BharatPremi
12-14 02:48 PM
Yes BP, in that case Britain too will be oversubscribed just like IN,CH,MXa and PH.
7% ceiling applies to all the countries not just the ones that happen to be oversubscribed now.
So that interprets to "7% limit for every country" - seems to be "Equality"
7% ceiling applies to all the countries not just the ones that happen to be oversubscribed now.
So that interprets to "7% limit for every country" - seems to be "Equality"
wallpaper Justin Bieber Selena Gomez
caliducas
07-13 09:40 AM
Alright! Back to the US immigration deal! There is still hope and the battle is not over. So I wish you all the best with your cases. Mine has not been rejected/returned yet since my application was delivered on July 3rd. I don't know what will happen, but there is still hope!!!
:)
:)
she81
07-03 06:59 PM
I digged all the comments but looks like someone is trying to bury them again and again...
2011 house Justin Bieber and Selena
PBECVictim
06-27 10:52 AM
If Dept of State finds by mid of the month all(not by country) EB3 or EB2 numbers consumed, then they may come back and say no more acceptance of particular category. But generally they don't want to do that for EB category applications, because it is difficult for them to evaluate, reason is some numbers from Family category will be transfered to EB categories.
It happened for EB2 India, in the month of July 2006 mid. All numbers for EB2 India were utilized before mid of July, but even then they didn't come back in the mid of the month. So they made it "U" in next bulletin.
Don't be panic...........
It happened for EB2 India, in the month of July 2006 mid. All numbers for EB2 India were utilized before mid of July, but even then they didn't come back in the mid of the month. So they made it "U" in next bulletin.
Don't be panic...........
more...
knowDOL
05-19 09:44 AM
August 2003 is a good PD if it were EB2 and you could have stayed with your company. I heard in this forum from someone that, if the person is Masters graduate and worked in related for three years they are exempt from cap even though they applied in EB3 category. If this is true, it is good for you to stay in your current company and not try substitution. If this is not true and if I were you I would have gone for substitution.
What ever you do, do it with good terms with your current employer, so you can come back and join them and be able to use the 2003 PD, if some thing goes wrong with your substitution. If you leave the company and join something else, if you think that you cannot join them back, then it may not worth it. Again, it depends on your personal situation, if you don't have a spouse who is waiting for EAD to work, you should not be risking this.
What ever you do, do it with good terms with your current employer, so you can come back and join them and be able to use the 2003 PD, if some thing goes wrong with your substitution. If you leave the company and join something else, if you think that you cannot join them back, then it may not worth it. Again, it depends on your personal situation, if you don't have a spouse who is waiting for EAD to work, you should not be risking this.
Vishal2007
05-02 01:12 AM
I think judging Gandhiji in the context of Indian History is beyond my pay grade. I am sure about the fact that his ideology would remain relevant for much more time in human history.
I like this (read as a good humor), his ideology would remain relevant for much more time in human history. you go by , Gandhi is father of our nation, I am thinking beyond that, he had power to influence British gov. to avoid death penalty for Bhagat Singh, he never used his power, because he was jealous of Bhagat
I like this (read as a good humor), his ideology would remain relevant for much more time in human history. you go by , Gandhi is father of our nation, I am thinking beyond that, he had power to influence British gov. to avoid death penalty for Bhagat Singh, he never used his power, because he was jealous of Bhagat
more...
brahmam
09-17 01:27 AM
Here are the authentic numbers from FLCDataCenter.com (http://flcdatacenter.com/CasePerm.aspx)
My analysis from those mdb files: (they are tricky because the data is for FY2005 while the priority date calculations we are doing are for the calendar year)
calendar year 2005 ( received date between 3/19/2005 - 12/31/2005) = 8645
year 2006 (rcv date between 1/1/2006 - 9/27/2006) = 15008
after this it gets bad since the data has no receipt date, only certified date. my estimate is around 12000 for those 3 months of 2006.(total number of certified PERMs between 10/2/2006 - 03/31/2007 = 13873)
total PERM approvals with PD between march 2005 and Dec 2006 ~ 37000
If EB2 is 50%, we are talking ~19000, with an avg of 2.5 GCs per PERM, we need 47,500 GCs between Mar 05 and Jan 07.
Good luck every one :(:D:mad:
My analysis from those mdb files: (they are tricky because the data is for FY2005 while the priority date calculations we are doing are for the calendar year)
calendar year 2005 ( received date between 3/19/2005 - 12/31/2005) = 8645
year 2006 (rcv date between 1/1/2006 - 9/27/2006) = 15008
after this it gets bad since the data has no receipt date, only certified date. my estimate is around 12000 for those 3 months of 2006.(total number of certified PERMs between 10/2/2006 - 03/31/2007 = 13873)
total PERM approvals with PD between march 2005 and Dec 2006 ~ 37000
If EB2 is 50%, we are talking ~19000, with an avg of 2.5 GCs per PERM, we need 47,500 GCs between Mar 05 and Jan 07.
Good luck every one :(:D:mad:
2010 images selena gomez justin
rb_248
12-13 11:39 AM
Hello All,
First and foremost, i must thank everyone from IV, who is working tirelessly to resolve the issues of retrogression in the GC process. As an affected individual I am very grateful that leaders of IV are ready to contribute so much effort for its goals. And even though I do not actively work for the IV agenda, I have contributed money to some IV action items.
I have a question/suggestion regarding the IV agenda. On IV's about page, pt number 2 asserts amongst other things,
The Discriminatory Per-Country Rationing of Green Cards That Exacerbates the Delays.
and further in the same point
We do not allow employers to discriminate hiring based on their nationality or country of origin. Therefore, the employment-based immigration, which is a derivative benefit of employment, should also be free from rationing based on nationality or country of birth.
I am curious to know what is the "legal" strength of these assertions is. Are they just "moral" statements or can the validity of these statements be tested in the legal framework of this country? In other words, my question is what is the constitutionality of the "Per Country Caps" in Employment / Family Based Immrigration procedures.
A lot of Laws and Statutes have been challenged in the Judicial System of USA. And many more are challenged every year. And if the laws are not constitutional then they can be repealed.
I am sure the leaders of IV must have thought about this argument however a quick search of the forums with 'constitutionality' as the search term did not return any results.
IV's efforts to utilize Lobbying to bring about change to alleviate/eliminate retrogression are certainly beneficial. However, if IV has not already considered and eliminated this legal argument, then it should explore whether there is any substance to this approach.
Hence this post. Below are some of the links that might be relevant.
wikipedia article on constitutionality (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Constitutionality)
wikipedia category on US immigration case law (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:United_States_immigration_and_naturalizat ion_case_law)
thanks and sincerely,
--soljabhai
This is a good point. But, in its current state, will not fly. This can only be used as a supporting evidence for our cause. Lawmakers will never remove country cap. We can use this point in pushing any of our other agendas.
First and foremost, i must thank everyone from IV, who is working tirelessly to resolve the issues of retrogression in the GC process. As an affected individual I am very grateful that leaders of IV are ready to contribute so much effort for its goals. And even though I do not actively work for the IV agenda, I have contributed money to some IV action items.
I have a question/suggestion regarding the IV agenda. On IV's about page, pt number 2 asserts amongst other things,
The Discriminatory Per-Country Rationing of Green Cards That Exacerbates the Delays.
and further in the same point
We do not allow employers to discriminate hiring based on their nationality or country of origin. Therefore, the employment-based immigration, which is a derivative benefit of employment, should also be free from rationing based on nationality or country of birth.
I am curious to know what is the "legal" strength of these assertions is. Are they just "moral" statements or can the validity of these statements be tested in the legal framework of this country? In other words, my question is what is the constitutionality of the "Per Country Caps" in Employment / Family Based Immrigration procedures.
A lot of Laws and Statutes have been challenged in the Judicial System of USA. And many more are challenged every year. And if the laws are not constitutional then they can be repealed.
I am sure the leaders of IV must have thought about this argument however a quick search of the forums with 'constitutionality' as the search term did not return any results.
IV's efforts to utilize Lobbying to bring about change to alleviate/eliminate retrogression are certainly beneficial. However, if IV has not already considered and eliminated this legal argument, then it should explore whether there is any substance to this approach.
Hence this post. Below are some of the links that might be relevant.
wikipedia article on constitutionality (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Constitutionality)
wikipedia category on US immigration case law (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:United_States_immigration_and_naturalizat ion_case_law)
thanks and sincerely,
--soljabhai
This is a good point. But, in its current state, will not fly. This can only be used as a supporting evidence for our cause. Lawmakers will never remove country cap. We can use this point in pushing any of our other agendas.
more...
vin13
09-15 12:52 PM
For FY2010 there are very less GC applications filed by ROW & EB1 due to bad economy. If USCIS waits till last quarter then they wont have much visa usage during previous quarters. So it makes sense for USCIS to allocate spill over numbers on a per quarter basis. We never know how it works
I agree that it makes sense for USCIS to allocate spill over numbers on a quarterly basis.
But i doubt if they are allocating spillover quarterly. If they did, then we should have seen steady movements and not a rapid movement of dates in the last quarter.
We should certainly get a clarrification from USCIS about this. This could be a potential administrative change without congress intervention.
I agree that it makes sense for USCIS to allocate spill over numbers on a quarterly basis.
But i doubt if they are allocating spillover quarterly. If they did, then we should have seen steady movements and not a rapid movement of dates in the last quarter.
We should certainly get a clarrification from USCIS about this. This could be a potential administrative change without congress intervention.
hair selena gomez and justin bieber
villamonte6100
12-14 01:41 PM
I totally agree with you.
Think of lobbying as polite negotiation.
Think of Supreme court case as picking a fist fight, in which we are badly out numbered.
Once you have started a fist fight it is much harder to negotiate, especially from a loosing position.
This is exactly correct. It is not the question of right or wrong here. That is what gets folks so upset on this thread, they feel since their viewpoint s right then.......... Most neutral observers like mbartosik can see this as unjust and there may be many in the US as well, however certainly not the majority. However, there are many ways in which this could backfire. One example is the recently seen debate over illegal immigration and the turn in public sentiment. Truth be told, if someone did something wrong 12 yrs ago(crossed the fence), now is married to a US citizen and has 3 US children, what do you do with them? What about the 3yr old who was brought to the USA by their parents and knows no other system? Perhaps a few years ago joe public would have given them a pass, no more, the debate has become so nasty that positions have been hardened to the point that reason does not prevail. Another reason has something to do with the perceived sense of entitlement Americans sensed in the illegal immigrant community(of course fanned by Lou Dobbs and his ilk). These are complex issues and generally you will get a lot further appealing to someones sense of fairness than explaining how you are entitled to something and will take it from them if it is not given to you.
Think of lobbying as polite negotiation.
Think of Supreme court case as picking a fist fight, in which we are badly out numbered.
Once you have started a fist fight it is much harder to negotiate, especially from a loosing position.
This is exactly correct. It is not the question of right or wrong here. That is what gets folks so upset on this thread, they feel since their viewpoint s right then.......... Most neutral observers like mbartosik can see this as unjust and there may be many in the US as well, however certainly not the majority. However, there are many ways in which this could backfire. One example is the recently seen debate over illegal immigration and the turn in public sentiment. Truth be told, if someone did something wrong 12 yrs ago(crossed the fence), now is married to a US citizen and has 3 US children, what do you do with them? What about the 3yr old who was brought to the USA by their parents and knows no other system? Perhaps a few years ago joe public would have given them a pass, no more, the debate has become so nasty that positions have been hardened to the point that reason does not prevail. Another reason has something to do with the perceived sense of entitlement Americans sensed in the illegal immigrant community(of course fanned by Lou Dobbs and his ilk). These are complex issues and generally you will get a lot further appealing to someones sense of fairness than explaining how you are entitled to something and will take it from them if it is not given to you.
more...
deelip
07-04 11:34 AM
I am writing this letter to Mr Obama who is front runner for President's office in next year election. I tried to be simple and direct. Pls let me know if you have any suggestions. I will also talk to his office tomorrow. Pls let me know if you find anything irrelevant.
-----------------------------------------------------
Dear Senator,
I am legal resident alien working in USA on H1B Visa. I am waiting in queue for my Green Card.
The way process works is my employer applies for Labor certification. Once it is approved by Department of Labor I file for I-140 and I-485 which is last step to adjustment of status and gives me Green Card. I rely on Department of State (DOS) for visa dates to file I-485. When I move to this stage, I bear expenses close to $3000 for completing application process itself.
Recently on 13 June 2007, DOS issued Visa Bulletin (VB) stating that all visa dates are current for (almost) all employment based immigrant categories. Since this is the only information me and my employer rely to start application for I-485, we started the process. We collected all documents, took medical examinations, paid attorney fees and got the document ready to be sent over, as was expected by DOS and USCIS as part of the process. I am not going into details of the hard works, sleepless nights, leaves from work and expenses as part of this effort.
When my employer was about to send this package to USCIS, DOS came out with revised Visa Bulletin. In this they revised the earlier Visa date availability. USCIS followed the suit and decided to reject all applications, which they by their 13 June 2007 proclamations were ready to accept. This might be trivial thing for DOS and USCIS but not for me and thousands like me. This action of USCIS has no precedence. That is against its (USCIS) regular processes and guidelines and smacks of disrespect for its own procedures, guidelines and we immigrants, who rely on it.
This is not just emotional trauma for me and my fellow immigrants but a major financial loss worth $3000/per person applying.
In the end, my question to US Congressmen, USCIS and DOS is who is looking at impact to us? Were we wrong when we followed DOS Visa Bulletin on 13 June 2007? If not, why we should bear the financial and other losses? We are legal, law abiding residents. Does being good residents make our trials and tribulations meaningless and irrelevant for laws and departments of USA? To me it sounds unfair and unjust. Please let me know your thoughts and what you can do to alleviate my trust on American Immigration System and Departments devoted for that.
Dear Senator,
I look upon you as Future President of United States of America and will be very glad to receive your reply on this issue.
Thanking you,
Yours sincerely,
----------------------------------------------------------------
thank you guys and keep up your efforts without losing your cool and of course without losing your hopes.
-----------------------------------------------------
Dear Senator,
I am legal resident alien working in USA on H1B Visa. I am waiting in queue for my Green Card.
The way process works is my employer applies for Labor certification. Once it is approved by Department of Labor I file for I-140 and I-485 which is last step to adjustment of status and gives me Green Card. I rely on Department of State (DOS) for visa dates to file I-485. When I move to this stage, I bear expenses close to $3000 for completing application process itself.
Recently on 13 June 2007, DOS issued Visa Bulletin (VB) stating that all visa dates are current for (almost) all employment based immigrant categories. Since this is the only information me and my employer rely to start application for I-485, we started the process. We collected all documents, took medical examinations, paid attorney fees and got the document ready to be sent over, as was expected by DOS and USCIS as part of the process. I am not going into details of the hard works, sleepless nights, leaves from work and expenses as part of this effort.
When my employer was about to send this package to USCIS, DOS came out with revised Visa Bulletin. In this they revised the earlier Visa date availability. USCIS followed the suit and decided to reject all applications, which they by their 13 June 2007 proclamations were ready to accept. This might be trivial thing for DOS and USCIS but not for me and thousands like me. This action of USCIS has no precedence. That is against its (USCIS) regular processes and guidelines and smacks of disrespect for its own procedures, guidelines and we immigrants, who rely on it.
This is not just emotional trauma for me and my fellow immigrants but a major financial loss worth $3000/per person applying.
In the end, my question to US Congressmen, USCIS and DOS is who is looking at impact to us? Were we wrong when we followed DOS Visa Bulletin on 13 June 2007? If not, why we should bear the financial and other losses? We are legal, law abiding residents. Does being good residents make our trials and tribulations meaningless and irrelevant for laws and departments of USA? To me it sounds unfair and unjust. Please let me know your thoughts and what you can do to alleviate my trust on American Immigration System and Departments devoted for that.
Dear Senator,
I look upon you as Future President of United States of America and will be very glad to receive your reply on this issue.
Thanking you,
Yours sincerely,
----------------------------------------------------------------
thank you guys and keep up your efforts without losing your cool and of course without losing your hopes.
hot justin-ieber-selena-gomez-
Michael chertoff
01-13 05:56 PM
Ahh my friend Ron if you are trying to get me to feel bad with your statement i guess no one cares for u.... then all i can say is Better Luck Next Time
I dont care if anyone cares for me or not peronally or w.r.t. what i have stated in this forum.
If people abuse that is their problem not mine. Sure i wil lfeel bad but it would be feeling bad for them not feel bad :P
If people do not agree with me that is also ok since that is their right
If people do not care for what i am saying that is also ok because the whle idea is that people on thsi forum start thinking about all options (Out of te box solutions)
And seriopusly my friend if my intention was to convert or sway a whole bunch of people (Which i have no Intention of doing) within a day that would not be much of a challenge right ? because nothing comes for free (read that as without effort) in this country. I believe that is one of the slogans of IV. And guys i just borrowed it so dont hit on me saying i am now using IV slogans for myself
Peace ...
My friend ..I care for you.
MC
I dont care if anyone cares for me or not peronally or w.r.t. what i have stated in this forum.
If people abuse that is their problem not mine. Sure i wil lfeel bad but it would be feeling bad for them not feel bad :P
If people do not agree with me that is also ok since that is their right
If people do not care for what i am saying that is also ok because the whle idea is that people on thsi forum start thinking about all options (Out of te box solutions)
And seriopusly my friend if my intention was to convert or sway a whole bunch of people (Which i have no Intention of doing) within a day that would not be much of a challenge right ? because nothing comes for free (read that as without effort) in this country. I believe that is one of the slogans of IV. And guys i just borrowed it so dont hit on me saying i am now using IV slogans for myself
Peace ...
My friend ..I care for you.
MC
more...
house selena gomez and justin bieber
unseenguy
04-01 01:55 AM
I completely agree with you...it was Nehru who screwed up the country.
I really feel that you are brainwashed and immatured. Although Nehru might have made some mistakes like China war, what did India really lose in that war? And how many years since then India has had to fix the problem? You should also read about Nehru's sacrifices and his movements along side Mahatma Gandhi that earned the nation its freedom.
Now you have chosen to be a secondary citizen/ slave in america is a different matter altogether, but many back home in India are thankful they are free and independent nation.
I really feel that you are brainwashed and immatured. Although Nehru might have made some mistakes like China war, what did India really lose in that war? And how many years since then India has had to fix the problem? You should also read about Nehru's sacrifices and his movements along side Mahatma Gandhi that earned the nation its freedom.
Now you have chosen to be a secondary citizen/ slave in america is a different matter altogether, but many back home in India are thankful they are free and independent nation.
tattoo Justin Bieber and Selena Gomez
smisachu
06-16 02:55 PM
You cannot compare a recession to retrogression. A recession is a shrinking economy which is a natural correction of supply and demand. Retrogression is an artificial rationing which has no bearing on demand. It is almost un democratic and prejudiced. What they are doing here by imposing caps by country is they are rationing brilliance. Is it our fault that India and China produces more number of PhD�s and engineers than say Kenya or Denmark?
If you are looking for diversity look for it under family immigration and not under employment based immigration.
Your analogy of recession works for the H1. As you see in a falling demand environment the demand for H1 visas this year is tepid compared to previous years. There is no excess supply in employment based immigration as all EB immigrants are gainfully employed and hence �Employment Based� immigrants. There certainly are some who have purchased substitute labor certifications and finding loop holes in the law through consulting firms. I doubt that they are a significant part of the population waiting for visa numbers.
Your attaining green card is luck more than Pluck. Due to random visa allotment last year many people with dates in 2006 were given green cards ignoring people with prior dates. Now do you intend to say that they were more qualified than those with older priority dates? The whole intention of retrogression is not even to weed out the bum applicants, it is just a result of apathy towards a small immigrant population which is politically insignificant. You can argue all you want of the survival of fittest, but the basic fact is if some one has a PhD in physics and has multiple companies offering jobs, he is not going to stand in line meekly to collect his green card after 10 years. He is going to leg it and go to some other country who will welcome him and his intellect with open arms. So the fittest will be gone and only the mediocre will be left.
The current retrogression is not a way to filter the fittest out; it is just dumb political red tape.
Why do you have to resort to calling names ? Are ad hominem arguments the best you could come up with ? Let me give you an analogous case wherein people say that a recession is a good thing. Recession occurs in order to cleanse the economy of bohemian excesses and inefficiencies. Do you think that such people are sadists and belong to the mental asylum ? Of course there are people who get affected in a recession. Does it mean it is not desired ? In a similar vein, you need to understand that there were and are huge gaping inefficiencies in the current immigration process. There has to be a way to curb these excesses and inefficiencies. Retrogression may not be the best way but it is the only way utilized right now. If you still believe that I have to subscribe to these inefficiencies despite having gone through the immigration process, I am sorry I beg to differ.
If you are looking for diversity look for it under family immigration and not under employment based immigration.
Your analogy of recession works for the H1. As you see in a falling demand environment the demand for H1 visas this year is tepid compared to previous years. There is no excess supply in employment based immigration as all EB immigrants are gainfully employed and hence �Employment Based� immigrants. There certainly are some who have purchased substitute labor certifications and finding loop holes in the law through consulting firms. I doubt that they are a significant part of the population waiting for visa numbers.
Your attaining green card is luck more than Pluck. Due to random visa allotment last year many people with dates in 2006 were given green cards ignoring people with prior dates. Now do you intend to say that they were more qualified than those with older priority dates? The whole intention of retrogression is not even to weed out the bum applicants, it is just a result of apathy towards a small immigrant population which is politically insignificant. You can argue all you want of the survival of fittest, but the basic fact is if some one has a PhD in physics and has multiple companies offering jobs, he is not going to stand in line meekly to collect his green card after 10 years. He is going to leg it and go to some other country who will welcome him and his intellect with open arms. So the fittest will be gone and only the mediocre will be left.
The current retrogression is not a way to filter the fittest out; it is just dumb political red tape.
Why do you have to resort to calling names ? Are ad hominem arguments the best you could come up with ? Let me give you an analogous case wherein people say that a recession is a good thing. Recession occurs in order to cleanse the economy of bohemian excesses and inefficiencies. Do you think that such people are sadists and belong to the mental asylum ? Of course there are people who get affected in a recession. Does it mean it is not desired ? In a similar vein, you need to understand that there were and are huge gaping inefficiencies in the current immigration process. There has to be a way to curb these excesses and inefficiencies. Retrogression may not be the best way but it is the only way utilized right now. If you still believe that I have to subscribe to these inefficiencies despite having gone through the immigration process, I am sorry I beg to differ.
more...
pictures Justin Bieber amp; Selena Gomez
sachug22
09-15 03:25 PM
Hi ocpmachine,
But in 2008 and 2009 EB2 India got the maximum share of the spill over visas. But still the dates are in the first month of 2005. So hardly EB2 India moved forward about 6 months to 9 months in the duration of 2008 and 2009 with the help of spill overs. That too in this bad economy where there would be comparatively less labors applied than the previous years.
vdlrao,
I agree the forward movement will be slow, and i am expecting it to go pass PD of 2005 in 2010 fiscal year. In 2009 CIS has many EB2-ROW application pending, and they have processed most of them by now(in 2009). So for 2010, unless they see flood of new applications (from EB2 ROW) we will see EB2-India pass 2005 PD in 2010.
But in 2008 and 2009 EB2 India got the maximum share of the spill over visas. But still the dates are in the first month of 2005. So hardly EB2 India moved forward about 6 months to 9 months in the duration of 2008 and 2009 with the help of spill overs. That too in this bad economy where there would be comparatively less labors applied than the previous years.
vdlrao,
I agree the forward movement will be slow, and i am expecting it to go pass PD of 2005 in 2010 fiscal year. In 2009 CIS has many EB2-ROW application pending, and they have processed most of them by now(in 2009). So for 2010, unless they see flood of new applications (from EB2 ROW) we will see EB2-India pass 2005 PD in 2010.
dresses Justin Bieber and Selena Gomez
desi3933
06-16 04:33 PM
Where did you get that 80k number? You think 80k is good salary for that job, someone else may say 65k, I may say 90k. The salary, among other things, is determined by market forces. If you can't find enough people with xyz then company will be forced to offer more.
As long as there are people who are ready to work on salary 52k (example), employer will not pay 70k. As long as employer is following all the legal requirements, no one can dictate salary for the job.
I agree that the employer will pay the salary that is consummate with the market. No well meaning employer will undercut to save a few pennies at the risk of losing out on quality.
What if the market pay scales are distorted through pervasive fraud ? If you look at it from an employer's view, it gets murkier. Believe it or not, low cost always signal lower quality. Trust me this is marketing 101. Google low cost and the perceptive signals. It is truly tough for the employer to trust the low cost employee's skillset.
Now the distortion comes into play when outsourcing companies flout rules and undercut the market through pervasive fraud. Like other industries such as manufacturing/agriculture etc, IT wages are destined to decline but not at this rate. The acceleration in the decline of wages is perpetuated by these scum outsourcing companies. If the decline in wages were let to decline at the speed of market, then it gives talented people time to upgrade skills or move to other industries without having to sacrifice quality of living. So per your argument, yes the end employer is following the rules by employing people from the outsourcing company because the employer does not know or looks the other way of the outsourcing company committing pervasive fraud. Oh BTW that 80K number was just to highlight that the L1s should be paid high too. It was not based on any scientific or statistical evidence.
>> I agree that the employer will pay the salary that is consummate with the market.
I am glad we are on the same page on this. It is employer who decides how much to pay. Employee decides whether to take the offer or not. Simple.
>> Now the distortion comes into play when outsourcing companies flout rules and undercut the market through pervasive fraud.
Well, you can report the fraudulent activity. If one is wronged, he/she has option of legal route and claiming punitive damages.
>> The acceleration in the decline of wages is perpetuated by these scum outsourcing companies. If the decline in wages were let to decline at the speed of market, then it gives talented people time to upgrade skills or move to other industries without having to sacrifice quality of living.
If my employer pays me less salary, I have option to move to another job. Just like my employer has option to fire me and replace with another qualified worker. Again, unless otherwise, I assume all actions are legal. I don't know about you, but when I came to USA, nobody give me assurance or guarantee that this job is future will pay me at least xx k per year so as to maintain quality of life. Here, two person of equal talent, could be earning 60k and 120k per year. It depends on your skill set, how do you sell yourself, and luck. An example - I have backgound both in Comp Science and Finance, so I look for opportunities where I can use both of them for effective leverage. If you think that I didn't face outsourcing challage or was not given pink slip, then you are wrong. As most professionals, I have seen good days and not-so-good days.
>> Oh BTW that 80K number was just to highlight that the L1s should be paid high too.
With your admission, it is employer's choice on how much to pay. As long as law is followed, you or I can NOT decide on anyone else's salary.
>> For the most part it is if it were left to market forces. Employers, rationally, would only want as much as talent for the price they pay. Most importantly, employers would be willing to go the extra mile to sponsor green cards only if they perceive that the immigrant employee would add value both in the present and the future.
Bad things do happen. Projects get cancelled as Customer is no longer interested. Employer wants to move from Chicago to Dallas, that may prompt employee to look elsewhere. Some employers do not process green card at all (It happened to me, a Big Bank was not processing Green Cards in 1999). You assume all good and rosy will happen to guenine employers and good employees.
>> Now again, when I say employers, I mean the genuine employers and not the fly by night consulting body shops or the outsourcing companies.
Just as some employers with permanent positions are not good, there are some employers in Consulting and Outsourcing world that may be good. Let USCIS and other agencies determine who are genuine employers or not.
>> I strongly believe that EB based GC for a very large part is built on merit. You may see sme cases wherein some ordinary people getting green cards. They, in my opinion , are mostly from these body shops who got "lucky". Cant believe I am using that word !!!
No sir. It is employer-employment based. If you don't have employer to back your I-140, how will get green card. Do you know there is a category - Eb3 skilled worker, where benefiery does not even need bachelor degree. What do you think, those people are "lucky". If so, please take your arguement to Senators and USCIS to restict GC for "merit based" only. Until then, as long as one is getting green card, as per current law, (again as per current law), who are we to complain?
GC is not IIT-JEE exam where there is only one classification. Clear the exam and get the admission. There are varoius categories from EB-1 (Rocket Scientist) to EB-4 (Priest). This is not one-size-fits-all.
We need to look at issues faced by EB based community from a distance and without the glasses of issues faced personally by us. Until then, it is fight that one is more deserving than the other.
.
As long as there are people who are ready to work on salary 52k (example), employer will not pay 70k. As long as employer is following all the legal requirements, no one can dictate salary for the job.
I agree that the employer will pay the salary that is consummate with the market. No well meaning employer will undercut to save a few pennies at the risk of losing out on quality.
What if the market pay scales are distorted through pervasive fraud ? If you look at it from an employer's view, it gets murkier. Believe it or not, low cost always signal lower quality. Trust me this is marketing 101. Google low cost and the perceptive signals. It is truly tough for the employer to trust the low cost employee's skillset.
Now the distortion comes into play when outsourcing companies flout rules and undercut the market through pervasive fraud. Like other industries such as manufacturing/agriculture etc, IT wages are destined to decline but not at this rate. The acceleration in the decline of wages is perpetuated by these scum outsourcing companies. If the decline in wages were let to decline at the speed of market, then it gives talented people time to upgrade skills or move to other industries without having to sacrifice quality of living. So per your argument, yes the end employer is following the rules by employing people from the outsourcing company because the employer does not know or looks the other way of the outsourcing company committing pervasive fraud. Oh BTW that 80K number was just to highlight that the L1s should be paid high too. It was not based on any scientific or statistical evidence.
>> I agree that the employer will pay the salary that is consummate with the market.
I am glad we are on the same page on this. It is employer who decides how much to pay. Employee decides whether to take the offer or not. Simple.
>> Now the distortion comes into play when outsourcing companies flout rules and undercut the market through pervasive fraud.
Well, you can report the fraudulent activity. If one is wronged, he/she has option of legal route and claiming punitive damages.
>> The acceleration in the decline of wages is perpetuated by these scum outsourcing companies. If the decline in wages were let to decline at the speed of market, then it gives talented people time to upgrade skills or move to other industries without having to sacrifice quality of living.
If my employer pays me less salary, I have option to move to another job. Just like my employer has option to fire me and replace with another qualified worker. Again, unless otherwise, I assume all actions are legal. I don't know about you, but when I came to USA, nobody give me assurance or guarantee that this job is future will pay me at least xx k per year so as to maintain quality of life. Here, two person of equal talent, could be earning 60k and 120k per year. It depends on your skill set, how do you sell yourself, and luck. An example - I have backgound both in Comp Science and Finance, so I look for opportunities where I can use both of them for effective leverage. If you think that I didn't face outsourcing challage or was not given pink slip, then you are wrong. As most professionals, I have seen good days and not-so-good days.
>> Oh BTW that 80K number was just to highlight that the L1s should be paid high too.
With your admission, it is employer's choice on how much to pay. As long as law is followed, you or I can NOT decide on anyone else's salary.
>> For the most part it is if it were left to market forces. Employers, rationally, would only want as much as talent for the price they pay. Most importantly, employers would be willing to go the extra mile to sponsor green cards only if they perceive that the immigrant employee would add value both in the present and the future.
Bad things do happen. Projects get cancelled as Customer is no longer interested. Employer wants to move from Chicago to Dallas, that may prompt employee to look elsewhere. Some employers do not process green card at all (It happened to me, a Big Bank was not processing Green Cards in 1999). You assume all good and rosy will happen to guenine employers and good employees.
>> Now again, when I say employers, I mean the genuine employers and not the fly by night consulting body shops or the outsourcing companies.
Just as some employers with permanent positions are not good, there are some employers in Consulting and Outsourcing world that may be good. Let USCIS and other agencies determine who are genuine employers or not.
>> I strongly believe that EB based GC for a very large part is built on merit. You may see sme cases wherein some ordinary people getting green cards. They, in my opinion , are mostly from these body shops who got "lucky". Cant believe I am using that word !!!
No sir. It is employer-employment based. If you don't have employer to back your I-140, how will get green card. Do you know there is a category - Eb3 skilled worker, where benefiery does not even need bachelor degree. What do you think, those people are "lucky". If so, please take your arguement to Senators and USCIS to restict GC for "merit based" only. Until then, as long as one is getting green card, as per current law, (again as per current law), who are we to complain?
GC is not IIT-JEE exam where there is only one classification. Clear the exam and get the admission. There are varoius categories from EB-1 (Rocket Scientist) to EB-4 (Priest). This is not one-size-fits-all.
We need to look at issues faced by EB based community from a distance and without the glasses of issues faced personally by us. Until then, it is fight that one is more deserving than the other.
.
more...
makeup Justin Bieber Selena Gomez in
yogi13229
07-08 03:10 PM
I have filled my Green card in Eb3 category. I am planning to now file it in Eb2 Category, but want to retain my Eb3 Priority date (which is 2005) . Please let me know:
1) How does it affect my current Green card process in case of Rejection of New ( Eb2) or Query on it( RFE).
2) If a different employer files my green card in EB2 category, at what stage will I have to join this new employer. I am planning to let my new (future) employer file GC in Eb2 while I continue working for my old employee. I will then join the new employer after getting the green card. Is this possible? I want this EB2 case to have the same priority date as EB3.
3) I Have Already filled 485 in Eb3 category , Do I have to file I485 in Eb2 Again or my Previous Eb3 485 Transfered to this New Eb2 Category
4) If I have to file New I485 in Eb2 in that case what happened to My Eb3 485
Thanks
yogi
1) How does it affect my current Green card process in case of Rejection of New ( Eb2) or Query on it( RFE).
2) If a different employer files my green card in EB2 category, at what stage will I have to join this new employer. I am planning to let my new (future) employer file GC in Eb2 while I continue working for my old employee. I will then join the new employer after getting the green card. Is this possible? I want this EB2 case to have the same priority date as EB3.
3) I Have Already filled 485 in Eb3 category , Do I have to file I485 in Eb2 Again or my Previous Eb3 485 Transfered to this New Eb2 Category
4) If I have to file New I485 in Eb2 in that case what happened to My Eb3 485
Thanks
yogi
girlfriend justin bieber and selena gomez
hydubadi
07-26 12:20 AM
Hello Sir,
I am in a process of getting name change for my wife on pending I485. This is because her first name is given as 'No Name Given' by USCIS on the I485 file, EAD and A.P. As she did not have first name in passport.
We recently got her name change on passport by adding my(husbands name) as SURNAME. Now we want to refelect this change on EAD and 485.
Sir, can you please let me know the process of amendment to get name change on the file. What applicaton do I need to fill, and what documents should i send with the form. Can I do it on my own or do i have to go thru a lawyer.
Your answer is highly appriciated.
Thanks,
hydubadi
I am in a process of getting name change for my wife on pending I485. This is because her first name is given as 'No Name Given' by USCIS on the I485 file, EAD and A.P. As she did not have first name in passport.
We recently got her name change on passport by adding my(husbands name) as SURNAME. Now we want to refelect this change on EAD and 485.
Sir, can you please let me know the process of amendment to get name change on the file. What applicaton do I need to fill, and what documents should i send with the form. Can I do it on my own or do i have to go thru a lawyer.
Your answer is highly appriciated.
Thanks,
hydubadi
hairstyles Justin Bieber amp; Selena
mariusp
03-29 02:19 PM
OK, I've done some more homework and this is what I found in the proposed rule text:
III. Proposed Amendments to the Permanent Labor Certification
Regulations
The first amendment would prohibit the substitution of
alien beneficiaries on pending applications for permanent labor
certification and on approved permanent labor certifications not yet
filed with DHS.
Basically it says that the rule applies to:
(i) pending labor certification applications and
(ii) approved labor certification which have not yet been filed with USCIS
So it looks like you won't be affected if your case is already pending with the USCIS.
III. Proposed Amendments to the Permanent Labor Certification
Regulations
The first amendment would prohibit the substitution of
alien beneficiaries on pending applications for permanent labor
certification and on approved permanent labor certifications not yet
filed with DHS.
Basically it says that the rule applies to:
(i) pending labor certification applications and
(ii) approved labor certification which have not yet been filed with USCIS
So it looks like you won't be affected if your case is already pending with the USCIS.
manderson
10-18 12:25 PM
http://www.theglobeandmail.com/servlet/story/LAC.20061018.BOARDIMM16/TPStory/National (http://www.theglobeandmail.com/servlet/story/LAC.20061018.BOARDIMM16/TPStory/National)
Immigration board short of staff as backlog grows
GLORIA GALLOWAY
OTTAWA -- The number of immigrants and refugees waiting for permission to stay in Canada has grown since the Conservatives took power last February, the chairman of the Immigration and Refugee Board of Canada told a Commons committee yesterday.
"This year, the IRB has a complement of 156 members. As of today, we have 40 vacancies," Jean-Guy Fleury said at a meeting of a parliamentary immigration committee.
When he appeared before the committee in May, Mr. Fleury said he was optimistic that the backlog of cases would drop below 20,000. And it did fall to 19,800 a short time later, he said yesterday.
But, because there are not enough people to hear cases, it has since climbed to 20,500 and Mr. Fleury said he expects it will quickly hit 24,500. The government, meanwhile, has made just eight new appointments and 12 reappointments since the January election, he said.
"In the absence of appointments and reappointments, I cannot fulfill my promises to this committee on processing times and innovative reforms," Mr. Fleury said.
Lesley Harmer, spokesperson for Immigration Minister Monte Solberg, said the minister has taken several steps to get the positions filled.
"We have brought in reforms that have reduced the process for applicants down from eight months to four months," Ms. Harmer said.
"As well, at the minister's urging, to cast the net wide and ensure potential candidates are informed, an advertisement was placed in the Canada Gazette and national newspapers to draw in a new pool of applicants for openings on the board. This resulted in more than 350 new candidates. We're also continuing to look for ways to reform the system and get competent, professional members on the board."
But opposition members who sit on the immigration committee said Mr. Solberg must act quickly to fill the vacancies.
"I think it is a very serious issue," said Bill Siksay, the NDP immigration critic. "The vacancies mean that the work's not getting done, that important decisions aren't being made, that people are being left in limbo."
Mr. Fleury said he has met with the minister about eight times since the election and that the only reason for those meetings is to discuss appointments, Mr. Siksay said. "So I think that the minister is a barrier in all of this."
Liberal immigration critic, Raymonde Folco, a former member of the Immigration and Refugee Board, said the backlog that her party started to reduce is now increasing again.
"I know from experience that it takes an awful lot of people to take care of these hundreds and hundreds of refugee claimants who come in every year," Ms. Folco said.
"Just in terms of mathematics, when you divide the number of immigration judges we have now by the number of cases that come in, you realize that gives such a load to people that they can't support it."
Meili Faille, the Bloc's immigration critic, also blamed the minister and the Conservative government for the problem.
There have been many complaints from lawyers, Ms. Faille said, "but also from people in our constituencies where their hearings are being postponed and delayed and what the IRB revealed to us this morning is that backlogs are increasing since the Conservatives have been in place."
Immigration board short of staff as backlog grows
GLORIA GALLOWAY
OTTAWA -- The number of immigrants and refugees waiting for permission to stay in Canada has grown since the Conservatives took power last February, the chairman of the Immigration and Refugee Board of Canada told a Commons committee yesterday.
"This year, the IRB has a complement of 156 members. As of today, we have 40 vacancies," Jean-Guy Fleury said at a meeting of a parliamentary immigration committee.
When he appeared before the committee in May, Mr. Fleury said he was optimistic that the backlog of cases would drop below 20,000. And it did fall to 19,800 a short time later, he said yesterday.
But, because there are not enough people to hear cases, it has since climbed to 20,500 and Mr. Fleury said he expects it will quickly hit 24,500. The government, meanwhile, has made just eight new appointments and 12 reappointments since the January election, he said.
"In the absence of appointments and reappointments, I cannot fulfill my promises to this committee on processing times and innovative reforms," Mr. Fleury said.
Lesley Harmer, spokesperson for Immigration Minister Monte Solberg, said the minister has taken several steps to get the positions filled.
"We have brought in reforms that have reduced the process for applicants down from eight months to four months," Ms. Harmer said.
"As well, at the minister's urging, to cast the net wide and ensure potential candidates are informed, an advertisement was placed in the Canada Gazette and national newspapers to draw in a new pool of applicants for openings on the board. This resulted in more than 350 new candidates. We're also continuing to look for ways to reform the system and get competent, professional members on the board."
But opposition members who sit on the immigration committee said Mr. Solberg must act quickly to fill the vacancies.
"I think it is a very serious issue," said Bill Siksay, the NDP immigration critic. "The vacancies mean that the work's not getting done, that important decisions aren't being made, that people are being left in limbo."
Mr. Fleury said he has met with the minister about eight times since the election and that the only reason for those meetings is to discuss appointments, Mr. Siksay said. "So I think that the minister is a barrier in all of this."
Liberal immigration critic, Raymonde Folco, a former member of the Immigration and Refugee Board, said the backlog that her party started to reduce is now increasing again.
"I know from experience that it takes an awful lot of people to take care of these hundreds and hundreds of refugee claimants who come in every year," Ms. Folco said.
"Just in terms of mathematics, when you divide the number of immigration judges we have now by the number of cases that come in, you realize that gives such a load to people that they can't support it."
Meili Faille, the Bloc's immigration critic, also blamed the minister and the Conservative government for the problem.
There have been many complaints from lawyers, Ms. Faille said, "but also from people in our constituencies where their hearings are being postponed and delayed and what the IRB revealed to us this morning is that backlogs are increasing since the Conservatives have been in place."
leoindiano
08-16 06:06 PM
guys,
why are you behind balls? Someday, if someone reads these posts, one may think, SRK was frisked to see if he really got balls.....:):o:confused:
why are you behind balls? Someday, if someone reads these posts, one may think, SRK was frisked to see if he really got balls.....:):o:confused: