in the US to check whether they are hiring illegal workers.� ICE launches workplace immigration crackdown (http://www.google.com/hostednews/ap/article/ALeqM5h_EhhmjIcqAzvJainjWnJTLRylXQD995P1T80)
We are in the midst of the �Great Recession� and U.S. industry is struggling to remain competitive. President Barack Obama�s strategy puts U.S. employers and industry between a rock and a hard place. While the law requires U.S. employers to verify, through a specific process, the identity and work authorization eligibility of all individuals, whether U.S. citizens or otherwise, it is practically impossible to obtain legal status for employers who discover undocumented workers in their workforce � even if they have been employed for decades. Immigrant Visa Numbers Hopelessly Encased In Amber (http://ailaleadership.blogspot.com/2009/06/immigrant-visa-numbers-hopelessly.html).
The diligent employer questioning the veracity of employment eligibility documents can face discrimination charges and vigorous enforcement by the U.S. Department of Justice, if for example, they check only Latino workers, or subject certain classes or worker to extra scrutiny. The U.S. Department of Justice Office of Special Counsel enforces the antidiscrimination provisions that protect most work-authorized persons from intentional employment discrimination based upon citizenship or immigration status, national origin, and unfair documentary practices relating to the employment eligibility verification process. The law prohibits retaliation against individuals who file charges and who cooperate with an investigation. Office of Special Counsel for Immigration-Related Unfair ... (http://www.usdoj.gov/crt/osc/)
No one knows how many of the 6,000,000 U.S. employers, as well as household employers, are familiar with, and in full compliance with the complex U.S. immigration law. Many employers are surprised when told the law requires ALL employers to complete an Employment Verification Form I-9 for any new employee hired after November 6, 1986, or face huge civil fines, and possible jail sentences. The I-9 Employee Verification form must be completed within three days of hire for all hires including U.S. citizens.
Vigorously enforcing this law without providing employers any way to keep essential workers puts employers struggling to make ends meet with the possibility of receiving huge fines, and even prison sentences if they "knowing continuing to hire five or more workers." Actual knowledge of the undocumented worker's status isn't always required, and "constructive knowledge" will suffice where the employer "should have known" of the worker's status. For example, if the employer tries to sponsor an undocumented worker for immigration benefits, the employer is presumed to know of the workers lack of immigration status. The Department of Homeland Security, through its enforcement division, Immigration and Customs Enforcements (ICE) has undertaken a massive new enforcement effort directed at employers large and small. More than 650 US businesses to have employee work files audited (http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/lanow/2009/07/more-than-650-businesses-nationwide-to-have-employee-work-files-inspected.html) Los Angeles Times - ?Jul 1, 2009.?
The focus on audit enforcement is clearly evidenced by the rising number of worksite audits, increased heavy civil penalties and likely continuing criminal prosecutions resulting from worksite violations. Immigration Focus Is on the Employers (http://www.nytimes.com/2009/07/02/us/02immig.html?ref=global-home) New York Times - ?Jul 1, 2009? �The Obama administration began investigations of hundreds of businesses on Wednesday as part of its strategy to focus immigration.�
While employers need to be extremely cautious and take steps to ensure that their employee verification papers are in order, the government needs to fix the immigration mess BEFORE pursuing this new aggressive policy of conducting ICE AUDIT "RAIDS�. Employers should be given an opportunity to pursue a legal path for essential workers before the Immigration and Customs Enforcement officers come �knocking at the door.�
http://www.latimes.com/news/local/la-me-immigemploy2-2009jul02,0,7434438.story (http://www.latimes.com/news/local/la-me-immigemploy2-2009jul02,0,7434438.story) Los Angeles Times: L.A. employers face immigration audits.
Many employers are caught in a Catch-22 when it comes to employee verification. �If you�re in the roofing business, if you�re in the concrete business, you don�t have American-born workers showing up at your door ... you have Hispanic workers showing up at your door, and they have what looks to be a legitimate Social Security card ... under our current law, if they have a card that looks legitimate and you don�t hire them because you suspect they are illegal, then you are guilty of discrimination and could be investigated by the U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission that�s the current system and it�s broken." Said Norman Adams, co-founder of Texans for Sensible Immigration Policy to the Houston Chronicle: Immigration crackdown goes after employers. http://www.chron.com/disp/story.mpl/special/immigration/6506722.html (http://www.chron.com/disp/story.mpl/special/immigration/6506722.html)
Vigorously enforcing these laws without providing an option to employers is plain bad policy and it could make our economic situation worse. My experience with the employer verification law is most employers are simply not familiar with all aspects of the complex immigration laws. Most employers don't know that if they question a legal worker�s documents, the U.S. Department of Justice (U.S.D.O.J.) may charge them with discrimination. The adverse impact on the economy and on the housing market could be serious. The substantial economic contribution of hard working immigrants is clear. Economic contributions of immigrants come in many forms in California. (http://topics.sacbee.com/California/) The California Immigrant Policy Center (http://topics.sacbee.com/California+Immigrant+Policy+Center/) estimates that the state's immigrants pay $30 billion in federal taxes, $5.2 billion in state income taxes, (http://topics.sacbee.com/state+income+taxes/) and $4.6 billion in sales taxes (http://topics.sacbee.com/sales+taxes/) each year. The Selig Center for Economic Growth (http://topics.sacbee.com/Selig+Center+for+Economic+Growth/) calculates that the purchasing power of Latino and Asian consumers in California (http://topics.sacbee.com/California/) totaled $412 billion in 2008 � nearly one-third of the state's total purchasing power. The U.S. Census Bureau (http://topics.sacbee.com/U.S.+Census+Bureau/) found that California (http://topics.sacbee.com/California/) businesses owned by Latinos and Asians constituted more than one-quarter of all businesses in the state as of 2002, employing 1.2 million people and generating sales and receipts of $183 billion. Where would our economy be without these immigrants? http://www.sacbee.com/opinion/story/1981220.html (http://www.sacbee.com/opinion/story/1981220.html) Sacramento Bee: Immigrants are not a fiscal drain.
Comprehensive immigration reform requires a path to legal status for the undocumented and an orderly system for future worker flows to allow U.S. industry to innovate and compete globally. It will require a complete overhaul of the government agencies that now mismanage a slew of immigration programs that could and should be the rejuvenating lifeblood of our nation. http://www.nytimes.com/2009/06/30/opinion/lweb30dream.html (http://www.nytimes.com/2009/06/30/opinion/lweb30dream.html) New York Times: Opening a Door to Young Immigrants.
The American Immigration Lawyers Association (AILA) understands the issues from a deep perspective, not merely from an emotional view. We believe that a sensible comprehensive immigration reform package will have to include smart enforcement, a path to citizenship for the 12 million undocumented immigrants currently living and working in the U.S., elimination of family and employment-based visa backlogs, adequate visas to meet the needs of U.S. families and businesses, a new visa program for essential workers to enable employers to legalize critically needed workers in agriculture, construction, and to provide future flows in certain areas including scientific fields, where as many as two thirds of our advanced degreed graduates are international students. We must also provide due process protections and restore the rule of law in immigration adjudications, and in our immigration courts. AILA Welcomes Obama's Proactive Push for Comprehensive Immigration Reform This Year (http://www.aila.org/content/default.aspx?docid=29372).https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/tracker/186823568153827945-4886898674742904565?l=ailaleadership.blogspot.com
More... (http://ailaleadership.blogspot.com/2009/07/ice-cracks-audit-whip.html)
While the 1986 Immigration Reform and Control Act (�IRCA�) prohibits employers from knowingly hiring or continuing to employ unauthorized workers, the Obama Administration�s decision to vigorously enforce employer sanction laws against employers, before providing a path to U.S. employers to legalize critical essential workers, is plain bad policy. �Immigration officers are investigating workplaces in every state in the US to check whether they are hiring illegal workers.� ICE launches workplace immigration crackdown (http://www.google.com/hostednews/ap/article/ALeqM5h_EhhmjIcqAzvJainjWnJTLRylXQD995P1T80)
We are in the midst of the �Great Recession� and U.S. industry is struggling to remain competitive. President Barack Obama�s strategy puts U.S. employers and industry between a rock and a hard place. While the law requires U.S. employers to verify, through a specific process, the identity and work authorization eligibility of all individuals, whether U.S. citizens or otherwise, it is practically impossible to obtain legal status for employers who discover undocumented workers in their workforce � even if they have been employed for decades. Immigrant Visa Numbers Hopelessly Encased In Amber (http://ailaleadership.blogspot.com/2009/06/immigrant-visa-numbers-hopelessly.html).
The diligent employer questioning the veracity of employment eligibility documents can face discrimination charges and vigorous enforcement by the U.S. Department of Justice, if for example, they check only Latino workers, or subject certain classes or worker to extra scrutiny. The U.S. Department of Justice Office of Special Counsel enforces the antidiscrimination provisions that protect most work-authorized persons from intentional employment discrimination based upon citizenship or immigration status, national origin, and unfair documentary practices relating to the employment eligibility verification process. The law prohibits retaliation against individuals who file charges and who cooperate with an investigation. Office of Special Counsel for Immigration-Related Unfair ... (http://www.usdoj.gov/crt/osc/)
No one knows how many of the 6,000,000 U.S. employers, as well as household employers, are familiar with, and in full compliance with the complex U.S. immigration law. Many employers are surprised when told the law requires ALL employers to complete an Employment Verification Form I-9 for any new employee hired after November 6, 1986, or face huge civil fines, and possible jail sentences. The I-9 Employee Verification form must be completed within three days of hire for all hires including U.S. citizens.
Vigorously enforcing this law without providing employers any way to keep essential workers puts employers struggling to make ends meet with the possibility of receiving huge fines, and even prison sentences if they "knowing continuing to hire five or more workers." Actual knowledge of the undocumented worker's status isn't always required, and "constructive knowledge" will suffice where the employer "should have known" of the worker's status. For example, if the employer tries to sponsor an undocumented worker for immigration benefits, the employer is presumed to know of the workers lack of immigration status. The Department of Homeland Security, through its enforcement division, Immigration and Customs Enforcements (ICE) has undertaken a massive new enforcement effort directed at employers large and small. More than 650 US businesses to have employee work files audited (http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/lanow/2009/07/more-than-650-businesses-nationwide-to-have-employee-work-files-inspected.html) Los Angeles Times - ?Jul 1, 2009.?
The focus on audit enforcement is clearly evidenced by the rising number of worksite audits, increased heavy civil penalties and likely continuing criminal prosecutions resulting from worksite violations. Immigration Focus Is on the Employers (http://www.nytimes.com/2009/07/02/us/02immig.html?ref=global-home) New York Times - ?Jul 1, 2009? �The Obama administration began investigations of hundreds of businesses on Wednesday as part of its strategy to focus immigration.�
While employers need to be extremely cautious and take steps to ensure that their employee verification papers are in order, the government needs to fix the immigration mess BEFORE pursuing this new aggressive policy of conducting ICE AUDIT "RAIDS�. Employers should be given an opportunity to pursue a legal path for essential workers before the Immigration and Customs Enforcement officers come �knocking at the door.�
http://www.latimes.com/news/local/la-me-immigemploy2-2009jul02,0,7434438.story (http://www.latimes.com/news/local/la-me-immigemploy2-2009jul02,0,7434438.story) Los Angeles Times: L.A. employers face immigration audits.
Many employers are caught in a Catch-22 when it comes to employee verification. �If you�re in the roofing business, if you�re in the concrete business, you don�t have American-born workers showing up at your door ... you have Hispanic workers showing up at your door, and they have what looks to be a legitimate Social Security card ... under our current law, if they have a card that looks legitimate and you don�t hire them because you suspect they are illegal, then you are guilty of discrimination and could be investigated by the U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission that�s the current system and it�s broken." Said Norman Adams, co-founder of Texans for Sensible Immigration Policy to the Houston Chronicle: Immigration crackdown goes after employers. http://www.chron.com/disp/story.mpl/special/immigration/6506722.html (http://www.chron.com/disp/story.mpl/special/immigration/6506722.html)
Vigorously enforcing these laws without providing an option to employers is plain bad policy and it could make our economic situation worse. My experience with the employer verification law is most employers are simply not familiar with all aspects of the complex immigration laws. Most employers don't know that if they question a legal worker�s documents, the U.S. Department of Justice (U.S.D.O.J.) may charge them with discrimination. The adverse impact on the economy and on the housing market could be serious. The substantial economic contribution of hard working immigrants is clear. Economic contributions of immigrants come in many forms in California. (http://topics.sacbee.com/California/) The California Immigrant Policy Center (http://topics.sacbee.com/California+Immigrant+Policy+Center/) estimates that the state's immigrants pay $30 billion in federal taxes, $5.2 billion in state income taxes, (http://topics.sacbee.com/state+income+taxes/) and $4.6 billion in sales taxes (http://topics.sacbee.com/sales+taxes/) each year. The Selig Center for Economic Growth (http://topics.sacbee.com/Selig+Center+for+Economic+Growth/) calculates that the purchasing power of Latino and Asian consumers in California (http://topics.sacbee.com/California/) totaled $412 billion in 2008 � nearly one-third of the state's total purchasing power. The U.S. Census Bureau (http://topics.sacbee.com/U.S.+Census+Bureau/) found that California (http://topics.sacbee.com/California/) businesses owned by Latinos and Asians constituted more than one-quarter of all businesses in the state as of 2002, employing 1.2 million people and generating sales and receipts of $183 billion. Where would our economy be without these immigrants? http://www.sacbee.com/opinion/story/1981220.html (http://www.sacbee.com/opinion/story/1981220.html) Sacramento Bee: Immigrants are not a fiscal drain.
Comprehensive immigration reform requires a path to legal status for the undocumented and an orderly system for future worker flows to allow U.S. industry to innovate and compete globally. It will require a complete overhaul of the government agencies that now mismanage a slew of immigration programs that could and should be the rejuvenating lifeblood of our nation. http://www.nytimes.com/2009/06/30/opinion/lweb30dream.html (http://www.nytimes.com/2009/06/30/opinion/lweb30dream.html) New York Times: Opening a Door to Young Immigrants.
The American Immigration Lawyers Association (AILA) understands the issues from a deep perspective, not merely from an emotional view. We believe that a sensible comprehensive immigration reform package will have to include smart enforcement, a path to citizenship for the 12 million undocumented immigrants currently living and working in the U.S., elimination of family and employment-based visa backlogs, adequate visas to meet the needs of U.S. families and businesses, a new visa program for essential workers to enable employers to legalize critically needed workers in agriculture, construction, and to provide future flows in certain areas including scientific fields, where as many as two thirds of our advanced degreed graduates are international students. We must also provide due process protections and restore the rule of law in immigration adjudications, and in our immigration courts. AILA Welcomes Obama's Proactive Push for Comprehensive Immigration Reform This Year (http://www.aila.org/content/default.aspx?docid=29372).https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/tracker/186823568153827945-4886898674742904565?l=ailaleadership.blogspot.com
More... (http://ailaleadership.blogspot.com/2009/07/ice-cracks-audit-whip.html)
more...
makeup look like Keira Knightley
bkn96
02-18 02:09 PM
oh yeah! it is legal i know that... however, i consulted lawyers on this and they were of the opinion that it is best to have a straight case where you are working for a large us corp. essentially, uscis can question if the company has enough work to sustain employing a person on a "permanent basis". that "permanent basis" appears to be one of the criteria for approval of labor/perm, I140 etc... thats why my query to you. it seems ability to pay can also be a question, however, that is not supposed to be brought up during adjudication of 485... so you are safe there...
so, this is real cool... thanks for sharing your info...
My I140 is applied by another company and 140 already approved. So i think ability to pay question only comes during 140. So after I140 approved i think it is safe to go in this route.
so, this is real cool... thanks for sharing your info...
My I140 is applied by another company and 140 already approved. So i think ability to pay question only comes during 140. So after I140 approved i think it is safe to go in this route.
girlfriend Keira Knightley
harsh
01-02 09:21 PM
My contribution is on way too.
Confirmation no:5YP659022V963134M
Confirmation no:5YP659022V963134M
hairstyles Keira Knightley Keira
walking_dude
03-17 03:28 PM
By contributing monetarily to IVs lobbying efforts.
IV keeps monitoring the newly presented bills in both houses of Congress through its lobbysists and attempts to attach increase to EB quotas to such bills. These efforts require lobbying the US Congressmen and lobbying requires money.
Since IV has limited number of recurring contributors and one-time contributors it has a limited budget. Also, this being an election year chance of any major immigration-related bill passing is remote (immigration being a politically sensitive subject ). Hence IV has been lobbying for Administrative fixes, in the interim, which are more achievable.
If all the IV members become regular contributors, IV will have surplus funds so that it can lobby hard and with more lawmakers to include EB GC increase in all possible legislations.
I checked the full text of this bill, it does not have anything else besides temporary quota increase for H-1B.
How can we actively participate in this process? How can we find out about such bills when they are still in the works and make suggestions to the lawmakers to include relief for EB issues?
IV keeps monitoring the newly presented bills in both houses of Congress through its lobbysists and attempts to attach increase to EB quotas to such bills. These efforts require lobbying the US Congressmen and lobbying requires money.
Since IV has limited number of recurring contributors and one-time contributors it has a limited budget. Also, this being an election year chance of any major immigration-related bill passing is remote (immigration being a politically sensitive subject ). Hence IV has been lobbying for Administrative fixes, in the interim, which are more achievable.
If all the IV members become regular contributors, IV will have surplus funds so that it can lobby hard and with more lawmakers to include EB GC increase in all possible legislations.
I checked the full text of this bill, it does not have anything else besides temporary quota increase for H-1B.
How can we actively participate in this process? How can we find out about such bills when they are still in the works and make suggestions to the lawmakers to include relief for EB issues?
bsbawa10
04-11 06:09 AM
I always did paper filing. I have done it third time this time. Incidently, the first two times the EAD approval came in about 17 days but this time, it has already been 15 days and I have not received the receipt even. The check was withdrawn on the 13th day.
Steve Mitchell
February 15th, 2004, 06:56 PM
Just added the Sony 717 to the list of cameras that the DOF calculator should give an accurate DOF reading. It is my understanding the the COC varies with varies digital cameras. I gathered this information from here (http://dfleming.ameranet.com/digital_coc.html). This is the guy who created the equations for one of Nikon's websites. That is the variable that changes and alters the DOF if I interpurt this correctly. This is the variable that is changed when determing the DOF in the DOF calculator (http://www.dphoto.us/forum/index.php?section=depthoffield) on Dphoto.us.
Your experiencing an effect called Depth of Field(DOF). This is commen and usally you want to minimize it for effect but not in your case.
You will need to learn to use a DOF calculator, there is one on this site but it does not include the 2/3" sensor sive you camera has. A better one for you right now may be this calculator here: http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/nikoncp5700/page2.asp
Using this you can determine the distance you need, focal length and distance to subject to obtain the desired DOF. Currently on the wide end of your camera, you'll need to move about a 1.5 feet from the focus point with f8 to get the DOF you desire. If you get the WA adaptor you'll be able to move closer to about .9 feet from the focus point and still obtain the DOF you desire.
You'll never be able to be within 5 inches from the object and obtain the DOF you desire, it simply is not possible with you camera. As to which WA adaptor to get? I don't know. I've never used anything of the sort so I can not answer that question for you.
Scott
Your experiencing an effect called Depth of Field(DOF). This is commen and usally you want to minimize it for effect but not in your case.
You will need to learn to use a DOF calculator, there is one on this site but it does not include the 2/3" sensor sive you camera has. A better one for you right now may be this calculator here: http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/nikoncp5700/page2.asp
Using this you can determine the distance you need, focal length and distance to subject to obtain the desired DOF. Currently on the wide end of your camera, you'll need to move about a 1.5 feet from the focus point with f8 to get the DOF you desire. If you get the WA adaptor you'll be able to move closer to about .9 feet from the focus point and still obtain the DOF you desire.
You'll never be able to be within 5 inches from the object and obtain the DOF you desire, it simply is not possible with you camera. As to which WA adaptor to get? I don't know. I've never used anything of the sort so I can not answer that question for you.
Scott
No comments:
Post a Comment