Illuminae
05-27 06:48 PM
hey... fester, btw, your site totally sux, but.. er... hehe... i kinda like the song (feel free to throw stuff at me) :beam:
wallpaper real madrid fc 2011 squad.
sangeethak31
07-15 12:16 PM
As I am going for a H1 Visa renewal, I am not having an attorney.
Could someone please provide me a template.
Thanks,
Sangeetha K
Could someone please provide me a template.
Thanks,
Sangeetha K
estrela21
02-08 10:10 PM
well i got marriage church, but we didn't got are license yet, because my husband have some problem in court.( he is a citzen) We'll know if he will go to jail or not in march 31.
my question is:
since we don't know if he will or not. I need to know if i can start my paper with the immigration?
because if he goes to jail.. how we will do the interview if he is not here to go?
what i can do??
somebody can help me?:confused:
my question is:
since we don't know if he will or not. I need to know if i can start my paper with the immigration?
because if he goes to jail.. how we will do the interview if he is not here to go?
what i can do??
somebody can help me?:confused:
2011 real madrid fc 2011 squad.
voldemar
03-20 01:08 PM
I didnt understand your point: Is revoking an approved I140 is mandotary for the employer when an employee leaves?
No, not mandatory.
Per most lawyers it is not mandotory. Yes ofcourse employers "can" revoke but the question is it necessary for their interests and how? Employers will not be bound to employ you after you get green card. AC21 protects employee - not employer.
Revocation of an approved I140 by USCIS is may be for other reasons like incorrect info when its applied or something like that.I'm not discussing any "other reasons". Only USCIS denial of already approved application because of Ability to Pay when they add up all pending I-485 cases with I-140 pending or approved within one company. In that case if employer withdraw I-140 it could not be added to a pile of pending or approved I-140 - employer is not obliged to pay this employee.
No, not mandatory.
Per most lawyers it is not mandotory. Yes ofcourse employers "can" revoke but the question is it necessary for their interests and how? Employers will not be bound to employ you after you get green card. AC21 protects employee - not employer.
Revocation of an approved I140 by USCIS is may be for other reasons like incorrect info when its applied or something like that.I'm not discussing any "other reasons". Only USCIS denial of already approved application because of Ability to Pay when they add up all pending I-485 cases with I-140 pending or approved within one company. In that case if employer withdraw I-140 it could not be added to a pile of pending or approved I-140 - employer is not obliged to pay this employee.
more...
GCchakravyuh
07-13 11:43 AM
Dressing up professional makes utmost sense. Afterall they are dealing with 'professional legal immigrants' , not the illegal ones.
So guys , gals... make sure please NO JEANS. if you have summer wear suit fine, otherwise please do wear offical dress code- ofcourse summerwear.
So guys , gals... make sure please NO JEANS. if you have summer wear suit fine, otherwise please do wear offical dress code- ofcourse summerwear.
gc28262
07-12 12:31 AM
Are all these paper based filings or e-filings?
I e-filed EAD/AP renewals on May 25th, 2009. Applications are at TSC. My AP got approved on June 19th and I received the AP documents on June 20th. However, my EAD application is still pending since May 25th. I think most, if not all, EAD e-files receive a FP notice and they take a picture as well as FP when we go to the ASC. I haven't received FP notice either so far. From what I am seeing, EAD paper based filing is being processed much faster (2-3 weeks) than e-filings. Anyone who e-filed EAD could pls let us know how long it took for FP notice and EAD approval.
Mine was an e-filing. However my FP scheduling was quite weird.
I had my FP scheduled for 11/13
but my Card Production was Ordered on 11/12
I still went ahead and gave my FP on 11/13.
I e-filed EAD/AP renewals on May 25th, 2009. Applications are at TSC. My AP got approved on June 19th and I received the AP documents on June 20th. However, my EAD application is still pending since May 25th. I think most, if not all, EAD e-files receive a FP notice and they take a picture as well as FP when we go to the ASC. I haven't received FP notice either so far. From what I am seeing, EAD paper based filing is being processed much faster (2-3 weeks) than e-filings. Anyone who e-filed EAD could pls let us know how long it took for FP notice and EAD approval.
Mine was an e-filing. However my FP scheduling was quite weird.
I had my FP scheduled for 11/13
but my Card Production was Ordered on 11/12
I still went ahead and gave my FP on 11/13.
more...
tinamatthew
07-21 04:08 PM
My PD is Nov 2004, I got 140 approved. Im not filing 485 now as im unmarried.
Any ideas when can be the date current again(for my PD atleast)?
Are you planning on getting married? Even if you are when you get married, your spouse can file as a derivative and incase your green card is approved. Your spouse will have 180 days in which to apply (i-485).
Talk to your lawyer, it may make sense to file now!
Any ideas when can be the date current again(for my PD atleast)?
Are you planning on getting married? Even if you are when you get married, your spouse can file as a derivative and incase your green card is approved. Your spouse will have 180 days in which to apply (i-485).
Talk to your lawyer, it may make sense to file now!
2010 real madrid fc players 2011.
krish2005
11-09 08:47 PM
I am opposing STEM cell bill then, I dont want to see Kaurava's running around...::-)
:D
"Science is a double edged". I would support stem cell research if there are ways control it and not to jeopardize nature's protocols.
lol. I could imagine the comical kaurava clowns running around when you put that post. :D:D:D
:D
"Science is a double edged". I would support stem cell research if there are ways control it and not to jeopardize nature's protocols.
lol. I could imagine the comical kaurava clowns running around when you put that post. :D:D:D
more...
gc_in_30_yrs
11-21 01:16 PM
I saw the following status on I-131
Application Type: I131, APPLICATION FOR USCIS TRAVEL DOCUMENT
Current Status: Document mailed to applicant.
On November 21, 2007 we mailed the document to the address we have on file. You should receive the new document within 30 days. If you do not, or if you move before you get it, call customer service.
Does it mean that I-131 is approved?
Yes, I guess.
Application Type: I131, APPLICATION FOR USCIS TRAVEL DOCUMENT
Current Status: Document mailed to applicant.
On November 21, 2007 we mailed the document to the address we have on file. You should receive the new document within 30 days. If you do not, or if you move before you get it, call customer service.
Does it mean that I-131 is approved?
Yes, I guess.
hair real madrid fc 2011 squad.
Maverick1
11-13 04:43 PM
Hi Guys,
I verified my 485 Application status online and this is what I found can you guys tel what could this mean.
My I140 is not approved yet.
Application Type: I485, APPLICATION TO REGISTER PERMANENT RESIDENCE OR TO ADJUST STATUS
Current Status: Document mailed to applicant.
What is your PD and country ? A lot depends on these two factors. Is this the status against your I485 ? or 131 ?
I verified my 485 Application status online and this is what I found can you guys tel what could this mean.
My I140 is not approved yet.
Application Type: I485, APPLICATION TO REGISTER PERMANENT RESIDENCE OR TO ADJUST STATUS
Current Status: Document mailed to applicant.
What is your PD and country ? A lot depends on these two factors. Is this the status against your I485 ? or 131 ?
more...
funny
09-16 02:05 PM
^bump^ ^bump^
hot real madrid fc 2011 squad. fc
abhijitp
01-27 11:47 AM
^^
more...
house real madrid fc 2011 squad.
waiting4ever
01-05 04:45 PM
This is a good effort towards solving the retrogression issue. Like many silent readers, I do have concern about contributing to a new organization.
Is there a way to know more details about this effort? Please send me a personal email so I can understand more and contribute with confidence.
Thanks!
Is there a way to know more details about this effort? Please send me a personal email so I can understand more and contribute with confidence.
Thanks!
tattoo real madrid fc 2011 squad.
munnu77
04-06 09:35 PM
i am sorry..i couldnt follow todays proceedings..whn i cam to iv site in the evening..everyone says bill is dead
whn i went to immigration-law.com, they say the following
cud someone tell me which one is true??????????
We reported earlier the Senate Republican Members Agreement last night. Today, the Democratic Minority Leader and other Democractic leaders agreed to the proposal, turning the Republican agreement into the Bi-Partisan Agreement. This dramatic break-through opens a door to the possibility of passing the Senate version of Comprehensive Immigration Reform bill, S. 2454, as amended before this week is over and before the Congress goes into the recess next two weeks.
The development is accompanied by three other developments:
President released statement supporting the bi-partisan agreement;
Senate rejected the Democrat's motion to cloture for the Specter amendments to S.2454;
Senate also relected the Republican Kyl' motion for his amendments.
Now we see the light at the end of the tunnel!!
whn i went to immigration-law.com, they say the following
cud someone tell me which one is true??????????
We reported earlier the Senate Republican Members Agreement last night. Today, the Democratic Minority Leader and other Democractic leaders agreed to the proposal, turning the Republican agreement into the Bi-Partisan Agreement. This dramatic break-through opens a door to the possibility of passing the Senate version of Comprehensive Immigration Reform bill, S. 2454, as amended before this week is over and before the Congress goes into the recess next two weeks.
The development is accompanied by three other developments:
President released statement supporting the bi-partisan agreement;
Senate rejected the Democrat's motion to cloture for the Specter amendments to S.2454;
Senate also relected the Republican Kyl' motion for his amendments.
Now we see the light at the end of the tunnel!!
more...
pictures real madrid fc 2011 squad.
p_aluri
06-11 05:40 PM
You may port the PD as well as get 3 yrs extension based on previously approved I-140 regardless of employer as long as I-140 is not revoked.
I am in my 8 yr. Have a H1-B approved Untill 2008 Dec
Have a EB3 Approved Labor and 140 from Company A.
Now as of today if I move to Company B ...
Question :
Can I get a 3 yr Extension based on Company A (140 Approved )
that is from june 2007 to june 2010
OR
Do I get my H1-B untill 2008 Dec ?
----
When I move to Company B is there anything that I have be aware off as
I am planning to pally Eb2 and move the PD from company A
My PD : EB3 Jun 2004
Thanks Thanks Thanks Thanks
I am in my 8 yr. Have a H1-B approved Untill 2008 Dec
Have a EB3 Approved Labor and 140 from Company A.
Now as of today if I move to Company B ...
Question :
Can I get a 3 yr Extension based on Company A (140 Approved )
that is from june 2007 to june 2010
OR
Do I get my H1-B untill 2008 Dec ?
----
When I move to Company B is there anything that I have be aware off as
I am planning to pally Eb2 and move the PD from company A
My PD : EB3 Jun 2004
Thanks Thanks Thanks Thanks
dresses real madrid fc 2011 squad. fc
Madhuri
04-09 11:30 AM
Thanks wellwishergc,
I need to clarify one thing though, my I-140 (which will be applied soon) is not pending for more than 365 days. Am I still eligible to file for 7th year?
Other thing is I also have a LC pending in PBEC (AD March 2005), but I am not with that employer and do not have any document/case number for that LC. Chances of getting these the that employer are bleak.
-Madhuri
I need to clarify one thing though, my I-140 (which will be applied soon) is not pending for more than 365 days. Am I still eligible to file for 7th year?
Other thing is I also have a LC pending in PBEC (AD March 2005), but I am not with that employer and do not have any document/case number for that LC. Chances of getting these the that employer are bleak.
-Madhuri
more...
makeup real madrid fc 2011 squad.
jhaalaa
11-11 10:56 AM
I agree that every single job loss matters and I support keeping jobs here where possible - unless essential.
Interestingly, jobs lost due to outsourcing are far less than other factors. Here is some interesting survey link:
Where the Jobs Went - Careers (http://www.cioinsight.com/c/a/Careers/Where-the-Jobs-Went-517950/?kc=CIOMINUTE11112009CIOA)
The reason I posted it here is because the anti-immigrant lobby also views immigrants as supporters of outsourcing - which is not true because we look wholistically from an economic perspective. Also we are comparatively less emotionally charged about local issues, something that we should be more involved in to ensure comfortable assimilation for natives and immigrants alike.
Interestingly, jobs lost due to outsourcing are far less than other factors. Here is some interesting survey link:
Where the Jobs Went - Careers (http://www.cioinsight.com/c/a/Careers/Where-the-Jobs-Went-517950/?kc=CIOMINUTE11112009CIOA)
The reason I posted it here is because the anti-immigrant lobby also views immigrants as supporters of outsourcing - which is not true because we look wholistically from an economic perspective. Also we are comparatively less emotionally charged about local issues, something that we should be more involved in to ensure comfortable assimilation for natives and immigrants alike.
girlfriend real madrid fc 2011 squad.
Blog Feeds
01-26 08:40 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)
hairstyles real madrid fc 2011 squad.
boldm28
06-17 08:27 AM
Years and years of waiting? no kidding. Look at my priority date. And there are people waiting before me. You used a pre-approved labor and have been waiting in the GC queue from what 2006? Dude, in today's world, a reasonable wait for eb3-is anywhere between 10-15 years and eb2 is atleast 5-6 years. I am not mad that you used a pre-approved labor, though in my personal opinion, its a taboo. I am just saying you are lucky enough that you may get your green card much quickly than people like us who have been waiting atleast 8-10 years and trust me, people like your case, usually should be happy.
you got that rite buddy
you got that rite buddy
tinamatthew
07-17 04:04 PM
DOS and USCIS are slow. But it would be really helpful if the IV code team can provide some update on our site. I believe over 2.5 hours have passed since the last update regarding some update in 1 hour. I guess we can't do anything if it takes more time but an update always helps! Thank you.
HERE IS THE UPDATE
UPDATE as of 3:18 PM EST 7/17/2007
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
DHS will be rescinding its July 2 update and the initial July Visa Bulletin will take effect for 31 days � i.e., all employment-based green card categories (except for the �Other Workers� category) will be �current� and CIS will accept applications through August 17.
DHS will issue a press release to this effect later today.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Last edited by logiclife : Today at 03:02 PM.
HERE IS THE UPDATE
UPDATE as of 3:18 PM EST 7/17/2007
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
DHS will be rescinding its July 2 update and the initial July Visa Bulletin will take effect for 31 days � i.e., all employment-based green card categories (except for the �Other Workers� category) will be �current� and CIS will accept applications through August 17.
DHS will issue a press release to this effect later today.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Last edited by logiclife : Today at 03:02 PM.
kish006
12-25 08:56 AM
agc2005,
Thanks for the reply.
I already send my EAD card. on Dec 11th. When did you resubmitted EAD Card and how many day USCIS took to reissue new EAD cards.
THanks
Any body who has simillary issue with AP and did you guys did. and how it took for u you to new cards.
Please send your experince.
Can I make this expedite. As I planning to go to India in Jan.
Thanks for the reply.
I already send my EAD card. on Dec 11th. When did you resubmitted EAD Card and how many day USCIS took to reissue new EAD cards.
THanks
Any body who has simillary issue with AP and did you guys did. and how it took for u you to new cards.
Please send your experince.
Can I make this expedite. As I planning to go to India in Jan.
No comments:
Post a Comment