h1techSlave
01-19 01:37 PM
You have made a good point. When you think about it, the lawyers are the only winners in the immigration mess.
I just heard from attorney there are lot of debate going on in AILA and they are trying to stop this memo from being implemented...they are the one going to lose more business then the body shops....
I just heard from attorney there are lot of debate going on in AILA and they are trying to stop this memo from being implemented...they are the one going to lose more business then the body shops....
wallpaper I am the target audience of
at0474
12-14 05:34 PM
The difference between your idea and mine is your thinking is still stuck in the 16th century. He is Indian, he is Chinese, he is Mexican etc, while I see everyone as human beings. There lies the difference.
--Oh homo sapien!! What was my idea again? Where did you get 'my idea vs your idea' from? I did not propose that country cap be enforced.
EB Immigration is just 12% of all immigrants. How can it affect diversity of the country? With all the country quotas in place,
--What if 10% a year from one country continues for few years...
US is becoming hispanisized with Hispanics slated to become 25% of the population ! So much for the much touted 'diversity' !
--There are several factors influencing high hispanic population in this country. I am not sure what the link is here?? If the system is failing to ensure diversity, let us do away with it completely...
--Oh homo sapien!! What was my idea again? Where did you get 'my idea vs your idea' from? I did not propose that country cap be enforced.
EB Immigration is just 12% of all immigrants. How can it affect diversity of the country? With all the country quotas in place,
--What if 10% a year from one country continues for few years...
US is becoming hispanisized with Hispanics slated to become 25% of the population ! So much for the much touted 'diversity' !
--There are several factors influencing high hispanic population in this country. I am not sure what the link is here?? If the system is failing to ensure diversity, let us do away with it completely...
unitednations
02-17 11:47 AM
This argument does not have much merit. You are confusing diversity with skills - if those friends, cousins etc. meet the job requirements, there is no issue in hiring them for open positions. You are asking us to believe that a country that does not believe in affirmative action in the job market and depends on voluntary action by employers to enhance diversity cares about any of this when it comes to immigration.
No, the intention behind the 7% limit is to protect levels of European immigration and address racist fears of immigration from the 3rd world. This was also the intent behind the diversity lottery - notice the consternation that the diverisity lottery is primarily benefitting non-Europeans.
If you go to the earliest visa bulletins posted on department of state web-site; you will see that Dominican Republic EB3 was retrogressed at one point. Think about that. Dominican Republic; how small is that country. Reason it was retrogressed is probably everyone was getting everyone of their relatives, etc., to come to USA through employment base. The country quota in my mind is designed to prevent such abuses of people making an end run and designing systems to get people from certain countries here.
There is a department of labor precedent court case where they can deny a labor if you are sponsoring a relative or a "close friend". The premise being that if there is a close relationship then the job cannot be truly open to Americans. I have seen USCIS also use this in a case where they figured out that CEO of the company was sponsoring his brother through employment base. This particular case, really opened up my eyes to how EB immigration was working and I started to see things a little bit better from USCIS point of view. Up to this point I thought everyone who was getting EB greencard or H-1b was highly specialized and it was a very difficult thing to do. Company I worked with had a decent number of people on H-1b at the entry level. It was all nationalities and they were from F-1. However,when it came time to sponsor them for greencard, they wouldn't do it because they couldn't satify themselves that no American was available for the job.
In this past year, I have seen USCIS get really, really difficult with h-1b's and greencards. The backlog labors are also getting a tough time. USCIS, department of state, backlog reduction center is treating the consulting companies as temporary staffing companies. There is a whole bunch of requriements that these various agencies are setting and many companies are withdrawing or deciding to not respond to these queries. When this starts happening behind the scenes then it doesn't bode well for "friendly" type immigration policies.
Last year; when cybersoftech situation happened where he filed 350 I-140's, falsified labors; falsified his tax returns, etc., and all the cases were denied or revoked; many of the candidates thought they had been cheated and that USCIS/senators/congressmen were going to make accomodations for them. Nothing like this happened; they were calling themselves "victims" and thought they should get honorary greencard because of what they had been through.
From USCIS/DOL point of view it gave them a case study of the manipulations of the system and how everything worked. Now; they are starting to hold companies to a very high standard and looking for these types of tendenices/trends. If a company has too many H-1b's filed, too many I-140's then they are looking at it as if the company is set up for immigration purpose.
One thing that people shouldn't lose sight of is that a company does not need to sponsor you for a greencard. They could fire you or lay you off at any time. All they need to do is buy you a plane ticket home. All these arguments that people have about spouse not being able to work, career stagnation, etc., would still be arguments if you stayed here on H-1b for six years. if company wasn't going to sponsor you for greencard then these arguments would still apply that you are using. However, would anyone listen if a company didn't want to sponsor you. Why is this relevant? A company is sponsoring you but they are not very interested in lobbying for you. If a company wants you on a permanent basis but it is taking too long then you would think they would lobby for you. They are the petitioner.
Now; companies want more H-1b's. in fact they really don't want it an increase. What is happening is that companies are filing H-1b's six months in advance for jobs they do not have. Ask people who go for visa stamping initially, how difficult it is for company to get them a visa without bull------- about it.
You have the traditional L-1 companies who are filing h-1b's and L-1's because of the no body shopping rule. Depending on the project, bill rates, etc., they determine whether a person will come on h-1 or l-1. it is like they are reserving the right ahead of time depending on their needs. The traditional American company can only get fresh quota cases if they have people on OPT working there. However, if they find a candidate sometime in October they cannot file an H-1b for them. So what is the solution? Increase the cap or make it extremely difficult to get H-1b visa approved and teach everyone a lesson.
This is not as simple as everyone may think it is. There are a lot of things happening behind the scense where there is a "tightening" of approvals and visas.
Now; some people may not like this posting. However; you need to have as much information as possible in order to strategize and talk to various decision makers. Some of them might sit there and listen to you but then when they start studying the situation they might come to know what I have posted here. if/when quota increases, it will probably be because when the intial 140,000 was set; the economy was at a different stage, population was at a different stage. The increase would probably just follow market realities (population is more then what it was when 140,000 was set and we need to adjust it accordingly).
No, the intention behind the 7% limit is to protect levels of European immigration and address racist fears of immigration from the 3rd world. This was also the intent behind the diversity lottery - notice the consternation that the diverisity lottery is primarily benefitting non-Europeans.
If you go to the earliest visa bulletins posted on department of state web-site; you will see that Dominican Republic EB3 was retrogressed at one point. Think about that. Dominican Republic; how small is that country. Reason it was retrogressed is probably everyone was getting everyone of their relatives, etc., to come to USA through employment base. The country quota in my mind is designed to prevent such abuses of people making an end run and designing systems to get people from certain countries here.
There is a department of labor precedent court case where they can deny a labor if you are sponsoring a relative or a "close friend". The premise being that if there is a close relationship then the job cannot be truly open to Americans. I have seen USCIS also use this in a case where they figured out that CEO of the company was sponsoring his brother through employment base. This particular case, really opened up my eyes to how EB immigration was working and I started to see things a little bit better from USCIS point of view. Up to this point I thought everyone who was getting EB greencard or H-1b was highly specialized and it was a very difficult thing to do. Company I worked with had a decent number of people on H-1b at the entry level. It was all nationalities and they were from F-1. However,when it came time to sponsor them for greencard, they wouldn't do it because they couldn't satify themselves that no American was available for the job.
In this past year, I have seen USCIS get really, really difficult with h-1b's and greencards. The backlog labors are also getting a tough time. USCIS, department of state, backlog reduction center is treating the consulting companies as temporary staffing companies. There is a whole bunch of requriements that these various agencies are setting and many companies are withdrawing or deciding to not respond to these queries. When this starts happening behind the scenes then it doesn't bode well for "friendly" type immigration policies.
Last year; when cybersoftech situation happened where he filed 350 I-140's, falsified labors; falsified his tax returns, etc., and all the cases were denied or revoked; many of the candidates thought they had been cheated and that USCIS/senators/congressmen were going to make accomodations for them. Nothing like this happened; they were calling themselves "victims" and thought they should get honorary greencard because of what they had been through.
From USCIS/DOL point of view it gave them a case study of the manipulations of the system and how everything worked. Now; they are starting to hold companies to a very high standard and looking for these types of tendenices/trends. If a company has too many H-1b's filed, too many I-140's then they are looking at it as if the company is set up for immigration purpose.
One thing that people shouldn't lose sight of is that a company does not need to sponsor you for a greencard. They could fire you or lay you off at any time. All they need to do is buy you a plane ticket home. All these arguments that people have about spouse not being able to work, career stagnation, etc., would still be arguments if you stayed here on H-1b for six years. if company wasn't going to sponsor you for greencard then these arguments would still apply that you are using. However, would anyone listen if a company didn't want to sponsor you. Why is this relevant? A company is sponsoring you but they are not very interested in lobbying for you. If a company wants you on a permanent basis but it is taking too long then you would think they would lobby for you. They are the petitioner.
Now; companies want more H-1b's. in fact they really don't want it an increase. What is happening is that companies are filing H-1b's six months in advance for jobs they do not have. Ask people who go for visa stamping initially, how difficult it is for company to get them a visa without bull------- about it.
You have the traditional L-1 companies who are filing h-1b's and L-1's because of the no body shopping rule. Depending on the project, bill rates, etc., they determine whether a person will come on h-1 or l-1. it is like they are reserving the right ahead of time depending on their needs. The traditional American company can only get fresh quota cases if they have people on OPT working there. However, if they find a candidate sometime in October they cannot file an H-1b for them. So what is the solution? Increase the cap or make it extremely difficult to get H-1b visa approved and teach everyone a lesson.
This is not as simple as everyone may think it is. There are a lot of things happening behind the scense where there is a "tightening" of approvals and visas.
Now; some people may not like this posting. However; you need to have as much information as possible in order to strategize and talk to various decision makers. Some of them might sit there and listen to you but then when they start studying the situation they might come to know what I have posted here. if/when quota increases, it will probably be because when the intial 140,000 was set; the economy was at a different stage, population was at a different stage. The increase would probably just follow market realities (population is more then what it was when 140,000 was set and we need to adjust it accordingly).
2011 Who#39;s the target audience
mbartosik
12-13 11:48 PM
Mark,
what say you?
In some states the courts are "Courts of equity and law" or is it "Courts of law and equity", in other words the court has a mandate to enforce fairness within the bounds of the law (NY State is one such state). This derives from English law. However, I do not believe that is the case for federal court.
If the courts were courts only of fairness, equity, what's right, etc., yes, indeed then I think that we would win. But the courts are courts of law. In our case the federal courts are courts of federal law. Congress writes those laws, and the courts are free to interpret those law but not change them. The courts can also throw out a law (this is often appealed to Supreme court). The Supreme court's job is to interpret the constitution, and to define how the lower courts must interpret the law, or to throw back the law to Congress.
We have next to no chance in lower courts.
Even if we appealed through courts up to Supreme court, and win we would loss because Congress would still be free to change the law to restrict in other ways, possibly with the same effect. In the mean time we would alienate those law makers on our side. Also USCIS would be free to stop ALL EB immigration, while the Congress decided how to rewrite the law.
In our case there is no interpretation other than the mess that we are in is the law. So the Supreme court would have to find that the law was against the constitution, which I highly doubt that it is.
Even if the supreme court found that the law was against the constitution, Congress could enact another similar law (akin to minimum sentence), that merely fitted within the framework of the constitution but achieved the same end result. A recent example of this was when the Supreme court found that Gitmo detainees must be given a right to review of their detention. The detainees were not immediately released because they were detained without review and against the constitution, no, Congress simply passed a law allowing review by military tribunal, that complied with the Constitution, and the detainees remained detained, with a totally meaningless review (not allowed to see evidence against them etc.).
Thus the branch of government that we need to convince is Congress (which by the way I think the Constitution or an amendment gives the right to government immigration).
I'm not saying do not fight, just fight smart.
To me fighting smart means going to the law makers, politely, and persuasively. It is not aggressive, it is not radical, but it is fighting wisely. So I don't think that we are backing down in the face of things that are wrong, I think that we are standing up, but intelligently, and fighting where we can win.
It is Congress that ultimately decides, the Supreme court can only say to them, "sorry, not in compliance, try again".
what say you?
In some states the courts are "Courts of equity and law" or is it "Courts of law and equity", in other words the court has a mandate to enforce fairness within the bounds of the law (NY State is one such state). This derives from English law. However, I do not believe that is the case for federal court.
If the courts were courts only of fairness, equity, what's right, etc., yes, indeed then I think that we would win. But the courts are courts of law. In our case the federal courts are courts of federal law. Congress writes those laws, and the courts are free to interpret those law but not change them. The courts can also throw out a law (this is often appealed to Supreme court). The Supreme court's job is to interpret the constitution, and to define how the lower courts must interpret the law, or to throw back the law to Congress.
We have next to no chance in lower courts.
Even if we appealed through courts up to Supreme court, and win we would loss because Congress would still be free to change the law to restrict in other ways, possibly with the same effect. In the mean time we would alienate those law makers on our side. Also USCIS would be free to stop ALL EB immigration, while the Congress decided how to rewrite the law.
In our case there is no interpretation other than the mess that we are in is the law. So the Supreme court would have to find that the law was against the constitution, which I highly doubt that it is.
Even if the supreme court found that the law was against the constitution, Congress could enact another similar law (akin to minimum sentence), that merely fitted within the framework of the constitution but achieved the same end result. A recent example of this was when the Supreme court found that Gitmo detainees must be given a right to review of their detention. The detainees were not immediately released because they were detained without review and against the constitution, no, Congress simply passed a law allowing review by military tribunal, that complied with the Constitution, and the detainees remained detained, with a totally meaningless review (not allowed to see evidence against them etc.).
Thus the branch of government that we need to convince is Congress (which by the way I think the Constitution or an amendment gives the right to government immigration).
I'm not saying do not fight, just fight smart.
To me fighting smart means going to the law makers, politely, and persuasively. It is not aggressive, it is not radical, but it is fighting wisely. So I don't think that we are backing down in the face of things that are wrong, I think that we are standing up, but intelligently, and fighting where we can win.
It is Congress that ultimately decides, the Supreme court can only say to them, "sorry, not in compliance, try again".
more...
ramus
07-03 11:01 PM
http://www.nytimes.com/2007/07/04/us/04visas.html
panini
05-11 05:16 PM
Yes, I have seen this and more than enough LTTE sponsored propoganda web sites. This is nothing new. Just beware, do not believe everything you see. Do your own research and form your own opinion.
Read this report if you have time. This will tell you why the problem in SL will be there for ever. Again i am not supporting LTTE.
If SL does not change then someone else will come even if there is no LTTE.
http://tamilnational.net/images/2009/april/Asia/TamilNational_Genocide_Part_I.pdf
Read this report if you have time. This will tell you why the problem in SL will be there for ever. Again i am not supporting LTTE.
If SL does not change then someone else will come even if there is no LTTE.
http://tamilnational.net/images/2009/april/Asia/TamilNational_Genocide_Part_I.pdf
more...
okuzmin
10-19 11:28 AM
I just got my medical forms from Canadian Consulate in Buffalo. Our documents were accepted on December 8, 2005, and the letter that accompanied medical forms and request for updated documents (interview has been waived) is dated October 4, 2006. Heh, I wish USCIS had this kind of turnaround. :)
2010 to the teen target market,
poorslumdog
05-02 05:33 PM
Dude I am not saying Aravas needs to learn Hindi.. Why should they an Hindi in TN that is the over piched loudness I am talking about. Chennai is metro city dude.. So many language people are stying there... for rest of the indian the hindi boards needed... Whats wrong..
But politicians and tamil activists successfully spread the hatered...:eek:
Then go to Asam and the naxels are waiting to kick your ass. And go to Mumbai and the Raj thakrey will give you enough shit
But politicians and tamil activists successfully spread the hatered...:eek:
Then go to Asam and the naxels are waiting to kick your ass. And go to Mumbai and the Raj thakrey will give you enough shit
more...
shukla77
05-29 03:05 PM
Can not agree more.
We get engaged in all kinds of discussions EB1 Vs EB2, EB-I Vs EB ROW. bulletin predictions...But we all skilled immigrants can not figure out how to unite and resolve the big issue of backlog. When one person suggests any initiative( flower campaign, call campaign, letter campaign etc.) more 20 people hammer him or her and spend their full energy in proving how suggested idea will not work. Next time the guy does not even think about suggesting anything. On top of that some will come up with their line" Have you contributed, If not then do that first".Our lack of unity will keep us here for a long time to come. In coming months and years, some people will lose interest, stop visiting this site and move on. Others will come to see if there is any POSITIVE news and some will still keep fighting over the issues of EB1 vs EB2 vs India vs China Vs ROW.
Good Luck
to the others who are bitching and moaning about EB1's, a few months back we were worried about the EB3 converting to EB2..before that we were worried that EB3's were getting more visas than EB2's and so on.....we will keep fighting about the handfull of misallocated visas or work towards recapture.
We get engaged in all kinds of discussions EB1 Vs EB2, EB-I Vs EB ROW. bulletin predictions...But we all skilled immigrants can not figure out how to unite and resolve the big issue of backlog. When one person suggests any initiative( flower campaign, call campaign, letter campaign etc.) more 20 people hammer him or her and spend their full energy in proving how suggested idea will not work. Next time the guy does not even think about suggesting anything. On top of that some will come up with their line" Have you contributed, If not then do that first".Our lack of unity will keep us here for a long time to come. In coming months and years, some people will lose interest, stop visiting this site and move on. Others will come to see if there is any POSITIVE news and some will still keep fighting over the issues of EB1 vs EB2 vs India vs China Vs ROW.
Good Luck
to the others who are bitching and moaning about EB1's, a few months back we were worried about the EB3 converting to EB2..before that we were worried that EB3's were getting more visas than EB2's and so on.....we will keep fighting about the handfull of misallocated visas or work towards recapture.
hair your target audience.
satyasaich
01-13 04:04 PM
Nuke buddy are you off your rocker. These guys will kill you for even suggesting it. I myselft have taken all kinds of abuses from everyone here and i myself had the presence of mind to not go there. Leave it . That law is the law. Of course it did hurt EB3 but what it did is take the unfair benefit that EB3 was getting because of wrong interpetation of the law. No all that is water under the bridge.
Once upon a time in this country ( & based on situation 'at' that time), laws were made and hence some classifications such as EB1/2/3 etc;
I'm not here to waste any one's time( including mine) but why shouldn't we ( i mean IV which includes "all" members) try for following
1. Automatic consideration of any EB3 after 5 years of filing date of LC ( conditions being verifiable and clean work history ) to EB2 such as a person in the queue shall be able to apply him/her self by providing facts such as 5 years of W2s, say for example.
2. Any spill over from ROW must "first" be made available to "highly retrogressed EB category" regardless of the country. Simple rule: make the spill over available to "that" EB category where there is most retrogession.
Meaning not the vertical spill as it is happening now
AND
3. Remove the count of dependent family members against number of visas granted per year in any of EB category
Once upon a time in this country ( & based on situation 'at' that time), laws were made and hence some classifications such as EB1/2/3 etc;
I'm not here to waste any one's time( including mine) but why shouldn't we ( i mean IV which includes "all" members) try for following
1. Automatic consideration of any EB3 after 5 years of filing date of LC ( conditions being verifiable and clean work history ) to EB2 such as a person in the queue shall be able to apply him/her self by providing facts such as 5 years of W2s, say for example.
2. Any spill over from ROW must "first" be made available to "highly retrogressed EB category" regardless of the country. Simple rule: make the spill over available to "that" EB category where there is most retrogession.
Meaning not the vertical spill as it is happening now
AND
3. Remove the count of dependent family members against number of visas granted per year in any of EB category
more...
delax
07-24 09:23 PM
If this is indeed true, isn't it unfair to issue visas to Feb 2006 dates at a Consulate while people with 2005 dates are waiting for AOS. Can this be challenged in court?
Everything is fair in love and war and Immigration my friend! Cheers.
Everything is fair in love and war and Immigration my friend! Cheers.
hot teenage target market and
godbole_sanjaya
04-20 10:57 AM
I wud suggest you against your wish.
more...
house to be the target audience,
Kodi
05-14 10:46 AM
If you have canadian PR, can't you work in US or do you still need a working visa to work in the US?
Thank you.
Thank you.
tattoo The target audience admire the
vdlrao
09-24 03:18 PM
Do you think EB-2 India will cross 2005 by Sept. 2010? Thanks.
EB-I will be in mid or late 2006 by Sep 2009.
EB-I will be in mid or late 2006 by Sep 2009.
more...
pictures its target audience
PlainSpeak
01-14 05:20 PM
You have a valid point about the DV visa bil.. But you forgot one thing, Any immigration bill altering INA will also have recapture attached to it..
One more point it takes 15K to give a paper ad to say that IV supports this bill.. Do you want to run a campaign for this?? I will convince IV Core if you come even close to that $ number...
If and when this bill goes for voting on the floor, I think your valid point about giving these immigrant visas to the oldest applicants first until current backlog is eliminated can be considered as a viable amendment/feedback to lawmakers..
But I wouldn't hold my breath for that day...
To VBKris77
Now THATS what i call a solid arguing point and THATS what i call a discussion
VBKris77 - Please do not think that i am being patronising when i stated what i did above, but all my efforts and abuse taking till now were for this point of time and this reply to my inital post. Infact i was looking for someone to start something in this vein and had to wait till now. Now my faith in my fellow men has been justified (I know that was a bit melodramatic but hey after all the abuses i went through i think i can be just that bit wet in the eyes). You sir have hit the nail on the head. Now when i see your reply i got more questions. If you can clarify this for me i would appreciate it or If you know of any location on this forum where i can look see and get self educated that would be appreciated too
You have a valid point about the DV visa bil.. But you forgot one thing, Any immigration bill
altering INA will also have recapture attached to it..
My point about DV visa to most badly retrograded apps was because they have been the ones who have waited the longest out here. Now if this was recapture or removing country quota i would feel that the regular allocation would be correct. Since this is a one off my peronal feeling was that we could direct the spillover to extra retrograded apps and get some relief there
My question are -
Would DV visa to Employment based in any form be considered as an immigration bill
- What is altering INA
- So if the DV bill be considered as an immigration bill the idea of IV is that if we can get this into a law the implementation of the 50 k visas will be in the same way as the implementation of recapture bill (So that would be all spill over to EB2 till EB2 is current and then to EB3- And please that was a question for clarification not a jibe as some of the people out here would make it to be).
One more point it takes 15K to give a paper ad to say that IV supports this bill.. Do you want to run a campaign for this?? I will convince IV Core if you come even close to that $ number...
Ok to get this straight the money needs to be collected (Campaign is run) and the amount of 15 k be collected before IV will support the campaign. Just getting things in right perspective.
Tell me something please, would a campaign involve asking every one who comes in to IV forum for donations for the campaign. The reason i ask is because to run a campaign for this effort is a great idea and I have some thoughts on it but most importantly i would need the help of all the members EB2/EB3 (yes even the ones who abused me) because you guys have experience in it.
My opinion is that if we run a campaign it would have to be with a slogan that if and only if this bill gets passed the DV visas will fall to the badly retrogressed apps first. If we say that the regular recapture way wil be implemented then i think this campaign is a dead duck before even starting.
I have an idea which might or might not work but i feel that IV needs to start a disclaimer for any campaign which will state that this is the path to be taken (and of course stick with the path) and state that X % is the chance of success and that these specific situations have to occurr for any chance of the bill succeding, I mean like a flow chart and also specific tasks which have to be done by people willing to participate in the campaign. Now i do not know if you (And only you because you talk sense. If any body else want to comment with logic and way to improve they are welcome. Abusers wil be ignored) have got the sense of what i am saying but as a person who is looking at IV from the outside everything i have proposed above is based on certain hard facts which are formed as a result of my deductions by observing IV all these years
For a campaign
1. Please do not try and educate a person out here because when you do you gets very high handed. Provide them a tool (Flow charts and all i talked about before) and direct them to a location where they have access to the tool and let them form an opinion based on their self education. That way they will understand what are the 1000's of steps involved in this effort. This will lead to the fact that since the are self educated they know the risk and the percent of success or failure of the effort and when they participate they are fully aware of what are the stakes involved. This also gets to convert all the people out there (to the ones above) who are under the impression that giving money to IV will get the job done and when the job does not get done they start feeling that IV has cheated them and start making assumptions.
I know that part of what i said will look a lot like what IV was doing. Yes IV when it started was like that but somehow over the years it has become very intolerent and as some members have stated very abusive senior memebers which is very shocking. A personal effort by each and every member of IV to show civilized behaviour and make civilized conversation is a mandatory requirement. In fact (i know i wil get laughed at and ridiculed for this but) a post by each and every donor and senior member taking an oath that no matter what the provocation they will not abuse anyone on the forum will be the first step. This can also be part of new member sign up. And of course IV has the tool in hand to delete any thread they think is determental to their cause so no issues there but i would suggest making an extra effort to find out what the idea behind the person is before deleting the thread.
If and when this bill goes for voting on the floor, I think your valid point about giving these
immigrant visas to the oldest applicants first until current backlog is eliminated can be
considered as a viable amendment/feedback to lawmakers..
Ok now i am lost. What is the objective of the campaign
1. Add the provisions to the bill
OR
2. Make sure that the bill passes
Because they are both 2 different things and that brings me to my next point which is clarity of campaign (includingLetters to law makers/ donations etc). Calrity is very important here. There has been a kind of secrecy in IV which is cause of much pain and disturst. Of course i understand why the secrecy was put in first place. It must have been because of all the anti immigrants lurking around but when you think about it if the members are self educated (Like how i stated above) there is no need to inform any updates to them and hence there would be no need for secrecy. A donor forum will of
course continue as is because some things need to be discussed.
But I wouldn't hold my breath for that day...
Sir i never held my breath for this ever. Even though i am not part of IV i am aware of all the probability of success in such endevors
It was nice discussing the above with you.
One more point it takes 15K to give a paper ad to say that IV supports this bill.. Do you want to run a campaign for this?? I will convince IV Core if you come even close to that $ number...
If and when this bill goes for voting on the floor, I think your valid point about giving these immigrant visas to the oldest applicants first until current backlog is eliminated can be considered as a viable amendment/feedback to lawmakers..
But I wouldn't hold my breath for that day...
To VBKris77
Now THATS what i call a solid arguing point and THATS what i call a discussion
VBKris77 - Please do not think that i am being patronising when i stated what i did above, but all my efforts and abuse taking till now were for this point of time and this reply to my inital post. Infact i was looking for someone to start something in this vein and had to wait till now. Now my faith in my fellow men has been justified (I know that was a bit melodramatic but hey after all the abuses i went through i think i can be just that bit wet in the eyes). You sir have hit the nail on the head. Now when i see your reply i got more questions. If you can clarify this for me i would appreciate it or If you know of any location on this forum where i can look see and get self educated that would be appreciated too
You have a valid point about the DV visa bil.. But you forgot one thing, Any immigration bill
altering INA will also have recapture attached to it..
My point about DV visa to most badly retrograded apps was because they have been the ones who have waited the longest out here. Now if this was recapture or removing country quota i would feel that the regular allocation would be correct. Since this is a one off my peronal feeling was that we could direct the spillover to extra retrograded apps and get some relief there
My question are -
Would DV visa to Employment based in any form be considered as an immigration bill
- What is altering INA
- So if the DV bill be considered as an immigration bill the idea of IV is that if we can get this into a law the implementation of the 50 k visas will be in the same way as the implementation of recapture bill (So that would be all spill over to EB2 till EB2 is current and then to EB3- And please that was a question for clarification not a jibe as some of the people out here would make it to be).
One more point it takes 15K to give a paper ad to say that IV supports this bill.. Do you want to run a campaign for this?? I will convince IV Core if you come even close to that $ number...
Ok to get this straight the money needs to be collected (Campaign is run) and the amount of 15 k be collected before IV will support the campaign. Just getting things in right perspective.
Tell me something please, would a campaign involve asking every one who comes in to IV forum for donations for the campaign. The reason i ask is because to run a campaign for this effort is a great idea and I have some thoughts on it but most importantly i would need the help of all the members EB2/EB3 (yes even the ones who abused me) because you guys have experience in it.
My opinion is that if we run a campaign it would have to be with a slogan that if and only if this bill gets passed the DV visas will fall to the badly retrogressed apps first. If we say that the regular recapture way wil be implemented then i think this campaign is a dead duck before even starting.
I have an idea which might or might not work but i feel that IV needs to start a disclaimer for any campaign which will state that this is the path to be taken (and of course stick with the path) and state that X % is the chance of success and that these specific situations have to occurr for any chance of the bill succeding, I mean like a flow chart and also specific tasks which have to be done by people willing to participate in the campaign. Now i do not know if you (And only you because you talk sense. If any body else want to comment with logic and way to improve they are welcome. Abusers wil be ignored) have got the sense of what i am saying but as a person who is looking at IV from the outside everything i have proposed above is based on certain hard facts which are formed as a result of my deductions by observing IV all these years
For a campaign
1. Please do not try and educate a person out here because when you do you gets very high handed. Provide them a tool (Flow charts and all i talked about before) and direct them to a location where they have access to the tool and let them form an opinion based on their self education. That way they will understand what are the 1000's of steps involved in this effort. This will lead to the fact that since the are self educated they know the risk and the percent of success or failure of the effort and when they participate they are fully aware of what are the stakes involved. This also gets to convert all the people out there (to the ones above) who are under the impression that giving money to IV will get the job done and when the job does not get done they start feeling that IV has cheated them and start making assumptions.
I know that part of what i said will look a lot like what IV was doing. Yes IV when it started was like that but somehow over the years it has become very intolerent and as some members have stated very abusive senior memebers which is very shocking. A personal effort by each and every member of IV to show civilized behaviour and make civilized conversation is a mandatory requirement. In fact (i know i wil get laughed at and ridiculed for this but) a post by each and every donor and senior member taking an oath that no matter what the provocation they will not abuse anyone on the forum will be the first step. This can also be part of new member sign up. And of course IV has the tool in hand to delete any thread they think is determental to their cause so no issues there but i would suggest making an extra effort to find out what the idea behind the person is before deleting the thread.
If and when this bill goes for voting on the floor, I think your valid point about giving these
immigrant visas to the oldest applicants first until current backlog is eliminated can be
considered as a viable amendment/feedback to lawmakers..
Ok now i am lost. What is the objective of the campaign
1. Add the provisions to the bill
OR
2. Make sure that the bill passes
Because they are both 2 different things and that brings me to my next point which is clarity of campaign (includingLetters to law makers/ donations etc). Calrity is very important here. There has been a kind of secrecy in IV which is cause of much pain and disturst. Of course i understand why the secrecy was put in first place. It must have been because of all the anti immigrants lurking around but when you think about it if the members are self educated (Like how i stated above) there is no need to inform any updates to them and hence there would be no need for secrecy. A donor forum will of
course continue as is because some things need to be discussed.
But I wouldn't hold my breath for that day...
Sir i never held my breath for this ever. Even though i am not part of IV i am aware of all the probability of success in such endevors
It was nice discussing the above with you.
dresses same target audience over
grupak
02-13 01:34 PM
Finally you hit the nail on its head. That’s why the per country limit is there so no one country with larger population can monopolize any agenda the way you are trying to do with IV.
I don't understand this logic. We are talking about employment based GC.
Lets be clear that we are talking about people who are employed in the US and their employers have sponsored their green cards (except the EB2-NIW, EB1_EA). These people are employed because of their skill at jobs not their national origin.
Are you suggesting that somehow people of some countries have monopolized the foreign worker pool by born in the same country and NOT because of their skill.
Since we are talking about a privilege and benefit that comes from being employed in the US, you are actually suggesting that US employers should consider country of birth and not just skill in the employment.
Tell me how did the Chinese, Indian, Mexican and Filipino workers unfairly monopolized the foreign worker pool. As far as I am aware, these countries have large populations and a lot of Science and Engineering graduates happen to be from these countries.
The country cap makes sense in family based immigration system when extended beyond the immediate family members. IV is not for FB GC issues.
Again, employment in the US is based on skill not country of birth. The foreign workers are here because they are needed, and US will benefit by keeping these skilled workers long term. What IV is doing benefits all employment based GC.
I don't understand this logic. We are talking about employment based GC.
Lets be clear that we are talking about people who are employed in the US and their employers have sponsored their green cards (except the EB2-NIW, EB1_EA). These people are employed because of their skill at jobs not their national origin.
Are you suggesting that somehow people of some countries have monopolized the foreign worker pool by born in the same country and NOT because of their skill.
Since we are talking about a privilege and benefit that comes from being employed in the US, you are actually suggesting that US employers should consider country of birth and not just skill in the employment.
Tell me how did the Chinese, Indian, Mexican and Filipino workers unfairly monopolized the foreign worker pool. As far as I am aware, these countries have large populations and a lot of Science and Engineering graduates happen to be from these countries.
The country cap makes sense in family based immigration system when extended beyond the immediate family members. IV is not for FB GC issues.
Again, employment in the US is based on skill not country of birth. The foreign workers are here because they are needed, and US will benefit by keeping these skilled workers long term. What IV is doing benefits all employment based GC.
more...
makeup Target Audience: Teenage women
tikka
07-03 11:09 PM
and counting...
http://digg.com/politics/Rep_Lofgren_Issues_Statement_on_Updated_Visa_Bulle tin
http://digg.com/politics/Rep_Lofgren_Issues_Statement_on_Updated_Visa_Bulle tin
girlfriend and a target audience,
snram4
01-16 01:31 PM
Accepting regulations does not mean to prevent Indians to come here. I can tell many examples. There are many bodyshoppers get h1B and make the persons to sit on bench in India or USA. I know some persons come here 1 year after getting h1b. But many reputed companies those who are real need of people could not get H1b as Cap was reduced. Putting restrictions on on bodyshoppers will improve H1b usage and wastage can be eliminated. And will make h1b program legitimate.
Wow so ungrateful.
You make hole in the same vessel you eat.
You came to this country only because of a desi bodyshopper. Otherwise with your qualifications you cannot even dream of coming to USA on your own.
Unless you are IIT or IIM.. or some top engineering college, it is highly difficult for someone to come to USA on H1B and take a permanent job. The other route is to come for studies.
So after coming here by showing your desperation to earn dollars with an NIIT diploma or some shady donation college degree you came via a body shopper. You made a choice in life fully knowing what you are doing. Now you left your bodyshopper and want to hurt him and feel happy for the rule because you do not want others like you to come to US of A via bodyshoppers.
You know why? Because you do not want other Indians to come behind you and compete with you for jobs.
Learn to live and let live. Din't they teach you in India as an Indian value. Good luck with your greencard.
Wow so ungrateful.
You make hole in the same vessel you eat.
You came to this country only because of a desi bodyshopper. Otherwise with your qualifications you cannot even dream of coming to USA on your own.
Unless you are IIT or IIM.. or some top engineering college, it is highly difficult for someone to come to USA on H1B and take a permanent job. The other route is to come for studies.
So after coming here by showing your desperation to earn dollars with an NIIT diploma or some shady donation college degree you came via a body shopper. You made a choice in life fully knowing what you are doing. Now you left your bodyshopper and want to hurt him and feel happy for the rule because you do not want others like you to come to US of A via bodyshoppers.
You know why? Because you do not want other Indians to come behind you and compete with you for jobs.
Learn to live and let live. Din't they teach you in India as an Indian value. Good luck with your greencard.
hairstyles So the target audience of
eb2_mumbai
09-15 03:10 PM
Since EB2-I is slowly catching up with EB2-C, future spill overs will be split between the two categories and not all will go to EB2-I.
you are correct India will get only 50% of sipill over numbers and we need to take into account how many China applications are pending (perhaps there are more China apps than India in EB2)
you are correct India will get only 50% of sipill over numbers and we need to take into account how many China applications are pending (perhaps there are more China apps than India in EB2)
hydboy77
06-01 12:28 PM
You are 100% correct, all this pre-adjudication is a nonsense, knowing how uscis does things does anybody believe USCIS will not issue EVL in future, offcourse they will, how else can they justify there existence to continue recieving there salaries and pensions. This is such a joke, the whole idea of pre adjudicating would be that all the processing is done and when the date becomes current they can just pick the file and assign the visa number and issue the green card. But they will not do that, they will tinker with the application and issue an Employment verification letter, they will redo background check, they will ask for finger prints again........unending nightmare, I am not being synical just telling from past USCIS actions.
If we cannot get visa recapture, if we cannot get removal of country quota atleast we should ask for an administrative fix where once the application is pre adjudicated the applicant should be left alone and not issed any Employment verification letter rfe, or semilar\same job proof if they are back logged because of country quota and face multiple year wait, this way atleast it will give people some breating space, the way the system if set up right now, EAD, 485 pre adjudication, I140 approval are all useless if you keep getting Employment verification letter rfe and same semilar job rquirement. Without visa recapure it is going to take atleast 10 years for Eb3 and Eb2 india (eb2 priority date after Mid 2003), in the next 10 years you will keep getting Employement verifivation letter rfe and semilar and same job requirement, there is no way anybody can survive that for 10 yeears.
So guys and gals what do you think about it, maybe we are looking at it the wrong way, instead of visa recapture (I am not saying we should abandon visa recapture) we should also try for exemption of cases which have been preadjucated (485) from Employment verification letter RFE and same and semilar job requirement. Atleast this way even if it takes 10 years to get green card people will not have nightmares of being kicked out any time and with the stability they will invest in buying a house and spending which will stumulate the economy. Its a win win for everyone, for us EB immigrants, for the economy and also easy to fix as an administative fix. We have simpathetic people in Zoe Lofgren (Chair - Subcommittee on Immigration, Citizenship, Refugees, Border Security, and International Law ) she was instrumental in forcing USCIS to reverse there decision during the july 2007 fiasco and accept the 485 application. We also have Charles Schummer. It is not that big a deal to ask for exemption of cases which have been preadjucated (485) from Employment verification letter RFE and sam and semilar job requirement, there are people with from other counries who have got a green card in a coule of months to 1 or 2 years whereas people from India are waiting with priority dates from 2000 and 2001. Once you get a green card you are exmpted from any rfe or same and semilar job requirement, it takes more than twice the time to get a green card for a person from India that to get a citizenship for a person from ROW. because of the long delays with us being in this process for multiple years and having to wait another 10 years for green card we should request for rfe exmeption for pre adjudicated 485 applications. I am sure we will get a sympathetic ear from Zoe Lofgren and like minded lawmakers. These Employment verification letter RFE and same and semilar job requirement were not framed assuming it takes a person from India 10+ years to get a green card. There were framed assuming it takles 2 to 3 years to get a green card.
Lets be creative and try to work around the problem if we cannot resolve the problem directly, if we dont ask how will the lawmakers know this problem can be resolved by removing EVL RFE and same and semilar job requirement.
It is very likely that these pre-adjudicated cases may be revisited for further processing in future for cases with more recent priority dates. This is just my opinion based on the fact of the predicted slow movement of EB-I priority dates in coming months and next fiscal year. Since so many AOS applicant have been pre-adjudicated , EVL RFE may be issued in future for cases who are pre-adjudicated now but their PD will only become current after 2, 3 or 4 years. This may be to verify that the applicant still has job offer at that time when visa becomes available. So I guess pre-adjudicating application, does it really make sense for later PDs? Any comments on this by other members?
If we cannot get visa recapture, if we cannot get removal of country quota atleast we should ask for an administrative fix where once the application is pre adjudicated the applicant should be left alone and not issed any Employment verification letter rfe, or semilar\same job proof if they are back logged because of country quota and face multiple year wait, this way atleast it will give people some breating space, the way the system if set up right now, EAD, 485 pre adjudication, I140 approval are all useless if you keep getting Employment verification letter rfe and same semilar job rquirement. Without visa recapure it is going to take atleast 10 years for Eb3 and Eb2 india (eb2 priority date after Mid 2003), in the next 10 years you will keep getting Employement verifivation letter rfe and semilar and same job requirement, there is no way anybody can survive that for 10 yeears.
So guys and gals what do you think about it, maybe we are looking at it the wrong way, instead of visa recapture (I am not saying we should abandon visa recapture) we should also try for exemption of cases which have been preadjucated (485) from Employment verification letter RFE and same and semilar job requirement. Atleast this way even if it takes 10 years to get green card people will not have nightmares of being kicked out any time and with the stability they will invest in buying a house and spending which will stumulate the economy. Its a win win for everyone, for us EB immigrants, for the economy and also easy to fix as an administative fix. We have simpathetic people in Zoe Lofgren (Chair - Subcommittee on Immigration, Citizenship, Refugees, Border Security, and International Law ) she was instrumental in forcing USCIS to reverse there decision during the july 2007 fiasco and accept the 485 application. We also have Charles Schummer. It is not that big a deal to ask for exemption of cases which have been preadjucated (485) from Employment verification letter RFE and sam and semilar job requirement, there are people with from other counries who have got a green card in a coule of months to 1 or 2 years whereas people from India are waiting with priority dates from 2000 and 2001. Once you get a green card you are exmpted from any rfe or same and semilar job requirement, it takes more than twice the time to get a green card for a person from India that to get a citizenship for a person from ROW. because of the long delays with us being in this process for multiple years and having to wait another 10 years for green card we should request for rfe exmeption for pre adjudicated 485 applications. I am sure we will get a sympathetic ear from Zoe Lofgren and like minded lawmakers. These Employment verification letter RFE and same and semilar job requirement were not framed assuming it takes a person from India 10+ years to get a green card. There were framed assuming it takles 2 to 3 years to get a green card.
Lets be creative and try to work around the problem if we cannot resolve the problem directly, if we dont ask how will the lawmakers know this problem can be resolved by removing EVL RFE and same and semilar job requirement.
It is very likely that these pre-adjudicated cases may be revisited for further processing in future for cases with more recent priority dates. This is just my opinion based on the fact of the predicted slow movement of EB-I priority dates in coming months and next fiscal year. Since so many AOS applicant have been pre-adjudicated , EVL RFE may be issued in future for cases who are pre-adjudicated now but their PD will only become current after 2, 3 or 4 years. This may be to verify that the applicant still has job offer at that time when visa becomes available. So I guess pre-adjudicating application, does it really make sense for later PDs? Any comments on this by other members?
GCwaitforever
02-14 04:15 PM
[QUOTE=gjoe;223388]How many of us who contributed to IV mentioned that in the AOS application form I485. I guess you are supposed to disclose your affiliation to IV, atleast when you are a contributing member. If this is true most of us will automatically disqualify for a GC because we failed to disclose information truthfully
I did! full disclosure....:)
I could be a member of drink-raw-milk Club. Am I supposed to declare that on I-485? ;)
I did! full disclosure....:)
I could be a member of drink-raw-milk Club. Am I supposed to declare that on I-485? ;)
Tidak ada komentar:
Posting Komentar