ronhira
07-21 10:27 PM
this guy doggystyle piss me off, i had other things to do and was not going to attend, but he made sure that i attend and expose incompetency of these impotent people. bottom line - donna wants to be the one to testify to the congress, she wants to be famous. others are idiots and can't see this. here is what happened - total waste of time. doddy is right, could not hear more than 5 distinct voices, they use different ids to make it appear that the whole world is anti immigrant, they even said that on the call, bunch of losers
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
donna – put in talking points for each article.
kevin – don’t want to look artificial
donna – yes, no copying pasting,
don’t want to put ourself apart from other american in it . the good thing is republicans are on the message and this is what democrats don’t know how to do. democrats are very articulate, but do not stay on the message
core point of the talking points, want to attack h1b only, that’s the core – we are fighting to apply in jobs in our own country
remember, the business week will post link to these h1b only wanted ads
you will not see an american who’ll be happy to see these ads
goto Bright Future Jobs (http://www.brghtfuurejob.com)
durbin bill will not do enough, will only prevent these h1s to come here. but after durbin bill pass, anyone can send this job. in order to apply for a job in nj one has to through pune, india. they ask new h1b to sign bond contract, and if they leave before 18 months, they will ask to pay the fee. this is bond contract which is illegal in america since long time.
kevin – ha ha ha indentured servants
donna – exactly, ha ha, and durbin will prevent this bond contract, if u click on h1b wanted ads
#7 ads says no degree required
#8 ads this is a govt. contract and the company is minority owned - the reason we attack minority owned or woman owned company is, it’s difficult to get this status and they are violating the spirit in which they got the minority status. there is a large number of unemployed h1b, the corporation made a solemn commitment to the us americans, government and to the foreign nationals – the corporations made the commitment to pay the individual and if they let them go or fire, they fly them home. what is going on is aila is recommending to companies that they essentially intimidate h1b when they let them go, making them sign a letter that they refuse to take ticket to fly back home. this is very very important for us to know and attack
one thing that most people don’t know - the indentured comes from the bond contract – the guest workers, h1b, will be never be deported, because, under the law, theoretically, they r never suppose to become illegal. the only people who r deportable r illegals.
some lady voice – this is not a civil and not a criminal offense
donna – no, because it’s the fault of the cos, bcoz the company did not fly them home. and this is one issue that doesn’t get represented in the media. h1b – that doesn’t have job, most important thing to post is – attack that u don’t have job and can’t apply for job
the exploitation which bw is writing about can only occur when these companies can bypass us – the solution to this lies – when companies are forced to hire her
another stupid woman – yes, the it was invented here
kevin – yes, for green card, lawyers find ways around the process
donna – corporation is finding work around to hire american worker,
door bell rings… that stupid woman answering door and cause disturbance for 5 minutes, opening door, dog barking, bragging to the mail man about being on a big “conference call”….
donna - the unifying thing is – corporations are ignoring us to find legal ways to ignore us.
stupid woman - how to answer them on the forums
kevin – just basically reply, and reply, and we have overwhelming numbers on our side
when u see their comments, they have high volume for 1 or 2 days, and then they r gone. we continue to post comments sometimes use different ids and make it look like we are many of us.
donna – we r not going to win the posting game, we don’t want to win the posting game
we are positing similar information, and this alerts the journalist and we have to filter our messages, say we have 20 votes about the bypass of the talent, 20 points about the employment discrimination, we will alert discrimination whom we will refer to these articles,
nyt – article got 1000 posts, and passed to other online journals,
as soon as i started, 1 generalist quoted me and then got quoted more
so the journalist who wrote the article, and those who comes afterwards, they read the post, that is important. we want generalist to read our comments, that we cannot apply for the job, and there is employment discrimination
kevin – you can also send reporters direct emails, i emailed moira of bw - direct emails, and that’s how we got bw article
donna – remember we have a track. after labor day, this is going to be up for discussion, btw, don’t even replicate u’r opponents phrases or never repeat u’r opposition is saying about yourself, so don’t say that there is no qualified americans, say we have over abundance of skill talent, in other words over supply, never say shortage, because u’ll otherwise saying opposition’s message about you. doesn’t anybody… do we want to have a discussion on that.
kevin – we do not have to be dignified in our response
donna - there is not a human on this planet who will believe that there are “want” ads that say –americans need not apply – that will create outrage.
buddy – can i ask a question, i click on an add, it goes to indeed, so this is pulled from rss feed
buddy – so i have many friends on facebook, i can tell them about these ads.
donna – exactly, so the jobs r there but we cannot apply for those jobs. we have doj is making a ground breaking case between ‘employment right and it
silly woman – i’ve been it manager, and know many american who
btw – u’r emotional truth will move people. these people have over qualified beyond the job we are positing, and they do not get hired, and that’s the pattern. years ago, we barely know the material, and we learned on the job, and now it’s the other way around, we know it and we are over qualified
another stupid guy - they fake resumes, and they say on the resumes that they know about oracle rake and unix admin, but they don’t know anything
donna - we are laying the groundwork about the washington beltway mentality, if have to make it look like that employer deliberately pst ads
everyone here on the call has historical record, honest to god. i have a good news, we r standing up for ourself, to tell this story of bypassing the american talent, and that’s what brighfuture jobs is about. that’s what durbin bill will do for us. there are couple of people who will focus on foreign citizens. two things (1.) they will hear from us, and (2.) whether we need guest workers at all, will be taken by afl-cio will pick up. but what we will do, we have absolute unique role to play, we will explain how the culture the bypass impacts us, and the culture of exploitation impacts us. we r the only once in the country who can tell this. there is going to be a discussion in beltway about “whether”, but american worker and american it professionals
no one said that - no foreign worker can come here – that’s not the message – it’s the bypass and exploitation.
donna - no there will be a discussion about no foreign work can come
don’t ever say – h1b is when a qualified american worker can not be found. we have to say that h1b law is about the bypass the american worker – the “discussion” will be about commission – anybody heard about that. the unions are setting commission whether or not we need guest workers – theoretically, and we will come up with the stories, boots on the gound, to show them the data the fuel, makes sense? they can have their tea and whatever stuff, and we will bring the bonfire.
kevin – that nyt story about that google supposedly employee, we have to post messages there,
we have to say that – there will not be an american and naturalized citizen, who say -that its ok to exploitation. there is deep deep discussion about who is an american. alf_cio has broken the opposition, but they r talking theoretically, and we r giving boots on the ground –
employers r not giving us the opportunity to compete – it’s the responsibility of federal govt that we are able to compete.
buddy – most of these jobs are it. someone in background in it can pick up even if there is new technology, but we r shut out by people with lower skills
donna -you r wrong, u r not shut down by people with lower skills, but by corporations
buddy – say 4 h1b workers replacing 1 american workers, they network, and team up to help each other
donna - no, u can argue the cheap, that’s ok, but u cannot argue about losing the right to compete. americans love cheap labor, but we have to focus on americans not being able to compete, its not about low wages.
mike – if u’r real american u cannot work for the 3rd world rates
donna – if u’r real american, u’ll make that corporation compete for these jobs locally. if u want americans, u want to create competition amongst americans here.
when a blackman would work for 10 cents, and white man work for $10, they would choose whiteman, they choose whiteman – because they were
so if u want to argue about wages, that’s cool, u r telling people u’r competing for the job. but the focus has to be on the right to compete.
this guy rajiv was replaced by h1b when he was on h1b. ha ha ha (everyone laughs)
find an american who don’t think its ok to find the people to right to compete. we have not said this to the lawmakers. the moment we tell this to the lawmakers, they will be 100% on our side
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
donna – put in talking points for each article.
kevin – don’t want to look artificial
donna – yes, no copying pasting,
don’t want to put ourself apart from other american in it . the good thing is republicans are on the message and this is what democrats don’t know how to do. democrats are very articulate, but do not stay on the message
core point of the talking points, want to attack h1b only, that’s the core – we are fighting to apply in jobs in our own country
remember, the business week will post link to these h1b only wanted ads
you will not see an american who’ll be happy to see these ads
goto Bright Future Jobs (http://www.brghtfuurejob.com)
durbin bill will not do enough, will only prevent these h1s to come here. but after durbin bill pass, anyone can send this job. in order to apply for a job in nj one has to through pune, india. they ask new h1b to sign bond contract, and if they leave before 18 months, they will ask to pay the fee. this is bond contract which is illegal in america since long time.
kevin – ha ha ha indentured servants
donna – exactly, ha ha, and durbin will prevent this bond contract, if u click on h1b wanted ads
#7 ads says no degree required
#8 ads this is a govt. contract and the company is minority owned - the reason we attack minority owned or woman owned company is, it’s difficult to get this status and they are violating the spirit in which they got the minority status. there is a large number of unemployed h1b, the corporation made a solemn commitment to the us americans, government and to the foreign nationals – the corporations made the commitment to pay the individual and if they let them go or fire, they fly them home. what is going on is aila is recommending to companies that they essentially intimidate h1b when they let them go, making them sign a letter that they refuse to take ticket to fly back home. this is very very important for us to know and attack
one thing that most people don’t know - the indentured comes from the bond contract – the guest workers, h1b, will be never be deported, because, under the law, theoretically, they r never suppose to become illegal. the only people who r deportable r illegals.
some lady voice – this is not a civil and not a criminal offense
donna – no, because it’s the fault of the cos, bcoz the company did not fly them home. and this is one issue that doesn’t get represented in the media. h1b – that doesn’t have job, most important thing to post is – attack that u don’t have job and can’t apply for job
the exploitation which bw is writing about can only occur when these companies can bypass us – the solution to this lies – when companies are forced to hire her
another stupid woman – yes, the it was invented here
kevin – yes, for green card, lawyers find ways around the process
donna – corporation is finding work around to hire american worker,
door bell rings… that stupid woman answering door and cause disturbance for 5 minutes, opening door, dog barking, bragging to the mail man about being on a big “conference call”….
donna - the unifying thing is – corporations are ignoring us to find legal ways to ignore us.
stupid woman - how to answer them on the forums
kevin – just basically reply, and reply, and we have overwhelming numbers on our side
when u see their comments, they have high volume for 1 or 2 days, and then they r gone. we continue to post comments sometimes use different ids and make it look like we are many of us.
donna – we r not going to win the posting game, we don’t want to win the posting game
we are positing similar information, and this alerts the journalist and we have to filter our messages, say we have 20 votes about the bypass of the talent, 20 points about the employment discrimination, we will alert discrimination whom we will refer to these articles,
nyt – article got 1000 posts, and passed to other online journals,
as soon as i started, 1 generalist quoted me and then got quoted more
so the journalist who wrote the article, and those who comes afterwards, they read the post, that is important. we want generalist to read our comments, that we cannot apply for the job, and there is employment discrimination
kevin – you can also send reporters direct emails, i emailed moira of bw - direct emails, and that’s how we got bw article
donna – remember we have a track. after labor day, this is going to be up for discussion, btw, don’t even replicate u’r opponents phrases or never repeat u’r opposition is saying about yourself, so don’t say that there is no qualified americans, say we have over abundance of skill talent, in other words over supply, never say shortage, because u’ll otherwise saying opposition’s message about you. doesn’t anybody… do we want to have a discussion on that.
kevin – we do not have to be dignified in our response
donna - there is not a human on this planet who will believe that there are “want” ads that say –americans need not apply – that will create outrage.
buddy – can i ask a question, i click on an add, it goes to indeed, so this is pulled from rss feed
buddy – so i have many friends on facebook, i can tell them about these ads.
donna – exactly, so the jobs r there but we cannot apply for those jobs. we have doj is making a ground breaking case between ‘employment right and it
silly woman – i’ve been it manager, and know many american who
btw – u’r emotional truth will move people. these people have over qualified beyond the job we are positing, and they do not get hired, and that’s the pattern. years ago, we barely know the material, and we learned on the job, and now it’s the other way around, we know it and we are over qualified
another stupid guy - they fake resumes, and they say on the resumes that they know about oracle rake and unix admin, but they don’t know anything
donna - we are laying the groundwork about the washington beltway mentality, if have to make it look like that employer deliberately pst ads
everyone here on the call has historical record, honest to god. i have a good news, we r standing up for ourself, to tell this story of bypassing the american talent, and that’s what brighfuture jobs is about. that’s what durbin bill will do for us. there are couple of people who will focus on foreign citizens. two things (1.) they will hear from us, and (2.) whether we need guest workers at all, will be taken by afl-cio will pick up. but what we will do, we have absolute unique role to play, we will explain how the culture the bypass impacts us, and the culture of exploitation impacts us. we r the only once in the country who can tell this. there is going to be a discussion in beltway about “whether”, but american worker and american it professionals
no one said that - no foreign worker can come here – that’s not the message – it’s the bypass and exploitation.
donna - no there will be a discussion about no foreign work can come
don’t ever say – h1b is when a qualified american worker can not be found. we have to say that h1b law is about the bypass the american worker – the “discussion” will be about commission – anybody heard about that. the unions are setting commission whether or not we need guest workers – theoretically, and we will come up with the stories, boots on the gound, to show them the data the fuel, makes sense? they can have their tea and whatever stuff, and we will bring the bonfire.
kevin – that nyt story about that google supposedly employee, we have to post messages there,
we have to say that – there will not be an american and naturalized citizen, who say -that its ok to exploitation. there is deep deep discussion about who is an american. alf_cio has broken the opposition, but they r talking theoretically, and we r giving boots on the ground –
employers r not giving us the opportunity to compete – it’s the responsibility of federal govt that we are able to compete.
buddy – most of these jobs are it. someone in background in it can pick up even if there is new technology, but we r shut out by people with lower skills
donna -you r wrong, u r not shut down by people with lower skills, but by corporations
buddy – say 4 h1b workers replacing 1 american workers, they network, and team up to help each other
donna - no, u can argue the cheap, that’s ok, but u cannot argue about losing the right to compete. americans love cheap labor, but we have to focus on americans not being able to compete, its not about low wages.
mike – if u’r real american u cannot work for the 3rd world rates
donna – if u’r real american, u’ll make that corporation compete for these jobs locally. if u want americans, u want to create competition amongst americans here.
when a blackman would work for 10 cents, and white man work for $10, they would choose whiteman, they choose whiteman – because they were
so if u want to argue about wages, that’s cool, u r telling people u’r competing for the job. but the focus has to be on the right to compete.
this guy rajiv was replaced by h1b when he was on h1b. ha ha ha (everyone laughs)
find an american who don’t think its ok to find the people to right to compete. we have not said this to the lawmakers. the moment we tell this to the lawmakers, they will be 100% on our side
wallpaper SIXTY SIX Red. 800 x 600 px
SkilledWorker4GC
07-26 12:53 PM
According to the pattern the next one is due tomorrow,
http://www.uscis.gov/files/pressrelease/ReceiptingTimes06Jul07.pdf
http://www.uscis.gov/files/pressrelease/ReceiptingTimes13Jul07.pdf
http://www.uscis.gov/files/pressrelease/ReceiptingTimes20Jul07.pdf
http://www.uscis.gov/files/pressrelease/ReceiptingTimes27Jul07.pdf
http://www.uscis.gov/files/pressrelease/ReceiptingTimes06Jul07.pdf
http://www.uscis.gov/files/pressrelease/ReceiptingTimes13Jul07.pdf
http://www.uscis.gov/files/pressrelease/ReceiptingTimes20Jul07.pdf
http://www.uscis.gov/files/pressrelease/ReceiptingTimes27Jul07.pdf
wahwah
06-05 12:03 PM
HQPRD 70/6.2.8-P
Michael Aytes
Acting Director of Domestic Operations
December 27, 2005
Interim guidance for processing I-140 employment-based immigrant petitions and I-485 and H-1B petitions affected by the American Competitiveness in the Twenty-First Century Act of 2000 (AC21) (Public Law 106-313)
I. Q & A ON PROCESSING OF I-140 PETITIONS AND I-485 APPLICATIONS UNDER THE I-140 PORTABILITY PROVISIONS OF �106(C) OF AC21
Question 1. How should service centers or district offices process unapproved I-140 petitions that were concurrently filed with I-485 applications that have been pending 180 days in relation to the I-140 portability provisions under �106(c) of AC21?
Answer: If it is discovered that a beneficiary has ported off of an unapproved I-140 and I-485 that has been pending for 180 days or more, the following procedures should be applied:
A. Review the pending I-140 petition to determine if the preponderance of the evidence establishes that the case is approvable or would have been approvable had it been adjudicated within 180 days. If the petition is approvable but for an ability to pay issue or any other issue relating to a time after the filing of the petition, approve the petition on it�s merits. Then adjudicate the adjustment of status application to determine if the new position is the same or similar occupational classification for I-140 portability purposes.
B. If a request for additional evidence (RFE) is necessary to resolve a material issue, other than post-filing issues such as ability to pay, an RFE can be issued to try to resolve the issue. When a response is received, and if the petition is approvable, follow the procedures in part A above
Even as it stands RIGHT NOW without the "New AC21 Rules", you cannot use AC21 unless your I-140 is approved. The basic principle of AC21 is "If your I-140 is APPROVED AND your I-485 application has been pending for more than 180 days" you can switch jobs and not lose anything.
Michael Aytes
Acting Director of Domestic Operations
December 27, 2005
Interim guidance for processing I-140 employment-based immigrant petitions and I-485 and H-1B petitions affected by the American Competitiveness in the Twenty-First Century Act of 2000 (AC21) (Public Law 106-313)
I. Q & A ON PROCESSING OF I-140 PETITIONS AND I-485 APPLICATIONS UNDER THE I-140 PORTABILITY PROVISIONS OF �106(C) OF AC21
Question 1. How should service centers or district offices process unapproved I-140 petitions that were concurrently filed with I-485 applications that have been pending 180 days in relation to the I-140 portability provisions under �106(c) of AC21?
Answer: If it is discovered that a beneficiary has ported off of an unapproved I-140 and I-485 that has been pending for 180 days or more, the following procedures should be applied:
A. Review the pending I-140 petition to determine if the preponderance of the evidence establishes that the case is approvable or would have been approvable had it been adjudicated within 180 days. If the petition is approvable but for an ability to pay issue or any other issue relating to a time after the filing of the petition, approve the petition on it�s merits. Then adjudicate the adjustment of status application to determine if the new position is the same or similar occupational classification for I-140 portability purposes.
B. If a request for additional evidence (RFE) is necessary to resolve a material issue, other than post-filing issues such as ability to pay, an RFE can be issued to try to resolve the issue. When a response is received, and if the petition is approvable, follow the procedures in part A above
Even as it stands RIGHT NOW without the "New AC21 Rules", you cannot use AC21 unless your I-140 is approved. The basic principle of AC21 is "If your I-140 is APPROVED AND your I-485 application has been pending for more than 180 days" you can switch jobs and not lose anything.
2011 iPhone Apple Red Wallpaper
shree19772000
12-05 03:05 PM
I guess my question stems from the comment above. Say if I do not get my GC and I wish to go back after 10 yrs is it possible to get my SS money back even if I am on H1 status?
more...
yabadaba
05-22 03:02 PM
I wonder what our children and grandchildren will learn from all these. When they grow up and know that their parents had to go through this mess while waiting to be accepted legally for xxxx number of years and some people got the "grand reward" of being illegal for many years!! These CIRcus operators will be responsible for the loss of "very little" moral left in this country. GOD BLESS AMERICA.
first they should learn spanish
first they should learn spanish
lazycis
12-21 12:58 PM
You did not read it carefully. The person actually NOTIFIED the USCIS about AC21. However, USCIS failed to record it.
That's was his/her problem. If the person have not notified the USCIS about the job change, everything would've been fine :) I am not going to argue with you. If one of hundreds thousand cases had an issue, it does not mean we have to rush and file AC21 every time we change a job. That will just create more work for the USCIS and increase our chances for RFE/denials. That's my opinion. You are entitled to yours. BTW, I changed jobs and did not file anything. No problems.
That's was his/her problem. If the person have not notified the USCIS about the job change, everything would've been fine :) I am not going to argue with you. If one of hundreds thousand cases had an issue, it does not mean we have to rush and file AC21 every time we change a job. That will just create more work for the USCIS and increase our chances for RFE/denials. That's my opinion. You are entitled to yours. BTW, I changed jobs and did not file anything. No problems.
more...
anurakt
12-20 03:47 PM
I may have to read this 5 times before I understand ...Any lawyers on this forum who can give us the bottomline...:)
2010 Desktop Wallpapers, Red
naveenkprasadam
04-13 12:31 PM
I am new to this community and have been watching some other forums online, but I am glad we have one dedicated for EB immigration. Way to go Immigration Voice!!!
Now, before anyone jumps at me, I promise to contribute for IV's efforts and donate for the various projects in a couple days.
The reason I am posting this is because I saw various threads with various ideas to gain visibility and make out cause known to all. I saw thready ranging from writing to senators to sending a 1 cent check everyday to sending a voided check for a big amount. Other notable ideas include sending flowers, calling senators, FOIA campaign, writing to the Obama administration, etc. While I agree that each of these actions contribute small drops to the ocean, I honestly think we should think BIG!!
I have analyzed EB Immigration considerably and here are my thoughts -
Anti-Immigrants, especially the ones against EB Immigration feel that we take away their jobs. However our defense against that is there's aren't that many skilled immigrants for certain skill set and hence we fill that void and keep corporate America competitive. However a lot of us argue that we who are waiting in line for our potential Green Cards pay our taxes and aide by the law, etc. All valid arguments. However, that doesn't make us any different than the majority of the 90% workforce that is employed. They all pay taxes too.
I have seen other ideas being floated around where they said "Buy a house, get a green card." Now, two issues with this - How many of us potential immigrants have 250 grand to invest in a house? I don't and can perhaps pay 5-10% down payment on a house. But if I lose my job, then I will be forced to default too and that doesn't help the economy. Also, there are more than 10 million homes in foreclosure and even hypothetically, let's say we will buy a house on a mortgage at 10% down. There are, say 1 million immigrants in waiting including dependents. And we buy 500,000 homes. That is a small dent in the entire real estate economy. Won't make a significant difference. Secondly, the current mess we are in was caused by the "sub prime" mortgage loans. If you know what "sub prime" means, then you probably know the areas where these houses were purchased. Have you seen the neighborhoods or the areas where these houses are foreclosed? A majority of us won't even drive through there, leave alone buying houses there. So obviously, us buying homes is not going to solve this economic mess. If you still insist, then you perhaps need to take a class on economics 101.
OK, say why am I saying all this? Well, for one, while its great that we put our brains to work to help solve the economic crisis, since a good economy has a knock on effect on immigration, but we can't come up with ordinary ideas. These are extraordinary times and we need extraordinary ideas. We need to think out of the box. I appreciate the efforts of IV with the FOIA drive, but here's my question with that - Besides knowing how long the wait is going to be to get our GC based on the information from USCIS, what other purpose is the FOIA going to solve? Probably not much. But I do agree that having those numbers helps us in identifying where we need to focus our lobbying efforts. If we know the bottleneck is EB2-EB3 spillover, we can work on that with USCIS.
Someone mentioned in another thread where we all need to concentrate on one effort rather than be divided in multiple efforts. And I think it was suggested that we focus on visa numbers recapturing. I think its a great idea. However, please be aware that in the context of CIR, EB immigration is a small drop. And hence any lobbying to increase/recapture visa numbers need to be done with the FB immigration. EB and FB together can lobby for the recapture visa numbers project and might achieve considerable success.
If we as EB immigrants need to make our voice known, we need to take a leaf out of the President's book, from his campaign. He started a grass roots level campaign and look at where that has led him to!! So here is my suggestion for a project that will highlight our cause and lead some of the anti- EB Immigration Aholes to shut up their various holes.
I am assuming we have around 500K immigrants in waiting. Let's say there are 250K primary applicants. The goal is we try to get an email database of as many potential immigrants we can. Next we start an email campaign highlighting a story of an immigrant family or a news article against immigration or lobbying by anti immigrant groups or lack of visibility in ongoing discussions on CIR. At the bottom of each email, we have a donate button that takes the person to IV's donation page/paypal, whatever it might be. We start with a minimum of $50 and go upwards to $500. The goal is if we have atleast, say 100,000 potential immigrants to contribute a min of $50, then if my calculations are in order, that is about $5 Millions. We might have more depending on how many more people contribute and how much more than the min $50 that people contribute. But the baseline collection would be about $5 Million. OK, so what do we with that money? Well, the biggest skill set for us EB immigrants are our education. We have a minimum of a bachelors degree and have a penchant for being well educated. That is the weakness in the American education system - Education. We say thousands of high school dropouts. Thousands of college drop outs. The Obama administration has clearly said they need to invest in America's future. And hence they have a big ambitious spending on fixing the educational system. I know that as non permanent residents or citizens, we are not allowed to contribute to any politicians. However, we can donate money to the state or to a charity organization. What I suggest is we collect this money and send it to the first lady, Michelle Obama and have her send this to a non profit community project for education on our behalf. This will bring a lot of attention because we as EB immigrants are saying, we want to contribute to better the educational system if given a chance so that the future American generations don't become prey to the 21st century American competitiveness like outsourcing and H Visas and stuff.
This might seem like a small drop in the ocean, but it is definitely a bright one!! And don't tell me it can't be done. It sure can be done. There was someone who already did this at the grassroots level, and his name is Barack Obama!!!
I am willing to talk to the IV Core team to discuss if needed.
Idea is too good.If we can make it work this is one of the best idea to get the attention of the administration.
Now, before anyone jumps at me, I promise to contribute for IV's efforts and donate for the various projects in a couple days.
The reason I am posting this is because I saw various threads with various ideas to gain visibility and make out cause known to all. I saw thready ranging from writing to senators to sending a 1 cent check everyday to sending a voided check for a big amount. Other notable ideas include sending flowers, calling senators, FOIA campaign, writing to the Obama administration, etc. While I agree that each of these actions contribute small drops to the ocean, I honestly think we should think BIG!!
I have analyzed EB Immigration considerably and here are my thoughts -
Anti-Immigrants, especially the ones against EB Immigration feel that we take away their jobs. However our defense against that is there's aren't that many skilled immigrants for certain skill set and hence we fill that void and keep corporate America competitive. However a lot of us argue that we who are waiting in line for our potential Green Cards pay our taxes and aide by the law, etc. All valid arguments. However, that doesn't make us any different than the majority of the 90% workforce that is employed. They all pay taxes too.
I have seen other ideas being floated around where they said "Buy a house, get a green card." Now, two issues with this - How many of us potential immigrants have 250 grand to invest in a house? I don't and can perhaps pay 5-10% down payment on a house. But if I lose my job, then I will be forced to default too and that doesn't help the economy. Also, there are more than 10 million homes in foreclosure and even hypothetically, let's say we will buy a house on a mortgage at 10% down. There are, say 1 million immigrants in waiting including dependents. And we buy 500,000 homes. That is a small dent in the entire real estate economy. Won't make a significant difference. Secondly, the current mess we are in was caused by the "sub prime" mortgage loans. If you know what "sub prime" means, then you probably know the areas where these houses were purchased. Have you seen the neighborhoods or the areas where these houses are foreclosed? A majority of us won't even drive through there, leave alone buying houses there. So obviously, us buying homes is not going to solve this economic mess. If you still insist, then you perhaps need to take a class on economics 101.
OK, say why am I saying all this? Well, for one, while its great that we put our brains to work to help solve the economic crisis, since a good economy has a knock on effect on immigration, but we can't come up with ordinary ideas. These are extraordinary times and we need extraordinary ideas. We need to think out of the box. I appreciate the efforts of IV with the FOIA drive, but here's my question with that - Besides knowing how long the wait is going to be to get our GC based on the information from USCIS, what other purpose is the FOIA going to solve? Probably not much. But I do agree that having those numbers helps us in identifying where we need to focus our lobbying efforts. If we know the bottleneck is EB2-EB3 spillover, we can work on that with USCIS.
Someone mentioned in another thread where we all need to concentrate on one effort rather than be divided in multiple efforts. And I think it was suggested that we focus on visa numbers recapturing. I think its a great idea. However, please be aware that in the context of CIR, EB immigration is a small drop. And hence any lobbying to increase/recapture visa numbers need to be done with the FB immigration. EB and FB together can lobby for the recapture visa numbers project and might achieve considerable success.
If we as EB immigrants need to make our voice known, we need to take a leaf out of the President's book, from his campaign. He started a grass roots level campaign and look at where that has led him to!! So here is my suggestion for a project that will highlight our cause and lead some of the anti- EB Immigration Aholes to shut up their various holes.
I am assuming we have around 500K immigrants in waiting. Let's say there are 250K primary applicants. The goal is we try to get an email database of as many potential immigrants we can. Next we start an email campaign highlighting a story of an immigrant family or a news article against immigration or lobbying by anti immigrant groups or lack of visibility in ongoing discussions on CIR. At the bottom of each email, we have a donate button that takes the person to IV's donation page/paypal, whatever it might be. We start with a minimum of $50 and go upwards to $500. The goal is if we have atleast, say 100,000 potential immigrants to contribute a min of $50, then if my calculations are in order, that is about $5 Millions. We might have more depending on how many more people contribute and how much more than the min $50 that people contribute. But the baseline collection would be about $5 Million. OK, so what do we with that money? Well, the biggest skill set for us EB immigrants are our education. We have a minimum of a bachelors degree and have a penchant for being well educated. That is the weakness in the American education system - Education. We say thousands of high school dropouts. Thousands of college drop outs. The Obama administration has clearly said they need to invest in America's future. And hence they have a big ambitious spending on fixing the educational system. I know that as non permanent residents or citizens, we are not allowed to contribute to any politicians. However, we can donate money to the state or to a charity organization. What I suggest is we collect this money and send it to the first lady, Michelle Obama and have her send this to a non profit community project for education on our behalf. This will bring a lot of attention because we as EB immigrants are saying, we want to contribute to better the educational system if given a chance so that the future American generations don't become prey to the 21st century American competitiveness like outsourcing and H Visas and stuff.
This might seem like a small drop in the ocean, but it is definitely a bright one!! And don't tell me it can't be done. It sure can be done. There was someone who already did this at the grassroots level, and his name is Barack Obama!!!
I am willing to talk to the IV Core team to discuss if needed.
Idea is too good.If we can make it work this is one of the best idea to get the attention of the administration.
more...
boreal
01-19 04:08 PM
I have sent the letter to President as well as IV.
Sent the letter to the President and IV.
Sent the letter to the President and IV.
hair wallpaper arsenal.
longq
12-20 03:41 PM
Hello IV and its core members,
I am one of the members of the forum and suffering due to the severe retrogression of EB visas. I highly appreciate IV�s effort to bring some legislative relief to address the severe backlogs in EB visas. I too participated in all IVs campaign in urging the law makers to bring some relief for this crisis. However, I have some concern here; about the method followed U.S DOS in allocating EB visas particularly in EB2 category for India and China. I am worried whether U.S DOS is violating the INA 202 (a), by suspending AC21 provision that eliminates country quota in EB categories. If they are violating by mistake, it is our responsibility to notify/clarify with them or we need to understand the law clearly. This is very important. Because, even if 110th congress passes SKIL bill, if DOS violates the AC21 law then it will not help applicants from oversubscribed countries (India and China). Here is my analysis based on following facts.
The cutoff date for EB2 India has moved just 7 days since last 9 months. However EB2 �Row has been current. EB2- ROW has never retrogressed before. EB3 ROW has seen considerable movement in last 9 months.
There may be four possible separate or combination of following reasons for the freeze of cutoff dates for India in EB2 at Jan 2003.
1. The backlog elimination effort of DOL pumped massive approved labor certificates from BEC. There may be tons of EB2 applicants from India and China with PD in the year 2001 and 2002 might have applied 485s based on recent approvals from BEC. However I doubt that. Because, in the year 2001, 2002 and 2003, EB3 India and China were �current�. No body cared about filing EB2 labor certification till the later part of 2004. Most lawyers preferred to file EB3 as it was easy, and there were no difference between EB3 and EB2 at that time. First ever indication for EB3 retrogression was issued by DOS only in later part of 2004. I doubt so many people have filed EB2-labor till 2003, keeping in mind that EB3 will retrogress in 2004 or future. Traditionally EB2 has been less demanding compare to EB1 and EB3.
2. Perhaps, there may be a huge demand by ROW (Due to PERM) to consume all the 86% of visa numbers in EB2 category in every month that prompts DOS to allocate only 7% to India and China. I doubt this too, because India and China itself consume about 60% of EB2 visas.
3. There may be lot of EB3 Indians and Chinese with PD 2001 and 2002 porting their PD from EB3 to EB2 by filing new LC and EB2-I-140. This may escalate the demand. However, how many will do this? How many employers will to do this �favor� for their employees? A real US employer/big corporations will not do double time work for an employee. Only consulting/staffing companies will do this. I think this may be a small group (or may not be?).
4. There may be another possible reason. There may be something wrong with U.S.DOS in allocating visa numbers in EB2 category, as per section 202 (a) of current INA. They may be issuing only 2800 (7% of 40,000) visas to India and China in EB2 and redirecting unused EB2 numbers to EB3 category. They may be imposing hard country cap in EB2 (Suspending AC21 law as per their VB Nov 2005). There is a large room for this speculation, due to the pattern of cutoff date movement in EB2 category. This is just a speculation. This argument/speculation is valid if DOS has issued less than 40,000 EB2 visas in FY 2006 as mandated by the law, and issued those numbers (40,000 minus actually issued) to EB3-ROW. In my view, it violates section 203 (b) (2) of the INA. One has to wait till they release statistics for FY 2006, to see how many EB2 visas are issued in that FY.
Here is some detailed analysis that says why it violates the law.
Section 201 of the Immigration and Nationality Act (INA) sets an annual minimum family-sponsored preference limit of 226,000. The worldwide level for annual employment-based preference immigrants is at least 140,000. Section 203 a and b of the Immigration and Nationality Act (INA) sets numbers for each preference categories with in FB and EB.
Section 202 prescribes that the per-country limit for preference immigrants is set at 7% of the total annual family-sponsored and employment-based preference limits, i.e., 25,620. The dependent area limit is set at 2%, or 7,320. This section also explains how to handle unused numbers with respect to country quota.
Even before AC21 rule enacted in 2000, there was no �hard� country cap as per INA then. Here is the section of INA before year 2000, describes how to allocate unused visas, if overall/total demand for FB an EB visas are less than supply*.
INA 202 (a) (3)
�Exception if additional visas available. - If because of the application of paragraph (2) with respect to one or more foreign states or dependent areas, the total number of visas available under both subsections (a-Family category) and (b-Employment category) of section 203 for a calendar quarter exceeds the number of qualified immigrants who otherwise may be issued such a visa, paragraph (2) shall not apply to visas made available to such states or areas during the remainder of such calendar quarter�.
Therefore, the 7% country cap had always been �soft� till year 2000.
After year 2000, AC21 has completely removed country cap in each employment category, if excess visas are available in each preference categories.
After 2000 (After AC21) the following law was added to INA in the section 202.
INA 202 (a) (5) (A)
EMPLOYMENT-BASED IMMIGRANTS NOT SUBJECT TO PER COUNTRY LIMITATION IF ADDITIONAL VISAS AVAILABLE- If the total number of visas available under paragraph (1), (2), (3), (4), or (5) of section 203(b) for a calendar quarter exceeds the number of qualified immigrants who may otherwise be issued such visas, the visas made available under that paragraph shall be issued without regard to the numerical limitation under paragraph (2) of this subsection during the remainder of the calendar quarter.
As per my simple interpretation of above AC21 rule, DOS should allocate unused visas by ROW �EB2 (ROW- countries other than India and China in EB2 category) for the first two months of any calendar quarter to over-subscribed countries (India & China) at the third month of that calendar quarter. They should not allocate to lower Preference category (EB3), if demand is more in higher preference category (EB2) to consume all the visa numbers in that preference category. They should allocate visas to all the documentarily qualified applicants in that (EB2) preference category, irrespective of country of birth. If they followed this rule/law, there may be a considerable movement in cut-off dates for India and China in Dec 2005, Mar, June and Sep of 2006 in EB2 (last month of each calendar quarter in a fiscal year). We have not witnessed such movement in last 1.5 years. No one knows how DOS is allocating numbers. They may be allocating only 7% visas to India and China in EB2 category very strictly, every month, and allocating unused numbers to EB3 category, by suspending AC21 law as indicated in their Nov 2005 Visa Bulletin. If they do so, it is against the law, at least in my interpretation of AC21 rule that eliminates country quota in EB categories.
DOS can not interpret above AC21 rule that eliminates per country limit applies �totally� to all EB categories put together, not by individual preference categories. I.e. If they say they will issue more than 2,800 visas to EB2- India per year (more than 7% of 40,000), provided overall demand for EB visas are less than 140,000. If they interpret the law like this, then there is no need for section 202(a) (5) (A) due to AC21 law. The law before AC21 {i.e. section 202 (a) (3)} itself address the elimination of country quota in both FB and EB category*. Then, section 202(a) (5) (A) is a duplicate wording of section 202(a) (3). So, this section of AC21 law becomes a redundant/duplicate law. Then, there is no meaning of employment �preference� category if they interpret �totally or overall worldwide demand�. In other words, a non-Indian/Chinese restaurant cook (EB3) is more preferred than a NIW PhDs (EB2) from India or China. Is it the intend of the congress when enacting AC21 law in removing per country limitation in EB category? Is it the American Competitiveness in 21st century? I highly doubt that.
Now it is the time to ask US DOS, how they are allocating visa number in EB2 category. If DOS interpreting the law differently, then we need to ask the law makers (Congress) what is their original intension behind the section 202(a)(5)(A) when they drafted the AC21 law in 2000 and how it is differ from 202 (a) (3).
Perhaps Core IV team can initiate to discuss/consult this issue with an immigration lawyer and place an enquiry with DOS or Law makers, if needed.
(*Note: DOS do not mix FB and EB categories for visa number allocation/calculation to meet the per country limit. They keep both in separate track to meet separately the 7% limit)
I am one of the members of the forum and suffering due to the severe retrogression of EB visas. I highly appreciate IV�s effort to bring some legislative relief to address the severe backlogs in EB visas. I too participated in all IVs campaign in urging the law makers to bring some relief for this crisis. However, I have some concern here; about the method followed U.S DOS in allocating EB visas particularly in EB2 category for India and China. I am worried whether U.S DOS is violating the INA 202 (a), by suspending AC21 provision that eliminates country quota in EB categories. If they are violating by mistake, it is our responsibility to notify/clarify with them or we need to understand the law clearly. This is very important. Because, even if 110th congress passes SKIL bill, if DOS violates the AC21 law then it will not help applicants from oversubscribed countries (India and China). Here is my analysis based on following facts.
The cutoff date for EB2 India has moved just 7 days since last 9 months. However EB2 �Row has been current. EB2- ROW has never retrogressed before. EB3 ROW has seen considerable movement in last 9 months.
There may be four possible separate or combination of following reasons for the freeze of cutoff dates for India in EB2 at Jan 2003.
1. The backlog elimination effort of DOL pumped massive approved labor certificates from BEC. There may be tons of EB2 applicants from India and China with PD in the year 2001 and 2002 might have applied 485s based on recent approvals from BEC. However I doubt that. Because, in the year 2001, 2002 and 2003, EB3 India and China were �current�. No body cared about filing EB2 labor certification till the later part of 2004. Most lawyers preferred to file EB3 as it was easy, and there were no difference between EB3 and EB2 at that time. First ever indication for EB3 retrogression was issued by DOS only in later part of 2004. I doubt so many people have filed EB2-labor till 2003, keeping in mind that EB3 will retrogress in 2004 or future. Traditionally EB2 has been less demanding compare to EB1 and EB3.
2. Perhaps, there may be a huge demand by ROW (Due to PERM) to consume all the 86% of visa numbers in EB2 category in every month that prompts DOS to allocate only 7% to India and China. I doubt this too, because India and China itself consume about 60% of EB2 visas.
3. There may be lot of EB3 Indians and Chinese with PD 2001 and 2002 porting their PD from EB3 to EB2 by filing new LC and EB2-I-140. This may escalate the demand. However, how many will do this? How many employers will to do this �favor� for their employees? A real US employer/big corporations will not do double time work for an employee. Only consulting/staffing companies will do this. I think this may be a small group (or may not be?).
4. There may be another possible reason. There may be something wrong with U.S.DOS in allocating visa numbers in EB2 category, as per section 202 (a) of current INA. They may be issuing only 2800 (7% of 40,000) visas to India and China in EB2 and redirecting unused EB2 numbers to EB3 category. They may be imposing hard country cap in EB2 (Suspending AC21 law as per their VB Nov 2005). There is a large room for this speculation, due to the pattern of cutoff date movement in EB2 category. This is just a speculation. This argument/speculation is valid if DOS has issued less than 40,000 EB2 visas in FY 2006 as mandated by the law, and issued those numbers (40,000 minus actually issued) to EB3-ROW. In my view, it violates section 203 (b) (2) of the INA. One has to wait till they release statistics for FY 2006, to see how many EB2 visas are issued in that FY.
Here is some detailed analysis that says why it violates the law.
Section 201 of the Immigration and Nationality Act (INA) sets an annual minimum family-sponsored preference limit of 226,000. The worldwide level for annual employment-based preference immigrants is at least 140,000. Section 203 a and b of the Immigration and Nationality Act (INA) sets numbers for each preference categories with in FB and EB.
Section 202 prescribes that the per-country limit for preference immigrants is set at 7% of the total annual family-sponsored and employment-based preference limits, i.e., 25,620. The dependent area limit is set at 2%, or 7,320. This section also explains how to handle unused numbers with respect to country quota.
Even before AC21 rule enacted in 2000, there was no �hard� country cap as per INA then. Here is the section of INA before year 2000, describes how to allocate unused visas, if overall/total demand for FB an EB visas are less than supply*.
INA 202 (a) (3)
�Exception if additional visas available. - If because of the application of paragraph (2) with respect to one or more foreign states or dependent areas, the total number of visas available under both subsections (a-Family category) and (b-Employment category) of section 203 for a calendar quarter exceeds the number of qualified immigrants who otherwise may be issued such a visa, paragraph (2) shall not apply to visas made available to such states or areas during the remainder of such calendar quarter�.
Therefore, the 7% country cap had always been �soft� till year 2000.
After year 2000, AC21 has completely removed country cap in each employment category, if excess visas are available in each preference categories.
After 2000 (After AC21) the following law was added to INA in the section 202.
INA 202 (a) (5) (A)
EMPLOYMENT-BASED IMMIGRANTS NOT SUBJECT TO PER COUNTRY LIMITATION IF ADDITIONAL VISAS AVAILABLE- If the total number of visas available under paragraph (1), (2), (3), (4), or (5) of section 203(b) for a calendar quarter exceeds the number of qualified immigrants who may otherwise be issued such visas, the visas made available under that paragraph shall be issued without regard to the numerical limitation under paragraph (2) of this subsection during the remainder of the calendar quarter.
As per my simple interpretation of above AC21 rule, DOS should allocate unused visas by ROW �EB2 (ROW- countries other than India and China in EB2 category) for the first two months of any calendar quarter to over-subscribed countries (India & China) at the third month of that calendar quarter. They should not allocate to lower Preference category (EB3), if demand is more in higher preference category (EB2) to consume all the visa numbers in that preference category. They should allocate visas to all the documentarily qualified applicants in that (EB2) preference category, irrespective of country of birth. If they followed this rule/law, there may be a considerable movement in cut-off dates for India and China in Dec 2005, Mar, June and Sep of 2006 in EB2 (last month of each calendar quarter in a fiscal year). We have not witnessed such movement in last 1.5 years. No one knows how DOS is allocating numbers. They may be allocating only 7% visas to India and China in EB2 category very strictly, every month, and allocating unused numbers to EB3 category, by suspending AC21 law as indicated in their Nov 2005 Visa Bulletin. If they do so, it is against the law, at least in my interpretation of AC21 rule that eliminates country quota in EB categories.
DOS can not interpret above AC21 rule that eliminates per country limit applies �totally� to all EB categories put together, not by individual preference categories. I.e. If they say they will issue more than 2,800 visas to EB2- India per year (more than 7% of 40,000), provided overall demand for EB visas are less than 140,000. If they interpret the law like this, then there is no need for section 202(a) (5) (A) due to AC21 law. The law before AC21 {i.e. section 202 (a) (3)} itself address the elimination of country quota in both FB and EB category*. Then, section 202(a) (5) (A) is a duplicate wording of section 202(a) (3). So, this section of AC21 law becomes a redundant/duplicate law. Then, there is no meaning of employment �preference� category if they interpret �totally or overall worldwide demand�. In other words, a non-Indian/Chinese restaurant cook (EB3) is more preferred than a NIW PhDs (EB2) from India or China. Is it the intend of the congress when enacting AC21 law in removing per country limitation in EB category? Is it the American Competitiveness in 21st century? I highly doubt that.
Now it is the time to ask US DOS, how they are allocating visa number in EB2 category. If DOS interpreting the law differently, then we need to ask the law makers (Congress) what is their original intension behind the section 202(a)(5)(A) when they drafted the AC21 law in 2000 and how it is differ from 202 (a) (3).
Perhaps Core IV team can initiate to discuss/consult this issue with an immigration lawyer and place an enquiry with DOS or Law makers, if needed.
(*Note: DOS do not mix FB and EB categories for visa number allocation/calculation to meet the per country limit. They keep both in separate track to meet separately the 7% limit)
more...
belmontboy
05-18 04:29 PM
There are good and not so good schools here for MS /PhD. Either way why a seperate quota for US MS/PhD. Is a foreign MS/PHD any inferior?
Just a thought..
Especially IIT/IISc are not too bad schools in india!
nobody is comparing the schools over here with IIT/IISC.
There is a quota for masters in H1B.
There should be a similar quota in GC for masters.
Just a thought..
Especially IIT/IISc are not too bad schools in india!
nobody is comparing the schools over here with IIT/IISC.
There is a quota for masters in H1B.
There should be a similar quota in GC for masters.
hot wallpapers red. wallpapers
snathan
06-17 09:20 AM
^^^^^^^^^^^
more...
house United FC Wallpaper - Red
chanduv23
11-16 03:10 PM
but isnt this the reason for LC advertising? That is, if a USC or permanent resident applies he should be given preference over an immigrant. By that rationale I am not so sure it is illegal.
Also, many large companies, when applying for jobs on their websites, mandatorily require you to state your visa status. While self-identification (race, sex) is always optional and cannot be required (by law, there will always be a statement that says submission of this info is voluntary).
They cannot ask it if it is illegal, and clearly this information is used in the employment process.
So, I am not so sure this is illegal.
I am pretty sure that discriminating on nationality is illegal, but that is different
Probably according to the EEOC rules, unless the job requires for security clearance, companies must not discriminate between a US citizen and someone with work authorization. A company must also not deny job to you because u don't have enough time on ur visa. Company must go through legal channels to accept or deny employment for visa holders. As such companies don't really discriminate. They want good people for work. Most times it is the reqruiters who post these ads. Reqruiters post ads like * must be citizen, must be local to New York* etc... Even for L/C ads, I don't think there is a need to mention preference for citizens - though I am not sure about this.
If prefering US citizens is discriminatory, I am sure a bill will be easily passed to make such postings valid and legal :)
Also, many large companies, when applying for jobs on their websites, mandatorily require you to state your visa status. While self-identification (race, sex) is always optional and cannot be required (by law, there will always be a statement that says submission of this info is voluntary).
They cannot ask it if it is illegal, and clearly this information is used in the employment process.
So, I am not so sure this is illegal.
I am pretty sure that discriminating on nationality is illegal, but that is different
Probably according to the EEOC rules, unless the job requires for security clearance, companies must not discriminate between a US citizen and someone with work authorization. A company must also not deny job to you because u don't have enough time on ur visa. Company must go through legal channels to accept or deny employment for visa holders. As such companies don't really discriminate. They want good people for work. Most times it is the reqruiters who post these ads. Reqruiters post ads like * must be citizen, must be local to New York* etc... Even for L/C ads, I don't think there is a need to mention preference for citizens - though I am not sure about this.
If prefering US citizens is discriminatory, I am sure a bill will be easily passed to make such postings valid and legal :)
tattoo Red Rose Wallpaper Images
satish_hello
12-07 10:19 AM
I am still waiting for FP, i created SR, hey told i have to wait for 4-6 weeks, which is already over.
I took infopass, my name check is clear, No info abt the FP Notice.
Any one in same situation transfered cases from NSC-->CSC-->NSC not yet received FP yet.
satish
----------------------------------------------
EB2/PD-Sept'2004/I-140 Approved.
I-485 - Sent July5th. - Transferred ---> WAC ---> back to NSC
EAD- Card Received
AP - Approved.
NC- Cleared
FP-?
AD -?
---------------------------------
I took infopass, my name check is clear, No info abt the FP Notice.
Any one in same situation transfered cases from NSC-->CSC-->NSC not yet received FP yet.
satish
----------------------------------------------
EB2/PD-Sept'2004/I-140 Approved.
I-485 - Sent July5th. - Transferred ---> WAC ---> back to NSC
EAD- Card Received
AP - Approved.
NC- Cleared
FP-?
AD -?
---------------------------------
more...
pictures iPhone Wallpapers: Red!
Lisap
08-22 12:08 PM
So the attorney sent the package before you were actually current?
dresses wallpapers red. wallpapers red
tnite
08-09 10:51 PM
http://www.murthy.com/bulletin.html
Miss. Murthy reports that LS was rejected for some folks.
How does one get to know if his Labor Substitution was rejected? If a Receipt Notice was received does that mean that it was accepted? And, can they reject it later?
you missed the word "wrongly" rejected.
Miss. Murthy reports that LS was rejected for some folks.
How does one get to know if his Labor Substitution was rejected? If a Receipt Notice was received does that mean that it was accepted? And, can they reject it later?
you missed the word "wrongly" rejected.
more...
makeup Name: red devil
mallu
12-01 02:58 PM
FYI: The number of name check related lawsuits increased 10 times from January 2006 to January 2007 :) I estimate the total number for this year will be 3-4 times bigger than 2006 number.
There may be a slight decrease in number because of retrogression, but i believe the bros&sis in the citizenship queue will compensate for that.
There may be a slight decrease in number because of retrogression, but i believe the bros&sis in the citizenship queue will compensate for that.
girlfriend Red Wallpaper
bsnf
04-20 09:10 PM
I was asked for the AP in India and Germany. The custom officer in India was aware of the AP and immediately completed the process and let me go. In Germany the 1st person ( probability a new hire) did not understand the AP so he asked another custom officer to look at the AP document. The other office looked at the AP and then explained the document to the 1st officer and let me go.
BTW, the trip last month was the 3rd time I traveled to India on AP.
BTW, the trip last month was the 3rd time I traveled to India on AP.
hairstyles Abstract Wallpaper
p1234
10-25 02:36 PM
Senior (PD's from 2001-03) EB3-I sufferers, you'll surely get what you deserve by the middle of 2009. Having said that, if you think its in your best interest to get a better job under EB2, go for it and port your PD. Nothing can stop you.
If someone writes a letter to USCIS to stop EB3 porting, you can counter it by writing another letter explaining why you are porting in the first place and you have the right and the freedom to get better jobs and qualify for higher categories.
If someone writes a letter to USCIS to stop EB3 porting, you can counter it by writing another letter explaining why you are porting in the first place and you have the right and the freedom to get better jobs and qualify for higher categories.
suren1
02-12 11:41 AM
As per data - EB3 is dead horse for rest of the FY
:mad:
:mad:
GCard_Dream
04-13 01:09 PM
so you don't see a difference in how a private organization and a non-profit organization operates. Well here are some:
1. In your office, you are actually working for your boss and you are getting paid to do what they want you to do. I don't remember getting any pay check from IV. In fact, I have written several checks to IV. This doesn't mean I can post whatever I want but as long as I am following IV guidelines, I shouldn't get harassed by folks like you who think that their post is the only important post.
2. If you don't do what you are told at work, they'll fire your a&& and you wouldn’t know how to pay your bills next month. That's why the CEO or your boss don't have to send you a one liner before they take any decision.
As far as I know, IV is just a group of people coming together to address a problem which is shared by all members. I know that some people have worked harder than others and some people have contributed more than others but everyone has contributed one way or the other. So for you to come out and say that you are the only one doing all the work and others are just doing nothing and some how you are the CEO of this organization is just beyond my imagination. May be it's time you wake up and smell the coffee.
In your office do you ask your CEO/VPs to first send you a one liner before he takes a decision on your project? Think about it
1. In your office, you are actually working for your boss and you are getting paid to do what they want you to do. I don't remember getting any pay check from IV. In fact, I have written several checks to IV. This doesn't mean I can post whatever I want but as long as I am following IV guidelines, I shouldn't get harassed by folks like you who think that their post is the only important post.
2. If you don't do what you are told at work, they'll fire your a&& and you wouldn’t know how to pay your bills next month. That's why the CEO or your boss don't have to send you a one liner before they take any decision.
As far as I know, IV is just a group of people coming together to address a problem which is shared by all members. I know that some people have worked harder than others and some people have contributed more than others but everyone has contributed one way or the other. So for you to come out and say that you are the only one doing all the work and others are just doing nothing and some how you are the CEO of this organization is just beyond my imagination. May be it's time you wake up and smell the coffee.
In your office do you ask your CEO/VPs to first send you a one liner before he takes a decision on your project? Think about it
Tidak ada komentar:
Posting Komentar