gcformeornot
05-15 08:36 AM
who think if they close their eyes, their problems will go away....:D
wallpaper paper flowers to make.
snathan
03-28 12:39 PM
Hi All,
I filed joint tax return for me and my wife (who is on H4 visa) and sent the W-7 form (for ITIN processing) alongwith the tax return files prepared by my Tax Consultant. However, IRS changed my tax return to single return and reduced the fed refund accordingly, saying that ITIN for my wife is missing. When I called them, they could not confirm but only said that the ITIN could be still undergoing processing. Can you please advise what I should do now on my behalf to get back the refund balance amount?
Wait for ITIN to be processed and once get the ITIN amend your tax filing.
I filed joint tax return for me and my wife (who is on H4 visa) and sent the W-7 form (for ITIN processing) alongwith the tax return files prepared by my Tax Consultant. However, IRS changed my tax return to single return and reduced the fed refund accordingly, saying that ITIN for my wife is missing. When I called them, they could not confirm but only said that the ITIN could be still undergoing processing. Can you please advise what I should do now on my behalf to get back the refund balance amount?
Wait for ITIN to be processed and once get the ITIN amend your tax filing.
TeddyKoochu
01-06 02:57 PM
There is nothing called "upgrade". You can file a second I-140 as EB1-A in parallel. Other than the money and energy spent, there is no downside. AFAIK, there is no "eligibility" for filing EB1-A. In the petition, you must demonstrate that you meet the minimum number of criteria described by USCIS.
USCIS - EB-1 Eligibility and Filing (http://www.uscis.gov/portal/site/uscis/menuitem.5af9bb95919f35e66f614176543f6d1a/?vgnextoid=3a4df271ab0fd010VgnVCM1000000ecd190aRCR D&vgnextchannel=91919c7755cb9010VgnVCM10000045f3d6a1 RCRD)
Sincerest thanks for the information. Iam looking at criteria 1 to 10 in the list that you have provided. I believe that I can gather evidence to satisfy 2 criteria�s completely and maybe 1 partially, does that suffice or there is a rule that atleast say 4 / 10 or X / 10 should be satisfied as a minimum. Most of the criteria�s are actually meant for distinguished people in research, whereas my profile is more of an IT application developer / designer.
USCIS - EB-1 Eligibility and Filing (http://www.uscis.gov/portal/site/uscis/menuitem.5af9bb95919f35e66f614176543f6d1a/?vgnextoid=3a4df271ab0fd010VgnVCM1000000ecd190aRCR D&vgnextchannel=91919c7755cb9010VgnVCM10000045f3d6a1 RCRD)
Sincerest thanks for the information. Iam looking at criteria 1 to 10 in the list that you have provided. I believe that I can gather evidence to satisfy 2 criteria�s completely and maybe 1 partially, does that suffice or there is a rule that atleast say 4 / 10 or X / 10 should be satisfied as a minimum. Most of the criteria�s are actually meant for distinguished people in research, whereas my profile is more of an IT application developer / designer.
2011 make tissue paper flowers.
royus77
07-17 10:29 PM
Hi,
My I-140 approved in TSC( premium processing)
My Attorney sent my I-485 on July 2 to TSC
my labor approved from Wisconsin
but I read somewhere all applications needs to go to NSC , is it true?
I greatly appreciate your help
You are fine. I 485 should go where I 140 was approved.USCIS will internally transfer the applications until Aug 30 if they were sent to wrong processng center( Check the accuracy of date)
http://www.uscis.gov/files/pressrele...ling062107.pdf
My I-140 approved in TSC( premium processing)
My Attorney sent my I-485 on July 2 to TSC
my labor approved from Wisconsin
but I read somewhere all applications needs to go to NSC , is it true?
I greatly appreciate your help
You are fine. I 485 should go where I 140 was approved.USCIS will internally transfer the applications until Aug 30 if they were sent to wrong processng center( Check the accuracy of date)
http://www.uscis.gov/files/pressrele...ling062107.pdf
more...
cagedcactus
06-11 12:53 PM
Hmmm....
If you watched the way he won last two terms as President, you wouldnt doubt anything about this man. If he says "see you at the bill signing", then he WILL see you at the bill signing.
We better move quick and start pulling every string that is in our control, or else it will be too late.
If you watched the way he won last two terms as President, you wouldnt doubt anything about this man. If he says "see you at the bill signing", then he WILL see you at the bill signing.
We better move quick and start pulling every string that is in our control, or else it will be too late.
sravani
05-15 01:29 PM
Thanks...is your 140 in NSC or TSC ?
NSC
NSC
more...
GrndMasterFlash
03-26 09:34 AM
i can haz added plzzzz
http://www.kirupa.com/forum/showthread.php?t=323032
http://www.kirupa.com/forum/showthread.php?t=323032
2010 paper flowers to make.
div_bell_2003
02-18 08:20 PM
Great piece of info, dude ! :)
Just an additional question, what happens if the parents are in the I-485 applied stage and the baby is born outside of US ?
Child born abroad to Lawful Permanent Resident (LPR) may be boarded if
child was born during the temporary visit abroad of a mother who is a lawful permanent resident alien, or a national, of the United States, provided that the child's application for admission to the United States is made within 2 years of birth and the child is accompanied by the parent who is applying for readmission as a permanent resident upon the first return of the parent.
Link for the document (http://www.cbp.gov/linkhandler/cgov/travel/inspections_carriers_facilities/carrier_info_guide/carrier_info_guide.ctt/carrier_info_guide.pdf)
_______________________
Not a legal advice.
US citizen of Indian origin
Just an additional question, what happens if the parents are in the I-485 applied stage and the baby is born outside of US ?
Child born abroad to Lawful Permanent Resident (LPR) may be boarded if
child was born during the temporary visit abroad of a mother who is a lawful permanent resident alien, or a national, of the United States, provided that the child's application for admission to the United States is made within 2 years of birth and the child is accompanied by the parent who is applying for readmission as a permanent resident upon the first return of the parent.
Link for the document (http://www.cbp.gov/linkhandler/cgov/travel/inspections_carriers_facilities/carrier_info_guide/carrier_info_guide.ctt/carrier_info_guide.pdf)
_______________________
Not a legal advice.
US citizen of Indian origin
more...
justsomeguy
07-12 06:29 PM
fellow legal immigrations - this is my first posting on immigrationvoice.
i have been following this site very closely and first of all let me congratulate the IV team - you are all doing a terrific job!
now, i have read a lot of threads where employees say their employers do not give them the I-140 receipt numbers or the approved I-140s. this is sick! this is worse than bonded labor. employers with good ethics do not play such dirty tricks. this just plain sucks :mad:
clearly, there are rules from the uscis itself that you can port your priority date to another firm as long as your labor + 140 have been approved. so NOBODY has the moral right to withhold your 140 or labor approvals. i keep hearing that "140 belongs to the company" .. good.. but what the heck does that mean ? does that mean there are laws that permit PD porting but in a way you cannot really do that coz certain companies are not willing to give u the approved 140s?... is this FAIR ? or is it time to put this as another ACTION ITEM to make it illegal for companies to withold 140 from their employees especially if they want to switch jobs ??? something to chew on...
peace!
i have been following this site very closely and first of all let me congratulate the IV team - you are all doing a terrific job!
now, i have read a lot of threads where employees say their employers do not give them the I-140 receipt numbers or the approved I-140s. this is sick! this is worse than bonded labor. employers with good ethics do not play such dirty tricks. this just plain sucks :mad:
clearly, there are rules from the uscis itself that you can port your priority date to another firm as long as your labor + 140 have been approved. so NOBODY has the moral right to withhold your 140 or labor approvals. i keep hearing that "140 belongs to the company" .. good.. but what the heck does that mean ? does that mean there are laws that permit PD porting but in a way you cannot really do that coz certain companies are not willing to give u the approved 140s?... is this FAIR ? or is it time to put this as another ACTION ITEM to make it illegal for companies to withold 140 from their employees especially if they want to switch jobs ??? something to chew on...
peace!
hair To make a paper flower,
h1-b forever
04-22 08:33 AM
small correction:
president is not a member of the congress and neither are the judges (separation of powers)
you are right we may sue congress but to win that is much much tough as even the judge is been appointed by the president which i guess is a member of congress :) but one can certainly try.
president is not a member of the congress and neither are the judges (separation of powers)
you are right we may sue congress but to win that is much much tough as even the judge is been appointed by the president which i guess is a member of congress :) but one can certainly try.
more...
paskal
04-09 08:38 PM
once you use EAD- for fellowship
you cannot be on an H1 from moonlighting.
if your wife is with a reputable firm, i would imagine the risk is low with an approved 140
i would ask a good attorney though.
you cannot be on an H1 from moonlighting.
if your wife is with a reputable firm, i would imagine the risk is low with an approved 140
i would ask a good attorney though.
hot to make paper flowers.
Gravitation
11-19 12:04 PM
https://egov.uscis.gov/cris/jsps/Processtimes.jsp?SeviceCenter=TSC
more...
house paper flowers to make. paper
TeddyKoochu
01-06 02:57 PM
There is nothing called "upgrade". You can file a second I-140 as EB1-A in parallel. Other than the money and energy spent, there is no downside. AFAIK, there is no "eligibility" for filing EB1-A. In the petition, you must demonstrate that you meet the minimum number of criteria described by USCIS.
USCIS - EB-1 Eligibility and Filing (http://www.uscis.gov/portal/site/uscis/menuitem.5af9bb95919f35e66f614176543f6d1a/?vgnextoid=3a4df271ab0fd010VgnVCM1000000ecd190aRCR D&vgnextchannel=91919c7755cb9010VgnVCM10000045f3d6a1 RCRD)
Sincerest thanks for the information. Iam looking at criteria 1 to 10 in the list that you have provided. I believe that I can gather evidence to satisfy 2 criteria�s completely and maybe 1 partially, does that suffice or there is a rule that atleast say 4 / 10 or X / 10 should be satisfied as a minimum. Most of the criteria�s are actually meant for distinguished people in research, whereas my profile is more of an IT application developer / designer.
USCIS - EB-1 Eligibility and Filing (http://www.uscis.gov/portal/site/uscis/menuitem.5af9bb95919f35e66f614176543f6d1a/?vgnextoid=3a4df271ab0fd010VgnVCM1000000ecd190aRCR D&vgnextchannel=91919c7755cb9010VgnVCM10000045f3d6a1 RCRD)
Sincerest thanks for the information. Iam looking at criteria 1 to 10 in the list that you have provided. I believe that I can gather evidence to satisfy 2 criteria�s completely and maybe 1 partially, does that suffice or there is a rule that atleast say 4 / 10 or X / 10 should be satisfied as a minimum. Most of the criteria�s are actually meant for distinguished people in research, whereas my profile is more of an IT application developer / designer.
tattoo To make these paper flowers,
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...
pictures Paper Flowers
Rockford
07-17 02:54 PM
we really have to be morons to take anynonymous comments at face-value.
or did you post the comments yourself and like the attention?
Then every one has to be moron to participate in this forum. Most ,if not all, are anonymous here too. You take them what for what they are worth...
or did you post the comments yourself and like the attention?
Then every one has to be moron to participate in this forum. Most ,if not all, are anonymous here too. You take them what for what they are worth...
dresses Tissue paper flowers make
rahulpaper
11-09 10:04 AM
We have a very similar case as yours...No FP and RFE on AP....
our 485 is NSC>CSC>NSC ...hence it is slow...my lawyer asked to wait for another month (60 from notice days)
RFE on AP is processed at NSC>CSC...
which means my 485 is back in NSC and AP is still at CSC....no connection between two applications.
our 485 is NSC>CSC>NSC ...hence it is slow...my lawyer asked to wait for another month (60 from notice days)
RFE on AP is processed at NSC>CSC...
which means my 485 is back in NSC and AP is still at CSC....no connection between two applications.
more...
makeup Instant Paper Flowers
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)
girlfriend paper flowers how to make.
shuvro58
01-03 03:18 AM
hi all http://my-used-stuff.com/smiley.gif
hairstyles make some paper flowers.
phillyag
07-20 04:37 PM
My 6 yrs are getting over in Jan 2008.
1. Can I apply for H1 extension request for 3 yrs instead of EAD?
2. Or with EAD?
Excuse me but I am a novice here.
1. Can I apply for H1 extension request for 3 yrs instead of EAD?
2. Or with EAD?
Excuse me but I am a novice here.
fortune50
07-17 10:52 PM
You are OK. This is taken from the 485 instructions.
File all employment-based AOS applications at the following address:
USCIS Nebraska Service Center
P.O. Box 87485
Lincoln, NE 68501-7485
This includes an employment-based Form I-485 filed concurrently with a Form I-140, Immigrant Petition for Alien Worker, and an employment-based Form I-485 filed based on a pending or an approved Form I-140. To facilitate acceptance and processing of Form I-485 when Form I-140 has already been approved, submit a copy of the I-140 approval notice.
what does this mean ? did I file to wrong Service Center?:(
File all employment-based AOS applications at the following address:
USCIS Nebraska Service Center
P.O. Box 87485
Lincoln, NE 68501-7485
This includes an employment-based Form I-485 filed concurrently with a Form I-140, Immigrant Petition for Alien Worker, and an employment-based Form I-485 filed based on a pending or an approved Form I-140. To facilitate acceptance and processing of Form I-485 when Form I-140 has already been approved, submit a copy of the I-140 approval notice.
what does this mean ? did I file to wrong Service Center?:(
STAmisha
11-15 12:42 PM
You dont need a new H1 to come back to USA from Canada.All you need it is a valid I-94 and I-797. Dont surrender the I-94 at the border. This rule is called automatic revalidation rule.
Tidak ada komentar:
Posting Komentar