eb3_nepa
11-06 04:49 PM
It doesnt matter whether the clients of the employer are for-profit or not (obviously). The only thing relevant is whether or not the organization for which your wife will work is classified as not-for-profit.
What if the organization qualifies as a "medical" related organization. Dealing Solely with hospitals etc?
What if the organization qualifies as a "medical" related organization. Dealing Solely with hospitals etc?
wallpaper wallpaper Cute Funny Sayings
crystal
06-15 06:20 PM
I found in another forum similar question but not exact.
http://boards.immigrationportal.com/showthread.php?t=115661
as per the above link even though u dont apply for EAD , once you file I-485, you no longer can work on F1-EAD if I understand it correctly
(moderators please do not delete the above link , as I am just trying to get information for my cause.)
I am on F1 -OPT and my husband wants to apply for EAD...we are totally confused..i ma talking to my present compnay lawyers and my husbands compnay lawyers, they said it should be OK.... But i am not convinced.... they say there is alwys arisk involved..but it is a chance that we have to take.... i will keep you posted when i make a decision..lot of my frinds are in teh same position..so will tell you about otehr facts which i come across
http://boards.immigrationportal.com/showthread.php?t=115661
as per the above link even though u dont apply for EAD , once you file I-485, you no longer can work on F1-EAD if I understand it correctly
(moderators please do not delete the above link , as I am just trying to get information for my cause.)
I am on F1 -OPT and my husband wants to apply for EAD...we are totally confused..i ma talking to my present compnay lawyers and my husbands compnay lawyers, they said it should be OK.... But i am not convinced.... they say there is alwys arisk involved..but it is a chance that we have to take.... i will keep you posted when i make a decision..lot of my frinds are in teh same position..so will tell you about otehr facts which i come across
waiting_4_gc
07-27 03:30 PM
You can't write 01/01/1995. In that case your check will be invalidated. Check expires after 180 days. :D :D
But you are correct for RD :)
Umm, what if USCIS takes more than 180 days to encash the checks?
Do we have to re-file the application/re-send the check?:confused:
But you are correct for RD :)
Umm, what if USCIS takes more than 180 days to encash the checks?
Do we have to re-file the application/re-send the check?:confused:
2011 cute funny quotes about love. cute funny sayings. cute funny sayings.
bestofall
12-30 09:56 PM
How did you find out , that files are assigned to I/O
more...
frostrated
06-25 12:56 PM
you need to be physically present in the country when you apply for your AP. you can either have the uscis send it to your address in india, a consular post in india or your address here in the US. i would suggest you have it sent to your address here in the US and then have one of your friends send it by fedex to india. dont use regular post as it might get misplaed or lost, which means you are stuck.
if you are planning to return before your current AP expires, then you dont need a new AP. might as well wait until later this year when they are planning to bring out a new EAD card that also has AP approval in it.
if you are planning to return before your current AP expires, then you dont need a new AP. might as well wait until later this year when they are planning to bring out a new EAD card that also has AP approval in it.
visafreedom
07-03 02:09 AM
Please read, sign and observe
http://www.petitiononline.com/aos485/petition.html
To: U,S. Congress American Government
USCIS/DOS has made fun of a set of highly skilled immigrant workers of America. They issued a bulletin in June 2007 (http://travel.state.gov/visa/frvi/bulletin/bulletin_3258.html) declaring all classes of employment-based visa priority dates current from July 1, 2007 and then pulled the carpet under everyone's feet by issuing a bulletin in July 2007 (http://travel.state.gov/visa/frvi/bulletin/bulletin_3263.html) which declared all July applications ineligible.
The June bulletin caused a frenzy of activity amongst the applicants which ranged from applicants cancelling their travel plans and rushing to file their petitions to applicants tying the nuptial knot and cancelling their plans of higher studies. This act is mockery and disrespect of such skilled workers, causing them huge emotional and mental trauma. It also represents a huge economic loss in terms of time and resources consumed for readiness in filing the applications that involved the individuals, their employers and the attorneys representing them.
As a mark of protest we would like to observe July 13, 2007 as "NO WORK DAY". We demand justice from America and the American Governement. We believe our voices will only be heard when our presence (and importance) is made conspicuous by our absence. So, all those who believe in this are urged to refrain from going to work on Friday July 13, 2007.
Sincerely,
http://www.petitiononline.com/aos485/petition.html
To: U,S. Congress American Government
USCIS/DOS has made fun of a set of highly skilled immigrant workers of America. They issued a bulletin in June 2007 (http://travel.state.gov/visa/frvi/bulletin/bulletin_3258.html) declaring all classes of employment-based visa priority dates current from July 1, 2007 and then pulled the carpet under everyone's feet by issuing a bulletin in July 2007 (http://travel.state.gov/visa/frvi/bulletin/bulletin_3263.html) which declared all July applications ineligible.
The June bulletin caused a frenzy of activity amongst the applicants which ranged from applicants cancelling their travel plans and rushing to file their petitions to applicants tying the nuptial knot and cancelling their plans of higher studies. This act is mockery and disrespect of such skilled workers, causing them huge emotional and mental trauma. It also represents a huge economic loss in terms of time and resources consumed for readiness in filing the applications that involved the individuals, their employers and the attorneys representing them.
As a mark of protest we would like to observe July 13, 2007 as "NO WORK DAY". We demand justice from America and the American Governement. We believe our voices will only be heard when our presence (and importance) is made conspicuous by our absence. So, all those who believe in this are urged to refrain from going to work on Friday July 13, 2007.
Sincerely,
more...
485Mbe4001
05-17 06:31 PM
question along the same lines, any idea how much it costs to get LC via perm?
2010 Find cute cute funny quotes
CHHAYA
04-20 07:08 AM
I filed paper EAD renewal to TSC. TSC received application on 4/14/11 but my check is not cashed yet. How long they take to deposit the check and issue the receipt notice?
more...
CCC2006
09-11 03:54 PM
Hi All,
I received word from my company that my 45 day letter had come in .. this is March 2005. Its more than a year and now they just seem to keep quite. If I persist they say the lawyer has not come up with anything yet.
I tried calling the lawyer but they say that nothing has come up either.
Now with all the talk about September 2007 the finish date for the BEC where do we stand. My lawyer is quiet, my employer is quite and my 6 years are getting close to complete in January 2007.
How are you guyz coping ? I am tired of waiting .. haven't gone past the first stage.
Hoping for the best.
I received word from my company that my 45 day letter had come in .. this is March 2005. Its more than a year and now they just seem to keep quite. If I persist they say the lawyer has not come up with anything yet.
I tried calling the lawyer but they say that nothing has come up either.
Now with all the talk about September 2007 the finish date for the BEC where do we stand. My lawyer is quiet, my employer is quite and my 6 years are getting close to complete in January 2007.
How are you guyz coping ? I am tired of waiting .. haven't gone past the first stage.
Hoping for the best.
hair Cute Funny Sayings
Blog Feeds
02-25 07:20 PM
AILA Leadership Has Just Posted the Following:
https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhDLoj10OKbQS98oZXIhE_hiDkorKkzrK1ZXdDjAbTH5oTaylUuvzhgOe2uD7WivYjcdDSbG4bSUOP1lbKh6fKcoXUAbM3zsJDOO8_8Z-ACBP-0mgTn2ZpCQzkUo3VjFnN4kwCAtFEuhpA/s320/2010-02-23+Magnifying+Glass.jpg (https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhDLoj10OKbQS98oZXIhE_hiDkorKkzrK1ZXdDjAbTH5oTaylUuvzhgOe2uD7WivYjcdDSbG4bSUOP1lbKh6fKcoXUAbM3zsJDOO8_8Z-ACBP-0mgTn2ZpCQzkUo3VjFnN4kwCAtFEuhpA/s1600-h/2010-02-23+Magnifying+Glass.jpg)
By Eleanor Pelta, AILA First Vice President
The latest salvo in the war against H-1B workers and their employers (and this time, they�ve thrown L-1�s in just for fun,) is the Economic Policy Institute�s briefing paper by Ron Hira, released last week, which concludes that the practice of using H-1B and L-1 workers and then sending them back to their home countries is bad for the economy. While Hira�s findings are certainly headline-grabbing, the road that Hira takes to get there is filled with twists, turns and manipulations and simply lacks real data.
Hira starts with the premise that some employers use H-1B�s and L visas as a bridge to permanent residence, and some employers use those categories for temporary worker mobility. (His particular political bent is belied by his constant usage of the term �guest-worker status��a term that brings with it the politically charged connotations of the European guest worker programs for unskilled workers�for the practice of bringing H-1B�s and L�s in to the U.S. on a temporary basis.) After examining his �data,� he divides the world of employers into two broad categories:
� Bad guys (generally foreign employers, no surprise, or U.S. employers with off-shore companies in India) that bring in H-1B and L workers for temporary periods, exploit them, underpay them and send them home after they get training from the American workers whose jobs they will outsource when they return home
� Good guys (U.S. corporations �Hira uses the more genteel label, �firms with traditional business models�) that bring H-1B and L workers to the U.S., pay them adequate wages, and sponsor them for permanent residence, thereby effecting a knowledge transfer to American colleagues that is good for the economy
Hira�s tool, a statistic he calls �immigration yield,� is simply a comparison of H-1B and L usage and the number of PERM applications filed by the highest users of those visas. He essentially concludes that because the highest users of H-1B�s and L�s are Indian consulting companies, and these companies have only a minimal number of PERM�s certified, they are using H�s and L�s as cheap temporary labor. He is unable to explain away the high number PERM filings of one of the IT consulting companies, and so he addresses this anomaly by saying �part of the explanation might be that it is headquartered in the United States.�
There are too many things wrong with this analysis to list in this blog, but here are a just a few ways in which Hira�s study is problematic:
Hira�s clear implication is that companies that don�t sponsor H-1B�s and L�s for PERM are using these workers instead of more expensive American labor. He ignores that fact the H-1B program has rules in place requiring payment of the prevailing wage to these workers. But even worse, he has not presented any data whatsoever on the average wages paid to these workers. He also doesn�t address the expense of obtaining such visas. He simply concludes that because they are here temporarily, they are underpaid.
Hira makes the argument that companies who use H-1B and L workers as temporary workers generally use their U.S. operations as a training ground for these workers and then send then back to their home countries to do the job that was once located here. Again, this assertion is not supported by any real statistical data about, or serious review of, the U.S. activities of such workers, but rather by anecdotal evidence and quotes from news stories taken out of context.
With respect to the fact that the L-1B visa requires specialized knowledge and so would normally preclude entry to the U.S. for the purpose of gaining training, Hira cites and outdated OIG report that alleges that adjudicators will approve any L-1B petition, because the standards are so broad. Those of use in the field struggling with the 10 page RFE�s typically issued automatically on any specialized knowledge petition would certainly beg to differ with that point.
Hira clearly implies that American jobs are lost because of H-1B and L �guest workers,� but has no direct statistical evidence of such job loss.
The fact is that usage of H-1B and L visas varies with the needs of the employer. Some employers use these programs to rotate experienced, professional workers into the United States and then send the workers abroad to continue their careers. Some employers bring H-1B�s and L�s into the U.S. to rely on their skills on a permanent basis. Judging from the fraud statistics as well as DOL enforcement actions, the majority of employers who use H-1B workers pay these workers adequate wages and comply with all of the DOL rules regarding use of these workers, whether the employers bring them in for temporary purposes or not. By the same token, the minority of employers who seek to abuse H and L workers may well do so, whether they intend to sponsor them for permanent residence or not. Indeed, arguably, the potential for long-term abuse is much worse in the situation in which a real �bad guy� employer is sponsoring an employee for a green card, because of the inordinate length of time it takes for many H-1B and L workers to obtain permanent residency due to backlogs.
Hira does make that last point, and it is just about the only one we agree on. Congress needs to create a streamlined way for employers to access and retain in the U.S. foreign expertise and talent, without at 10-15 year wait for permanent residence. But our economy still needs the ability for business to nimbly move talent to the U.S. on a temporary basis when needed, or to rotate key personnel internationally. In a world where global mobility means increased competitiveness, Hira�s �statistics� simply don�t support elimination of these crucial capability.https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/tracker/186823568153827945-6000198492670312275?l=ailaleadership.blogspot.com
More... (http://ailaleadership.blogspot.com/2010/02/epis-latest-study-of-h-1b-and-l-usage.html)
https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhDLoj10OKbQS98oZXIhE_hiDkorKkzrK1ZXdDjAbTH5oTaylUuvzhgOe2uD7WivYjcdDSbG4bSUOP1lbKh6fKcoXUAbM3zsJDOO8_8Z-ACBP-0mgTn2ZpCQzkUo3VjFnN4kwCAtFEuhpA/s320/2010-02-23+Magnifying+Glass.jpg (https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhDLoj10OKbQS98oZXIhE_hiDkorKkzrK1ZXdDjAbTH5oTaylUuvzhgOe2uD7WivYjcdDSbG4bSUOP1lbKh6fKcoXUAbM3zsJDOO8_8Z-ACBP-0mgTn2ZpCQzkUo3VjFnN4kwCAtFEuhpA/s1600-h/2010-02-23+Magnifying+Glass.jpg)
By Eleanor Pelta, AILA First Vice President
The latest salvo in the war against H-1B workers and their employers (and this time, they�ve thrown L-1�s in just for fun,) is the Economic Policy Institute�s briefing paper by Ron Hira, released last week, which concludes that the practice of using H-1B and L-1 workers and then sending them back to their home countries is bad for the economy. While Hira�s findings are certainly headline-grabbing, the road that Hira takes to get there is filled with twists, turns and manipulations and simply lacks real data.
Hira starts with the premise that some employers use H-1B�s and L visas as a bridge to permanent residence, and some employers use those categories for temporary worker mobility. (His particular political bent is belied by his constant usage of the term �guest-worker status��a term that brings with it the politically charged connotations of the European guest worker programs for unskilled workers�for the practice of bringing H-1B�s and L�s in to the U.S. on a temporary basis.) After examining his �data,� he divides the world of employers into two broad categories:
� Bad guys (generally foreign employers, no surprise, or U.S. employers with off-shore companies in India) that bring in H-1B and L workers for temporary periods, exploit them, underpay them and send them home after they get training from the American workers whose jobs they will outsource when they return home
� Good guys (U.S. corporations �Hira uses the more genteel label, �firms with traditional business models�) that bring H-1B and L workers to the U.S., pay them adequate wages, and sponsor them for permanent residence, thereby effecting a knowledge transfer to American colleagues that is good for the economy
Hira�s tool, a statistic he calls �immigration yield,� is simply a comparison of H-1B and L usage and the number of PERM applications filed by the highest users of those visas. He essentially concludes that because the highest users of H-1B�s and L�s are Indian consulting companies, and these companies have only a minimal number of PERM�s certified, they are using H�s and L�s as cheap temporary labor. He is unable to explain away the high number PERM filings of one of the IT consulting companies, and so he addresses this anomaly by saying �part of the explanation might be that it is headquartered in the United States.�
There are too many things wrong with this analysis to list in this blog, but here are a just a few ways in which Hira�s study is problematic:
Hira�s clear implication is that companies that don�t sponsor H-1B�s and L�s for PERM are using these workers instead of more expensive American labor. He ignores that fact the H-1B program has rules in place requiring payment of the prevailing wage to these workers. But even worse, he has not presented any data whatsoever on the average wages paid to these workers. He also doesn�t address the expense of obtaining such visas. He simply concludes that because they are here temporarily, they are underpaid.
Hira makes the argument that companies who use H-1B and L workers as temporary workers generally use their U.S. operations as a training ground for these workers and then send then back to their home countries to do the job that was once located here. Again, this assertion is not supported by any real statistical data about, or serious review of, the U.S. activities of such workers, but rather by anecdotal evidence and quotes from news stories taken out of context.
With respect to the fact that the L-1B visa requires specialized knowledge and so would normally preclude entry to the U.S. for the purpose of gaining training, Hira cites and outdated OIG report that alleges that adjudicators will approve any L-1B petition, because the standards are so broad. Those of use in the field struggling with the 10 page RFE�s typically issued automatically on any specialized knowledge petition would certainly beg to differ with that point.
Hira clearly implies that American jobs are lost because of H-1B and L �guest workers,� but has no direct statistical evidence of such job loss.
The fact is that usage of H-1B and L visas varies with the needs of the employer. Some employers use these programs to rotate experienced, professional workers into the United States and then send the workers abroad to continue their careers. Some employers bring H-1B�s and L�s into the U.S. to rely on their skills on a permanent basis. Judging from the fraud statistics as well as DOL enforcement actions, the majority of employers who use H-1B workers pay these workers adequate wages and comply with all of the DOL rules regarding use of these workers, whether the employers bring them in for temporary purposes or not. By the same token, the minority of employers who seek to abuse H and L workers may well do so, whether they intend to sponsor them for permanent residence or not. Indeed, arguably, the potential for long-term abuse is much worse in the situation in which a real �bad guy� employer is sponsoring an employee for a green card, because of the inordinate length of time it takes for many H-1B and L workers to obtain permanent residency due to backlogs.
Hira does make that last point, and it is just about the only one we agree on. Congress needs to create a streamlined way for employers to access and retain in the U.S. foreign expertise and talent, without at 10-15 year wait for permanent residence. But our economy still needs the ability for business to nimbly move talent to the U.S. on a temporary basis when needed, or to rotate key personnel internationally. In a world where global mobility means increased competitiveness, Hira�s �statistics� simply don�t support elimination of these crucial capability.https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/tracker/186823568153827945-6000198492670312275?l=ailaleadership.blogspot.com
More... (http://ailaleadership.blogspot.com/2010/02/epis-latest-study-of-h-1b-and-l-usage.html)
more...
dyekek12
12-13 02:15 PM
I'm thinking about pursuing maser degree of Biostatistics.
I heard the job market demand is high and
most jobs require master degree at least.
As a research assistance, biostatistician, research analyst..
Could I apply as EB2 ?
Am I qualifed?
I heard the job market demand is high and
most jobs require master degree at least.
As a research assistance, biostatistician, research analyst..
Could I apply as EB2 ?
Am I qualifed?
hot tattoo funny i love you
ashirwadb
10-07 03:52 PM
You'd have to wait for PD to become current to add spouse.
Furthermore, if you get married before I-485 is approved, spouse may be added once PD becomes current, even though by then you have your GC.
Furthermore, if you get married before I-485 is approved, spouse may be added once PD becomes current, even though by then you have your GC.
more...
house Funny Love Quotes. Comments
willgetgc2005
03-28 01:39 AM
Hello,
My PERM ad was placed and the lawyer said there are responses and company will have to take recruitment steps before he can file.
Company say he has done recruitment and sent report to lawyer. Lawyer says no, I have not received recruitment report. What is this recruitment report ? Is the PERM application not strong if there are responses.
I am really struggling between lawyer and company. Any thoughts. They seem to be dodging me after taking money. If i have some details from experinced gurus, I can talk to them. Else, they just delay after taking legal fee.
Please help
My PERM ad was placed and the lawyer said there are responses and company will have to take recruitment steps before he can file.
Company say he has done recruitment and sent report to lawyer. Lawyer says no, I have not received recruitment report. What is this recruitment report ? Is the PERM application not strong if there are responses.
I am really struggling between lawyer and company. Any thoughts. They seem to be dodging me after taking money. If i have some details from experinced gurus, I can talk to them. Else, they just delay after taking legal fee.
Please help
tattoo Funny Quote and Cute Quote and
Better_Days
11-02 05:26 PM
bump. Any insight from those who are smarter than me ?
more...
pictures house cute funny quotes
shx
03-31 06:14 PM
Its almost common knowledge that most of L1s are given to rank and file employees. Out of all the L1 people that I know, there's not even one that can be said to possess specialized knowledge. I'm sure there are a few legitimate L1 cases.
Don't give me this divide and conquer crap. A loophole is a loophole and it needs to be plugged, be it H1 or L1.
Don't give me this divide and conquer crap. A loophole is a loophole and it needs to be plugged, be it H1 or L1.
dresses cute i love you quotes. funny
shreekhand
08-03 12:39 AM
Well...most of the applications who applied for I-485 before retrogression hit in 2005 are already approved. So actually we are not seeing an effect of those applications.
What we are witnessing is the effect of all those who could not apply for I-485 from early 2001 till now because of the combined effect of retrogression and BEC! And as if that was not enough all those with PD's up until July 31, 2007 are applying (good for them) but making matters even difficult!!!
We are now seeing the effects of all those applications. Does this make any sense. It's some interesting pattern but I am not completely able to analyze the situation. Any inputs??
What we are witnessing is the effect of all those who could not apply for I-485 from early 2001 till now because of the combined effect of retrogression and BEC! And as if that was not enough all those with PD's up until July 31, 2007 are applying (good for them) but making matters even difficult!!!
We are now seeing the effects of all those applications. Does this make any sense. It's some interesting pattern but I am not completely able to analyze the situation. Any inputs??
more...
makeup hairstyles Cute Funny Love
sachisdis
02-23 07:48 PM
Hi,
Im from India and joined the company 4 years back as Programmer/Analyst. I have an Bachelors in Computer Science (3 Yrs) + MCA (3 Yrs) and experience of 4 years & 8 months before joining the company. The company field for GC under EB3, priority date: November 2008 and I-140 approved date: November 2009.
With nearing 9 years of experience company promoted me to Sr. Programmer/Analyst consultant and is ready to file the case in EB2.
My question:
1. My priority date from EB3 is November 6, 2008. So after approval of fresh labor for EB2, can the new I-140 for EB2 be filed with the old priority date of EB3 ?
2. Can the same company hold two I-140 for the same employee? That is keep the EB3 I-140 active and apply for EB2 I-140 till the EB2 clears/approves ?
3. The designation & job duties can be the same as that of EB3 or need to be changed.
Thanks in advance!
Im from India and joined the company 4 years back as Programmer/Analyst. I have an Bachelors in Computer Science (3 Yrs) + MCA (3 Yrs) and experience of 4 years & 8 months before joining the company. The company field for GC under EB3, priority date: November 2008 and I-140 approved date: November 2009.
With nearing 9 years of experience company promoted me to Sr. Programmer/Analyst consultant and is ready to file the case in EB2.
My question:
1. My priority date from EB3 is November 6, 2008. So after approval of fresh labor for EB2, can the new I-140 for EB2 be filed with the old priority date of EB3 ?
2. Can the same company hold two I-140 for the same employee? That is keep the EB3 I-140 active and apply for EB2 I-140 till the EB2 clears/approves ?
3. The designation & job duties can be the same as that of EB3 or need to be changed.
Thanks in advance!
girlfriend funny quotes about love
asanghi
01-24 11:43 AM
I just can't believe how many times this topic has come up, and yet keeps coming up.
We have had long heated discussions on this topic many times, and always come to the same conclusion and that is to push for filing I-485 without visa availability. This topis has so oft debated, there is no merit in kicking it up again.
We have had long heated discussions on this topic many times, and always come to the same conclusion and that is to push for filing I-485 without visa availability. This topis has so oft debated, there is no merit in kicking it up again.
hairstyles cute funny quotes about love.
.jpg "Cute Funny Quotes For Girls.")
tabletpc
01-10 01:23 PM
Its a gray area....!!!!!
She can work for the same employer on H1b, but is she on H1b status or not....its difficult to say. Hope i am not confusing you.
From what i have understood about GC law, once you take any benifit of GC, you are abounding your previous status.
I would suggest you to talk to your attorney.
Good luck
She can work for the same employer on H1b, but is she on H1b status or not....its difficult to say. Hope i am not confusing you.
From what i have understood about GC law, once you take any benifit of GC, you are abounding your previous status.
I would suggest you to talk to your attorney.
Good luck
coolvigo
07-02 11:08 PM
I am ready to that......
How can we do that...and when should we start it.....
Can someone lead it ?
How can we do that...and when should we start it.....
Can someone lead it ?
Saralayar
03-17 02:20 PM
According to IRS
http://www.irs.gov/newsroom/article/0,,id=179211,00.html
If any member has ITIN, economic stimulus package benefit will not be given.
EAD is a must for applying SSN. You need to show the EAD card, I-94 and Passport at the time of applying for SSN.
http://www.irs.gov/newsroom/article/0,,id=179211,00.html
If any member has ITIN, economic stimulus package benefit will not be given.
EAD is a must for applying SSN. You need to show the EAD card, I-94 and Passport at the time of applying for SSN.
No comments:
Post a Comment