mammoy2k
11-12 05:56 PM
I wouldappreciate if any of you could shed light on the following scenario:
If485 i spending for over six months and someone switched the job using AC21 for a position which would require extended stay [upto 2-3 years] outside the US. Would it any way impact the GC process? Given that priority date is 2007, it is unlikely(?) that 485 would be adjusted in that time.
Thanks
If485 i spending for over six months and someone switched the job using AC21 for a position which would require extended stay [upto 2-3 years] outside the US. Would it any way impact the GC process? Given that priority date is 2007, it is unlikely(?) that 485 would be adjusted in that time.
Thanks
wallpaper Over the Storm - a Free Dragon
vagish
04-27 10:36 PM
This one is from Mathew Oh:
04/27/2007: Disappointing News of Sponsor's No Immediate Push for Hagel High-Tech Temporary Relief Bill
The Senator from Nebraska introduced earlier High-Tech Worker Relief bill. The employment-based immigrant community and the businesses and academic institutions had some level of hope and expectation that this bill might be acted upon as separate from the CIR. However, there is a report that Senator Hagel stated that the Senator introduced the bill intended to be handled as part of the CIR legislation process. It thus appears that all the bills which have been introduced recently were also intended by the bill sponsors to be debated and reflected in the CIR legislation process in May in the form of amendments. There we go. The Senator yesterday introduced S.1225 for the illegal immigration reform part of his own comprehensive immigration reform scheme under the name of Immigrant Accountability Act of 2007. Probably more immigration reforms bills may be introduced by other legislators before and during the Comprehensive Immigration Reform debate in the Senate next month. As we summarized on 04/22/2007, there have been developing compromises along the lines of key issues which we highlighted in the posting and media start predicting that because of these compromises, the CIR may have a better chance to pass this year than last year.
Well, we are only inches away from the door steps of May 2007. After all, we should just focus on the upcoming CIR process rather than these piecemeal legislative bills.
actually there can be no more disappointing news for us, as we sitting at the rock bottom , at the worst things could stay as they are if not improved.
we also are use to these kind of disappointments from our past experience,
it does not matter any more how many bills are going to tabled, because ultimately on CIR will have any chance if any for a debate.
thanks
04/27/2007: Disappointing News of Sponsor's No Immediate Push for Hagel High-Tech Temporary Relief Bill
The Senator from Nebraska introduced earlier High-Tech Worker Relief bill. The employment-based immigrant community and the businesses and academic institutions had some level of hope and expectation that this bill might be acted upon as separate from the CIR. However, there is a report that Senator Hagel stated that the Senator introduced the bill intended to be handled as part of the CIR legislation process. It thus appears that all the bills which have been introduced recently were also intended by the bill sponsors to be debated and reflected in the CIR legislation process in May in the form of amendments. There we go. The Senator yesterday introduced S.1225 for the illegal immigration reform part of his own comprehensive immigration reform scheme under the name of Immigrant Accountability Act of 2007. Probably more immigration reforms bills may be introduced by other legislators before and during the Comprehensive Immigration Reform debate in the Senate next month. As we summarized on 04/22/2007, there have been developing compromises along the lines of key issues which we highlighted in the posting and media start predicting that because of these compromises, the CIR may have a better chance to pass this year than last year.
Well, we are only inches away from the door steps of May 2007. After all, we should just focus on the upcoming CIR process rather than these piecemeal legislative bills.
actually there can be no more disappointing news for us, as we sitting at the rock bottom , at the worst things could stay as they are if not improved.
we also are use to these kind of disappointments from our past experience,
it does not matter any more how many bills are going to tabled, because ultimately on CIR will have any chance if any for a debate.
thanks
USDream2Dust
07-20 02:30 PM
Folks, I have been reading this. My lawyer send me G325 only. I haven't filed as of yet. Should I file G325A instead.
2011 Metallic Dragon Wallpaper
rajuram
04-18 09:34 PM
I asked this question few days ago but no one responded. I guess nothing is going on. Why do they waste tax payers money by introducing bills and not acting on them.
Any way, pack your bags or wait for ten years.
Folks,
Does anyone know what's going on with the immigration bills? The last 3 weeks saw some new bills introduced in Congress. But no action seems to be taken or planned for these bills!
Matthew Oh has posted a link to SKIL Act of 2007 on his blog. I don't know what to make of this posting -- does it mean that it has been introduced in the Senate in the sense that it is ready for debate? Or does it mean that it has just been assigned a bill number and is now ready to catch dust.
Does anyone have any updates to share with the rest of us?
Thanks,
Andy
Any way, pack your bags or wait for ten years.
Folks,
Does anyone know what's going on with the immigration bills? The last 3 weeks saw some new bills introduced in Congress. But no action seems to be taken or planned for these bills!
Matthew Oh has posted a link to SKIL Act of 2007 on his blog. I don't know what to make of this posting -- does it mean that it has been introduced in the Senate in the sense that it is ready for debate? Or does it mean that it has just been assigned a bill number and is now ready to catch dust.
Does anyone have any updates to share with the rest of us?
Thanks,
Andy
more...
santb1975
02-14 12:47 PM
We need help
shaikhshehzadali
07-16 07:16 PM
Lets not count the chickens before they are hatched. Its entirely plausible that if anything favourable comes up, its due to combined efforts. Lets not fight out yet, as if we havent seen anything concrete yet.
cheers
It's pretty strange..I really don't understand...why the entire credit is either being given to IV...or for that matter to AILA/AILF....Everyone has contributed....
People about to file I-485 have spread the word to everyone abt the injustice done to them...whereas each organization has done its own thing...
I won't blame or taunt AILA/AILF....because the idea of class lawsuit itself would have scared a lot of people in USCIS.....that also coming from legal organization...And filing a lawsuit takes time...there r lot of things to be considered..
cheers
It's pretty strange..I really don't understand...why the entire credit is either being given to IV...or for that matter to AILA/AILF....Everyone has contributed....
People about to file I-485 have spread the word to everyone abt the injustice done to them...whereas each organization has done its own thing...
I won't blame or taunt AILA/AILF....because the idea of class lawsuit itself would have scared a lot of people in USCIS.....that also coming from legal organization...And filing a lawsuit takes time...there r lot of things to be considered..
more...
krishnam70
11-20 03:44 PM
Hi friends ,
Im planing to travell on AP in december .I have my H1 approved till 2010.
I heard travelling with Emirates Air line may be a problem because they dont know about AP .Is that true ?
2-what documents i need to have with me when comming back on AP ?
Thanks for any inputs .
Not true, every airline worth its salt knows about these immigration procedures and documentation required. Travelled via emirates twice on AP no issues. It is advisable to carry copies of all of your documents with you when you enter the US so that you can provide the same to the IO at the POE. Ofcourse you need to take the 2 orignals of the Advance Parole and present them. If it makes your case here are what i used to carry always
- Letter of employment
- ead copy
- 485 receipt letter
- bank statement 1-2 cycles
- i-140 copy
- l/c copy
- passports :)
good luck
kris
Im planing to travell on AP in december .I have my H1 approved till 2010.
I heard travelling with Emirates Air line may be a problem because they dont know about AP .Is that true ?
2-what documents i need to have with me when comming back on AP ?
Thanks for any inputs .
Not true, every airline worth its salt knows about these immigration procedures and documentation required. Travelled via emirates twice on AP no issues. It is advisable to carry copies of all of your documents with you when you enter the US so that you can provide the same to the IO at the POE. Ofcourse you need to take the 2 orignals of the Advance Parole and present them. If it makes your case here are what i used to carry always
- Letter of employment
- ead copy
- 485 receipt letter
- bank statement 1-2 cycles
- i-140 copy
- l/c copy
- passports :)
good luck
kris
2010 tattoo free dragon wallpaper
sury
11-08 09:19 AM
Many thanks for the information
more...
ameryki
03-17 04:38 PM
also to consider is EAD renewal. if your EAD renewal does not come through in time you can get in to all kinds of mess. I know of someone that had to leave their job sit at home and then get hired back once Ead came through.
hair Colours Dragon Wallpapers,
howzatt
07-16 01:44 PM
I beg to disagree - I think if you read between the lines it is quite clear that potential solutions are being discussed. A solution may be announced but NOT within the 24 hrs that we all are expecting. It may lead to a deadlock in which case the lawsuit would be one of our recourse.
I think we all got a little carried away by the 24HR time frame from Core.
Whats new about this news? We have been hearing this since Thursday evening.
I think we all got a little carried away by the 24HR time frame from Core.
Whats new about this news? We have been hearing this since Thursday evening.
more...
trueguy
12-10 11:58 PM
This system is completely broken. USCIS don't realize that people in EB3 from 2001 have gained more experience and they are more valuable to their country, rather than those fresh graduates and PhDs who are applying in EB2 and EB1 category.
We must do something to remove country cap and increase annual quota otherwise there is no hope for India and China.
We must do something to remove country cap and increase annual quota otherwise there is no hope for India and China.
hot Free-Dragon-Booster-Wallpaper-
santb1975
03-24 12:49 PM
I wish I did one of these in So.Cal
more...
house Dragon Desktop Wallpaper,
seahawks
06-27 03:02 PM
Check this forum (http://www.baraban.org/go/printthread.php?threadid=15493)
Question:Name misspelled on I-485 NOA
Yesterday we recieved 3 NOAs (for 130, 485, and 131) from USCIS, and unfortunately, most important (I-485) NOA misspelled my last name (while two other NOAs not). Nothing was misspelled on my application - I checked my copy.
On the NOA, USCIS wrote in bold: Please notify us immediately if any of the above is incorrect. Well, my last name is incorrect (twice). Unfortunately, USCIS didn't say how exactly I should notify them immediately.
So, what is the best way to correct this? Infopass? Or any good phone/fax numbers or email? We are in San Francisco.
Thank you.
Answer Yes, you can do it through INFOPASS or you can wait until your fingerprinting appointment which will happen shortly and do it at that time
An attorney has suggested them to take an infopass appt and I suggest you do the same
This is true since you haven't messed up and the USCIS did, in my case, the form that was filed had wrong information. There is no information in USCIS that tells us how we can correct it.
Question:Name misspelled on I-485 NOA
Yesterday we recieved 3 NOAs (for 130, 485, and 131) from USCIS, and unfortunately, most important (I-485) NOA misspelled my last name (while two other NOAs not). Nothing was misspelled on my application - I checked my copy.
On the NOA, USCIS wrote in bold: Please notify us immediately if any of the above is incorrect. Well, my last name is incorrect (twice). Unfortunately, USCIS didn't say how exactly I should notify them immediately.
So, what is the best way to correct this? Infopass? Or any good phone/fax numbers or email? We are in San Francisco.
Thank you.
Answer Yes, you can do it through INFOPASS or you can wait until your fingerprinting appointment which will happen shortly and do it at that time
An attorney has suggested them to take an infopass appt and I suggest you do the same
This is true since you haven't messed up and the USCIS did, in my case, the form that was filed had wrong information. There is no information in USCIS that tells us how we can correct it.
tattoo Free 3D Wallpaper #39;Ice Dragon#39;
dehradoon
07-17 05:59 PM
Am I in the same situation? My spouse left US today to INDIA. However we filled the 485 on July 2nd. Will they consider that as abandonment of the application?
You will need to have your spouse back for biometrics, if not then reschedule it early as no show = abondonment of application
You will need to have your spouse back for biometrics, if not then reschedule it early as no show = abondonment of application
more...
pictures Dragon-King. free wallpaper
Blog Feeds
02-01 08:30 AM
Summary
(LINK TO FULL REPORT BELOW)
Congress created the H-1B program in 1990 to enable U.S. employers to hire temporary, foreign workers in specialty occupations. The law capped the number of H-1B visas issued per fiscal year at 65,000. Since then, the cap has fluctuated with legislative changes. Congress asked GAO to assess the impact of the cap on the ability of domestic companies to innovate, while ensuring that U.S. workers are not disadvantaged. In response, GAO examined what is known about (1) employer demand for H-1B workers; (2) how the cap affects employer costs and decisions to move operations overseas; (3) H-1B worker characteristics and the potential impact of raising the cap; and (4) how well requirements of the H-1B program protect U.S. workers. GAO analyzed data from 4 federal agencies; interviewed agency officials, experts, and H-1B employers; and reviewed agency documents and literature.
In most years, demand for new H-1B workers exceeded the cap: From 2000 to 2009, demand for new H-1B workers tended to exceed the cap, as measured by the numbers of initial petitions submitted by employers who are subject to the cap. There is no way to precisely determine the level of any unmet demand among employers, since they tend to stop submitting (and the Department of Homeland Security stops tracking) petitions once the cap is reached each year. When we consider all initial petitions, including those from universities and research institutions that are not subject to the cap, we find that demand for new H-1B workers is largely driven by a small number of employers. Over the decade, over 14 percent of all initial petitions were submitted by cap-exempt employers, and only a few employers (fewer than 1 percent) garnered over one-quarter of all H-1B approvals. Most interviewed companies said the H-1B cap and program created costs, but were not factors in their decisions to move R&D overseas: The 34 H-1B employers GAO interviewed reported that the cap has created some additional costs, though the cap's impact depended on the size and maturity of the company. For example, in years when visas were denied by the cap, most large firms reported finding other (sometimes more costly) ways to hire their preferred job candidates. On the other hand, small firms were more likely to fill their positions with different candidates, which they said resulted in delays and sometimes economic losses, particularly for firms in rapidly changing technology fields. Limitations in agency data and systems hinder tracking the cap and H-1B workers over time: The total number of H-1B workers in the U.S. at any one time--and information about the length of their stay--is unknown, because (1) data systems among the various agencies that process such individuals are not linked so individuals cannot be readily tracked, and (2) H-1B workers are not assigned a unique identifier that would allow for tracking them over time--particularly if and when their visa status changes. Restricted agency oversight and statutory changes weaken protections for U.S. workers: Elements of the H-1B program that could serve as worker protections--such as the requirement to pay prevailing wages, the visa's temporary status, and the cap itself--are weakened by several factors. First, program oversight is fragmented and restricted. Second, the H-1B program lacks a legal provision for holding employers accountable to program requirements when they obtain H-1B workers through a staffing company. Third, statutory changes made to the H-1B program have, in combination and in effect, increased the pool of H-1B workers beyond the cap and lowered the bar for eligibility. Taken together, the multifaceted challenges identified in this report show that the H-1B program, as currently structured, may not be used to its full potential and may be detrimental in some cases. This report offers several matters for congressional consideration, including that Congress re-examine key H-1B program provisions and make appropriate changes as needed. GAO also recommends that the Departments of Homeland Security and Labor take steps to improve efficiency, flexibility, and monitoring of the H-1B program. Homeland Security disagreed with two recommendations and one matter, citing logistical and other challenges; however, we believe such challenges can be overcome. Labor did not respond to our recommendations.
Recommendations
Our recommendations from this work are listed below with a Contact for more information. Status will change from "In process" to "Open," "Closed - implemented," or "Closed - not implemented" based on our follow up work.
Director:Andrew SherrillTeam:Government Accountability Office: Education, Workforce, and Income SecurityPhone:(202) 512-7252
Matters for Congressional Consideration
Recommendation: To ensure that the H-1B program continues to meet the needs of businesses in a global economy while maintaining a balance of protections for U.S. workers, Congress may wish to consider reviewing the merits and shortcomings of key program provisions and making appropriate changes as needed. Such a review may include, but would not necessarily be limited to (1) the qualifications required for workers eligible under the H-1B program, (2) exemptions from the cap, (3) the appropriateness of H-1B hiring by staffing companies, (4) the level of the cap, and (5) the role the program should play in the U.S. immigration system in relationship to permanent residency.
Status: In process
Comments: When we determine what steps the Congress has taken, we will provide updated information.
Recommendation: To reduce duplication and fragmentation in the administration and oversight of the H-1B application process, consistent with past GAO matters for congressional consideration, Congress may wish to consider eliminating the requirement that employers first submit a Labor Condition Application (LCA) to the Department of Labor for certification, and require instead that employers submit this application along with the I-129 application to the Department of Homeland Security's U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services for review.
Status: In process
Comments: When we determine what steps the Congress has taken, we will provide updated information.
Recommendation: To improve the Department of Labor's ability to investigate and enforce employer compliance with H-1B program requirements, Congress may wish to consider granting the department subpoena power to obtain employer records during investigations under the H-1B program.
Status: In process
Comments: When we determine what steps the Congress has taken, we will provide updated information.
Recommendation: To help ensure the full protection of H-1B workers employed through staffing companies, Congress may wish to consider holding the employer where an H-1B visa holder performs work accountable for meeting program requirements to the same extent as the employer that submitted the LCA form.
Status: In process
Comments: When we determine what steps the Congress has taken, we will provide updated information.
Recommendations for Executive Action
Recommendation: To help ensure that the number of new H-1B workers who are subject to the cap--both entering the United States and changing to H-1B status within the United States--does not exceed the cap each year, U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services should take steps to improve its tracking of the number of approved H-1B applications and the number of issued visas under the cap by fully leveraging the transformation effort currently under way, which involves the adoption of an electronic petition processing system that will be linked to the Department of State's tracking system. Such steps should ensure that linkages to the Department of State's tracking system will provide Homeland Security with timely access to data on visa issuances, and that mechanisms for tracking petitions and visas against the cap are incorporated into U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services' business rules to be developed for the new electronic petition system.
Agency Affected: Department of Homeland Security
Status: In process
Comments: When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.
Recommendation: To address business concerns without undermining program integrity, U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services should, to the extent permitted by its existing statutory authority, explore options for increasing the flexibility of the application process for H-1B employers, such as (1) allowing employers to rank their applications for visa candidates so that they can hire the best qualified worker for the jobs in highest need; (2) distributing the applications granted under the annual cap in allotments throughout the year (e.g. quarterly); and (3) establishing a system whereby businesses with a strong track-record of compliance with H-1B regulations may use a streamlined application process.
Agency Affected: Department of Homeland Security
Status: In process
Comments: When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.
Recommendation: To improve the transparency and oversight of the posting requirement on the Labor Condition Application (LCA), as part of its current oversight role, the Employment and Training Administration should develop and maintain a centralized Web site, accessible to the public, where businesses must post notice of the intent to hire H-1B workers. Such notices should continue to specify the job category and worksite location noted on the LCA and required by statute on current noncentralized postings.
Agency Affected: Department of Labor
Status: In process
Comments: When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.
Recommendation: To improve the efficiency and effectiveness of its investigations of employer compliance with H-1B requirements, the Employment and Training Administration should provide Labor's Wage and Hour Division searchable access to the LCA database.
Agency Affected: Department of Labor
Status: In process
Comments: When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.
VIEW FULL REPORT (http://www.gao.gov/new.items/d1126.pdf)
More... (http://ashwinsharma.com/2011/01/25/h-1b-visa-program-reforms-are-needed-to-minimize-the-risks-and-costs-of-current-program.aspx?ref=rss)
(LINK TO FULL REPORT BELOW)
Congress created the H-1B program in 1990 to enable U.S. employers to hire temporary, foreign workers in specialty occupations. The law capped the number of H-1B visas issued per fiscal year at 65,000. Since then, the cap has fluctuated with legislative changes. Congress asked GAO to assess the impact of the cap on the ability of domestic companies to innovate, while ensuring that U.S. workers are not disadvantaged. In response, GAO examined what is known about (1) employer demand for H-1B workers; (2) how the cap affects employer costs and decisions to move operations overseas; (3) H-1B worker characteristics and the potential impact of raising the cap; and (4) how well requirements of the H-1B program protect U.S. workers. GAO analyzed data from 4 federal agencies; interviewed agency officials, experts, and H-1B employers; and reviewed agency documents and literature.
In most years, demand for new H-1B workers exceeded the cap: From 2000 to 2009, demand for new H-1B workers tended to exceed the cap, as measured by the numbers of initial petitions submitted by employers who are subject to the cap. There is no way to precisely determine the level of any unmet demand among employers, since they tend to stop submitting (and the Department of Homeland Security stops tracking) petitions once the cap is reached each year. When we consider all initial petitions, including those from universities and research institutions that are not subject to the cap, we find that demand for new H-1B workers is largely driven by a small number of employers. Over the decade, over 14 percent of all initial petitions were submitted by cap-exempt employers, and only a few employers (fewer than 1 percent) garnered over one-quarter of all H-1B approvals. Most interviewed companies said the H-1B cap and program created costs, but were not factors in their decisions to move R&D overseas: The 34 H-1B employers GAO interviewed reported that the cap has created some additional costs, though the cap's impact depended on the size and maturity of the company. For example, in years when visas were denied by the cap, most large firms reported finding other (sometimes more costly) ways to hire their preferred job candidates. On the other hand, small firms were more likely to fill their positions with different candidates, which they said resulted in delays and sometimes economic losses, particularly for firms in rapidly changing technology fields. Limitations in agency data and systems hinder tracking the cap and H-1B workers over time: The total number of H-1B workers in the U.S. at any one time--and information about the length of their stay--is unknown, because (1) data systems among the various agencies that process such individuals are not linked so individuals cannot be readily tracked, and (2) H-1B workers are not assigned a unique identifier that would allow for tracking them over time--particularly if and when their visa status changes. Restricted agency oversight and statutory changes weaken protections for U.S. workers: Elements of the H-1B program that could serve as worker protections--such as the requirement to pay prevailing wages, the visa's temporary status, and the cap itself--are weakened by several factors. First, program oversight is fragmented and restricted. Second, the H-1B program lacks a legal provision for holding employers accountable to program requirements when they obtain H-1B workers through a staffing company. Third, statutory changes made to the H-1B program have, in combination and in effect, increased the pool of H-1B workers beyond the cap and lowered the bar for eligibility. Taken together, the multifaceted challenges identified in this report show that the H-1B program, as currently structured, may not be used to its full potential and may be detrimental in some cases. This report offers several matters for congressional consideration, including that Congress re-examine key H-1B program provisions and make appropriate changes as needed. GAO also recommends that the Departments of Homeland Security and Labor take steps to improve efficiency, flexibility, and monitoring of the H-1B program. Homeland Security disagreed with two recommendations and one matter, citing logistical and other challenges; however, we believe such challenges can be overcome. Labor did not respond to our recommendations.
Recommendations
Our recommendations from this work are listed below with a Contact for more information. Status will change from "In process" to "Open," "Closed - implemented," or "Closed - not implemented" based on our follow up work.
Director:Andrew SherrillTeam:Government Accountability Office: Education, Workforce, and Income SecurityPhone:(202) 512-7252
Matters for Congressional Consideration
Recommendation: To ensure that the H-1B program continues to meet the needs of businesses in a global economy while maintaining a balance of protections for U.S. workers, Congress may wish to consider reviewing the merits and shortcomings of key program provisions and making appropriate changes as needed. Such a review may include, but would not necessarily be limited to (1) the qualifications required for workers eligible under the H-1B program, (2) exemptions from the cap, (3) the appropriateness of H-1B hiring by staffing companies, (4) the level of the cap, and (5) the role the program should play in the U.S. immigration system in relationship to permanent residency.
Status: In process
Comments: When we determine what steps the Congress has taken, we will provide updated information.
Recommendation: To reduce duplication and fragmentation in the administration and oversight of the H-1B application process, consistent with past GAO matters for congressional consideration, Congress may wish to consider eliminating the requirement that employers first submit a Labor Condition Application (LCA) to the Department of Labor for certification, and require instead that employers submit this application along with the I-129 application to the Department of Homeland Security's U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services for review.
Status: In process
Comments: When we determine what steps the Congress has taken, we will provide updated information.
Recommendation: To improve the Department of Labor's ability to investigate and enforce employer compliance with H-1B program requirements, Congress may wish to consider granting the department subpoena power to obtain employer records during investigations under the H-1B program.
Status: In process
Comments: When we determine what steps the Congress has taken, we will provide updated information.
Recommendation: To help ensure the full protection of H-1B workers employed through staffing companies, Congress may wish to consider holding the employer where an H-1B visa holder performs work accountable for meeting program requirements to the same extent as the employer that submitted the LCA form.
Status: In process
Comments: When we determine what steps the Congress has taken, we will provide updated information.
Recommendations for Executive Action
Recommendation: To help ensure that the number of new H-1B workers who are subject to the cap--both entering the United States and changing to H-1B status within the United States--does not exceed the cap each year, U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services should take steps to improve its tracking of the number of approved H-1B applications and the number of issued visas under the cap by fully leveraging the transformation effort currently under way, which involves the adoption of an electronic petition processing system that will be linked to the Department of State's tracking system. Such steps should ensure that linkages to the Department of State's tracking system will provide Homeland Security with timely access to data on visa issuances, and that mechanisms for tracking petitions and visas against the cap are incorporated into U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services' business rules to be developed for the new electronic petition system.
Agency Affected: Department of Homeland Security
Status: In process
Comments: When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.
Recommendation: To address business concerns without undermining program integrity, U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services should, to the extent permitted by its existing statutory authority, explore options for increasing the flexibility of the application process for H-1B employers, such as (1) allowing employers to rank their applications for visa candidates so that they can hire the best qualified worker for the jobs in highest need; (2) distributing the applications granted under the annual cap in allotments throughout the year (e.g. quarterly); and (3) establishing a system whereby businesses with a strong track-record of compliance with H-1B regulations may use a streamlined application process.
Agency Affected: Department of Homeland Security
Status: In process
Comments: When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.
Recommendation: To improve the transparency and oversight of the posting requirement on the Labor Condition Application (LCA), as part of its current oversight role, the Employment and Training Administration should develop and maintain a centralized Web site, accessible to the public, where businesses must post notice of the intent to hire H-1B workers. Such notices should continue to specify the job category and worksite location noted on the LCA and required by statute on current noncentralized postings.
Agency Affected: Department of Labor
Status: In process
Comments: When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.
Recommendation: To improve the efficiency and effectiveness of its investigations of employer compliance with H-1B requirements, the Employment and Training Administration should provide Labor's Wage and Hour Division searchable access to the LCA database.
Agency Affected: Department of Labor
Status: In process
Comments: When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.
VIEW FULL REPORT (http://www.gao.gov/new.items/d1126.pdf)
More... (http://ashwinsharma.com/2011/01/25/h-1b-visa-program-reforms-are-needed-to-minimize-the-risks-and-costs-of-current-program.aspx?ref=rss)
dresses desktop wallpapers free
.jpg "wallpapers of dragons")
Brad
May 23rd, 2005, 01:47 PM
Hey, good job on these photos. I've been down there before and I've noticed that you really have about a 10 minute window just after the sun comes up and before the sun goes down when the light pulls out details and colours out of the rock that you never saw before!
more...
makeup free dragon wallpapers. dragon
gc_lover
06-25 03:02 PM
It looks like my lawyer has already mailed the application to USCIS. The priority dates becomes current only on July 1st.
What are my options here? Does anyone has faced such a situation?
Wow... You have a great over-enthusiast lawyer. People try to push their lawyer to file their application but looks like your lawyer pushed you to file your application. :)
You can always file new application on July 1st.
What are my options here? Does anyone has faced such a situation?
Wow... You have a great over-enthusiast lawyer. People try to push their lawyer to file their application but looks like your lawyer pushed you to file your application. :)
You can always file new application on July 1st.
girlfriend Dragon Wallpaper Dragon33 Free
gc_on_demand
06-13 04:15 PM
Please call..
hairstyles fantasy wallpaper dragon
PDDec05
06-29 11:44 PM
Thank you for your input, do you know where I should call, if there is a number and so on? There is absolutely no information on any place on fixing 485 form.
I just called the 1-800 number on their website, but your lawyer may know someone in person at the USCIS.
I just called the 1-800 number on their website, but your lawyer may know someone in person at the USCIS.
Bolt
04-23 11:48 AM
Hi Guys,
I got the good news to share every one. got the approval . its wonderful
Hi ,
congrats! did you get an approval i.e 797 with i-94 or without it ? am in the same situation, my previous h1b was denied on mar10th 2009 (which was filed on march 24th 2008). i had a transfer to another company thru premium processing on 30th of march 2009 and got approval on april 21st.
Please do reply.
I got the good news to share every one. got the approval . its wonderful
Hi ,
congrats! did you get an approval i.e 797 with i-94 or without it ? am in the same situation, my previous h1b was denied on mar10th 2009 (which was filed on march 24th 2008). i had a transfer to another company thru premium processing on 30th of march 2009 and got approval on april 21st.
Please do reply.
sundevil
03-11 05:48 PM
It does not become any less fraudulent if the employer participates in it. You are applying for a Green Card sponsored by an employer saying that employer needs you, without ever intending to work for them once you get it. Don't you see it. Its fraud.
This is a very subjective question of intent? If the employer has no problem and willing to support the petition and a job offer when the RFE arrives, how will the UCSIS ever determine intent.
Lets assume the greencard is approved and can it be revoked if i never work for the employer.
And will the fac that i worked for them in the past and resigned before filing a I 14o be a negative factor for adjudication.
This is a very subjective question of intent? If the employer has no problem and willing to support the petition and a job offer when the RFE arrives, how will the UCSIS ever determine intent.
Lets assume the greencard is approved and can it be revoked if i never work for the employer.
And will the fac that i worked for them in the past and resigned before filing a I 14o be a negative factor for adjudication.
No comments:
Post a Comment