needhelp!
04-15 05:35 PM
I'm happy it finally worked out for you! Will you be changing your handle now ? :)
wallpaper funny quotes and sayings.
swarnapuri
12-23 01:32 PM
Check the message by saturnring11 in this thread. He linked the USCIS document which states that PD is retained by the employee once the I-140 is approved unless I-140 is revoked for Fraud.
http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/showthread.php?t=2368
Here is the link that he posted :
Look on Page 27 of the USCIS Press Release
http://www.uscis.gov/files/pressrelease/afm_ch22_091206R.pdf
http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/showthread.php?t=2368
Here is the link that he posted :
Look on Page 27 of the USCIS Press Release
http://www.uscis.gov/files/pressrelease/afm_ch22_091206R.pdf
chanduv23
09-04 04:21 PM
This is yet another inefficiency on their part. When it comes to AC21 your file does not even get updated even though you may have attached I-485 receipt along with AC21 filing. But when the employer revokes I-140 they don't forget to send you NOID or even I-485 denial.
yes it is like electricity department in India - If you miss payments for a particular period - the next moment they stand in front of ur house and block power suppply whereas they are seen nowhere in vicinity when you complain that you have a power cut and need someone to fix it.
yes it is like electricity department in India - If you miss payments for a particular period - the next moment they stand in front of ur house and block power suppply whereas they are seen nowhere in vicinity when you complain that you have a power cut and need someone to fix it.
2011 Funny Quotes And Images.
Blog Feeds
01-27 08:30 AM
Summary
(LINK TO FULL REPORT BELOW)
Congress created the H-1B program in 1990 to enable U.S. employers to hire temporary, foreign workers in specialty occupations. The law capped the number of H-1B visas issued per fiscal year at 65,000. Since then, the cap has fluctuated with legislative changes. Congress asked GAO to assess the impact of the cap on the ability of domestic companies to innovate, while ensuring that U.S. workers are not disadvantaged. In response, GAO examined what is known about (1) employer demand for H-1B workers; (2) how the cap affects employer costs and decisions to move operations overseas; (3) H-1B worker characteristics and the potential impact of raising the cap; and (4) how well requirements of the H-1B program protect U.S. workers. GAO analyzed data from 4 federal agencies; interviewed agency officials, experts, and H-1B employers; and reviewed agency documents and literature.
In most years, demand for new H-1B workers exceeded the cap: From 2000 to 2009, demand for new H-1B workers tended to exceed the cap, as measured by the numbers of initial petitions submitted by employers who are subject to the cap. There is no way to precisely determine the level of any unmet demand among employers, since they tend to stop submitting (and the Department of Homeland Security stops tracking) petitions once the cap is reached each year. When we consider all initial petitions, including those from universities and research institutions that are not subject to the cap, we find that demand for new H-1B workers is largely driven by a small number of employers. Over the decade, over 14 percent of all initial petitions were submitted by cap-exempt employers, and only a few employers (fewer than 1 percent) garnered over one-quarter of all H-1B approvals. Most interviewed companies said the H-1B cap and program created costs, but were not factors in their decisions to move R&D overseas: The 34 H-1B employers GAO interviewed reported that the cap has created some additional costs, though the cap's impact depended on the size and maturity of the company. For example, in years when visas were denied by the cap, most large firms reported finding other (sometimes more costly) ways to hire their preferred job candidates. On the other hand, small firms were more likely to fill their positions with different candidates, which they said resulted in delays and sometimes economic losses, particularly for firms in rapidly changing technology fields. Limitations in agency data and systems hinder tracking the cap and H-1B workers over time: The total number of H-1B workers in the U.S. at any one time--and information about the length of their stay--is unknown, because (1) data systems among the various agencies that process such individuals are not linked so individuals cannot be readily tracked, and (2) H-1B workers are not assigned a unique identifier that would allow for tracking them over time--particularly if and when their visa status changes. Restricted agency oversight and statutory changes weaken protections for U.S. workers: Elements of the H-1B program that could serve as worker protections--such as the requirement to pay prevailing wages, the visa's temporary status, and the cap itself--are weakened by several factors. First, program oversight is fragmented and restricted. Second, the H-1B program lacks a legal provision for holding employers accountable to program requirements when they obtain H-1B workers through a staffing company. Third, statutory changes made to the H-1B program have, in combination and in effect, increased the pool of H-1B workers beyond the cap and lowered the bar for eligibility. Taken together, the multifaceted challenges identified in this report show that the H-1B program, as currently structured, may not be used to its full potential and may be detrimental in some cases. This report offers several matters for congressional consideration, including that Congress re-examine key H-1B program provisions and make appropriate changes as needed. GAO also recommends that the Departments of Homeland Security and Labor take steps to improve efficiency, flexibility, and monitoring of the H-1B program. Homeland Security disagreed with two recommendations and one matter, citing logistical and other challenges; however, we believe such challenges can be overcome. Labor did not respond to our recommendations.
Recommendations
Our recommendations from this work are listed below with a Contact for more information. Status will change from "In process" to "Open," "Closed - implemented," or "Closed - not implemented" based on our follow up work.
Director:Andrew SherrillTeam:Government Accountability Office: Education, Workforce, and Income SecurityPhone:(202) 512-7252
Matters for Congressional Consideration
Recommendation: To ensure that the H-1B program continues to meet the needs of businesses in a global economy while maintaining a balance of protections for U.S. workers, Congress may wish to consider reviewing the merits and shortcomings of key program provisions and making appropriate changes as needed. Such a review may include, but would not necessarily be limited to (1) the qualifications required for workers eligible under the H-1B program, (2) exemptions from the cap, (3) the appropriateness of H-1B hiring by staffing companies, (4) the level of the cap, and (5) the role the program should play in the U.S. immigration system in relationship to permanent residency.
Status: In process
Comments: When we determine what steps the Congress has taken, we will provide updated information.
Recommendation: To reduce duplication and fragmentation in the administration and oversight of the H-1B application process, consistent with past GAO matters for congressional consideration, Congress may wish to consider eliminating the requirement that employers first submit a Labor Condition Application (LCA) to the Department of Labor for certification, and require instead that employers submit this application along with the I-129 application to the Department of Homeland Security's U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services for review.
Status: In process
Comments: When we determine what steps the Congress has taken, we will provide updated information.
Recommendation: To improve the Department of Labor's ability to investigate and enforce employer compliance with H-1B program requirements, Congress may wish to consider granting the department subpoena power to obtain employer records during investigations under the H-1B program.
Status: In process
Comments: When we determine what steps the Congress has taken, we will provide updated information.
Recommendation: To help ensure the full protection of H-1B workers employed through staffing companies, Congress may wish to consider holding the employer where an H-1B visa holder performs work accountable for meeting program requirements to the same extent as the employer that submitted the LCA form.
Status: In process
Comments: When we determine what steps the Congress has taken, we will provide updated information.
Recommendations for Executive Action
Recommendation: To help ensure that the number of new H-1B workers who are subject to the cap--both entering the United States and changing to H-1B status within the United States--does not exceed the cap each year, U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services should take steps to improve its tracking of the number of approved H-1B applications and the number of issued visas under the cap by fully leveraging the transformation effort currently under way, which involves the adoption of an electronic petition processing system that will be linked to the Department of State's tracking system. Such steps should ensure that linkages to the Department of State's tracking system will provide Homeland Security with timely access to data on visa issuances, and that mechanisms for tracking petitions and visas against the cap are incorporated into U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services' business rules to be developed for the new electronic petition system.
Agency Affected: Department of Homeland Security
Status: In process
Comments: When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.
Recommendation: To address business concerns without undermining program integrity, U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services should, to the extent permitted by its existing statutory authority, explore options for increasing the flexibility of the application process for H-1B employers, such as (1) allowing employers to rank their applications for visa candidates so that they can hire the best qualified worker for the jobs in highest need; (2) distributing the applications granted under the annual cap in allotments throughout the year (e.g. quarterly); and (3) establishing a system whereby businesses with a strong track-record of compliance with H-1B regulations may use a streamlined application process.
Agency Affected: Department of Homeland Security
Status: In process
Comments: When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.
Recommendation: To improve the transparency and oversight of the posting requirement on the Labor Condition Application (LCA), as part of its current oversight role, the Employment and Training Administration should develop and maintain a centralized Web site, accessible to the public, where businesses must post notice of the intent to hire H-1B workers. Such notices should continue to specify the job category and worksite location noted on the LCA and required by statute on current noncentralized postings.
Agency Affected: Department of Labor
Status: In process
Comments: When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.
Recommendation: To improve the efficiency and effectiveness of its investigations of employer compliance with H-1B requirements, the Employment and Training Administration should provide Labor's Wage and Hour Division searchable access to the LCA database.
Agency Affected: Department of Labor
Status: In process
Comments: When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.
VIEW FULL REPORT (http://www.gao.gov/new.items/d1126.pdf)
More... (http://ashwinsharma.com/2011/01/25/h-1b-visa-program-reforms-are-needed-to-minimize-the-risks-and-costs-of-current-program.aspx?ref=rss)
(LINK TO FULL REPORT BELOW)
Congress created the H-1B program in 1990 to enable U.S. employers to hire temporary, foreign workers in specialty occupations. The law capped the number of H-1B visas issued per fiscal year at 65,000. Since then, the cap has fluctuated with legislative changes. Congress asked GAO to assess the impact of the cap on the ability of domestic companies to innovate, while ensuring that U.S. workers are not disadvantaged. In response, GAO examined what is known about (1) employer demand for H-1B workers; (2) how the cap affects employer costs and decisions to move operations overseas; (3) H-1B worker characteristics and the potential impact of raising the cap; and (4) how well requirements of the H-1B program protect U.S. workers. GAO analyzed data from 4 federal agencies; interviewed agency officials, experts, and H-1B employers; and reviewed agency documents and literature.
In most years, demand for new H-1B workers exceeded the cap: From 2000 to 2009, demand for new H-1B workers tended to exceed the cap, as measured by the numbers of initial petitions submitted by employers who are subject to the cap. There is no way to precisely determine the level of any unmet demand among employers, since they tend to stop submitting (and the Department of Homeland Security stops tracking) petitions once the cap is reached each year. When we consider all initial petitions, including those from universities and research institutions that are not subject to the cap, we find that demand for new H-1B workers is largely driven by a small number of employers. Over the decade, over 14 percent of all initial petitions were submitted by cap-exempt employers, and only a few employers (fewer than 1 percent) garnered over one-quarter of all H-1B approvals. Most interviewed companies said the H-1B cap and program created costs, but were not factors in their decisions to move R&D overseas: The 34 H-1B employers GAO interviewed reported that the cap has created some additional costs, though the cap's impact depended on the size and maturity of the company. For example, in years when visas were denied by the cap, most large firms reported finding other (sometimes more costly) ways to hire their preferred job candidates. On the other hand, small firms were more likely to fill their positions with different candidates, which they said resulted in delays and sometimes economic losses, particularly for firms in rapidly changing technology fields. Limitations in agency data and systems hinder tracking the cap and H-1B workers over time: The total number of H-1B workers in the U.S. at any one time--and information about the length of their stay--is unknown, because (1) data systems among the various agencies that process such individuals are not linked so individuals cannot be readily tracked, and (2) H-1B workers are not assigned a unique identifier that would allow for tracking them over time--particularly if and when their visa status changes. Restricted agency oversight and statutory changes weaken protections for U.S. workers: Elements of the H-1B program that could serve as worker protections--such as the requirement to pay prevailing wages, the visa's temporary status, and the cap itself--are weakened by several factors. First, program oversight is fragmented and restricted. Second, the H-1B program lacks a legal provision for holding employers accountable to program requirements when they obtain H-1B workers through a staffing company. Third, statutory changes made to the H-1B program have, in combination and in effect, increased the pool of H-1B workers beyond the cap and lowered the bar for eligibility. Taken together, the multifaceted challenges identified in this report show that the H-1B program, as currently structured, may not be used to its full potential and may be detrimental in some cases. This report offers several matters for congressional consideration, including that Congress re-examine key H-1B program provisions and make appropriate changes as needed. GAO also recommends that the Departments of Homeland Security and Labor take steps to improve efficiency, flexibility, and monitoring of the H-1B program. Homeland Security disagreed with two recommendations and one matter, citing logistical and other challenges; however, we believe such challenges can be overcome. Labor did not respond to our recommendations.
Recommendations
Our recommendations from this work are listed below with a Contact for more information. Status will change from "In process" to "Open," "Closed - implemented," or "Closed - not implemented" based on our follow up work.
Director:Andrew SherrillTeam:Government Accountability Office: Education, Workforce, and Income SecurityPhone:(202) 512-7252
Matters for Congressional Consideration
Recommendation: To ensure that the H-1B program continues to meet the needs of businesses in a global economy while maintaining a balance of protections for U.S. workers, Congress may wish to consider reviewing the merits and shortcomings of key program provisions and making appropriate changes as needed. Such a review may include, but would not necessarily be limited to (1) the qualifications required for workers eligible under the H-1B program, (2) exemptions from the cap, (3) the appropriateness of H-1B hiring by staffing companies, (4) the level of the cap, and (5) the role the program should play in the U.S. immigration system in relationship to permanent residency.
Status: In process
Comments: When we determine what steps the Congress has taken, we will provide updated information.
Recommendation: To reduce duplication and fragmentation in the administration and oversight of the H-1B application process, consistent with past GAO matters for congressional consideration, Congress may wish to consider eliminating the requirement that employers first submit a Labor Condition Application (LCA) to the Department of Labor for certification, and require instead that employers submit this application along with the I-129 application to the Department of Homeland Security's U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services for review.
Status: In process
Comments: When we determine what steps the Congress has taken, we will provide updated information.
Recommendation: To improve the Department of Labor's ability to investigate and enforce employer compliance with H-1B program requirements, Congress may wish to consider granting the department subpoena power to obtain employer records during investigations under the H-1B program.
Status: In process
Comments: When we determine what steps the Congress has taken, we will provide updated information.
Recommendation: To help ensure the full protection of H-1B workers employed through staffing companies, Congress may wish to consider holding the employer where an H-1B visa holder performs work accountable for meeting program requirements to the same extent as the employer that submitted the LCA form.
Status: In process
Comments: When we determine what steps the Congress has taken, we will provide updated information.
Recommendations for Executive Action
Recommendation: To help ensure that the number of new H-1B workers who are subject to the cap--both entering the United States and changing to H-1B status within the United States--does not exceed the cap each year, U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services should take steps to improve its tracking of the number of approved H-1B applications and the number of issued visas under the cap by fully leveraging the transformation effort currently under way, which involves the adoption of an electronic petition processing system that will be linked to the Department of State's tracking system. Such steps should ensure that linkages to the Department of State's tracking system will provide Homeland Security with timely access to data on visa issuances, and that mechanisms for tracking petitions and visas against the cap are incorporated into U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services' business rules to be developed for the new electronic petition system.
Agency Affected: Department of Homeland Security
Status: In process
Comments: When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.
Recommendation: To address business concerns without undermining program integrity, U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services should, to the extent permitted by its existing statutory authority, explore options for increasing the flexibility of the application process for H-1B employers, such as (1) allowing employers to rank their applications for visa candidates so that they can hire the best qualified worker for the jobs in highest need; (2) distributing the applications granted under the annual cap in allotments throughout the year (e.g. quarterly); and (3) establishing a system whereby businesses with a strong track-record of compliance with H-1B regulations may use a streamlined application process.
Agency Affected: Department of Homeland Security
Status: In process
Comments: When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.
Recommendation: To improve the transparency and oversight of the posting requirement on the Labor Condition Application (LCA), as part of its current oversight role, the Employment and Training Administration should develop and maintain a centralized Web site, accessible to the public, where businesses must post notice of the intent to hire H-1B workers. Such notices should continue to specify the job category and worksite location noted on the LCA and required by statute on current noncentralized postings.
Agency Affected: Department of Labor
Status: In process
Comments: When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.
Recommendation: To improve the efficiency and effectiveness of its investigations of employer compliance with H-1B requirements, the Employment and Training Administration should provide Labor's Wage and Hour Division searchable access to the LCA database.
Agency Affected: Department of Labor
Status: In process
Comments: When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.
VIEW FULL REPORT (http://www.gao.gov/new.items/d1126.pdf)
More... (http://ashwinsharma.com/2011/01/25/h-1b-visa-program-reforms-are-needed-to-minimize-the-risks-and-costs-of-current-program.aspx?ref=rss)
more...
digital2k
07-17 04:43 PM
*
Rb_newsletter
07-13 05:31 PM
I am in similar situation but in GC process. My ex-colleagues are afraid to write experience letter for me.
Some colleagues who are still working in the same company doesn't want the company to know about the letter. They are afraid that company would take action if USCIS contacts the company to verify the letter.
Some colleagues who are out of the company are concerned about USCIS process. Basically they don't want to involve in any queries/RFEs from USCIS.
Some colleagues who are still working in the same company doesn't want the company to know about the letter. They are afraid that company would take action if USCIS contacts the company to verify the letter.
Some colleagues who are out of the company are concerned about USCIS process. Basically they don't want to involve in any queries/RFEs from USCIS.
more...
nrk
02-02 01:04 PM
Congrats.... :)
Finally after nine years in US my Green Card is approved.
On this very day in 2001 i was in flight to USA
1) Came to US on Feb 1st 2001
2) Changed employer in 2002 and GC applied in 2003 in EB3
3) After 2 years, changed the employer in 2004 and applied GC in EB2 at the end of 2004
4) Application with the DOL sent to the BEC
5) DOL approved the petition in Jan 2007
6) Applied I140 in April 2007
7) Applied I485 in July 2007
8) FP completed and EAD received in September 2007
9) I140 RFE Aug 2008
10) I140 denied in March 2009 - Reason is Too may petitions from the employer
11) Appeal sent in April 2009
12) Once the dates are current in Sep 2009, i talked to the attorney and decided to file a new I140 with the same labor
13) New I140 filed in Sep 2009
14) Received a notice from USCIS to withdraw the appeal inorder to process the new I140
15) Appeal withdrawn in October 2009
16) New I140 approved in Nov 2009
17) FP notices received in November for I485
18) FP done in December 2009
19) Infopass appointment in Jan 2010. Background check is completed
20) Received CPO emails for both the cases on Jan 21st 2010
21) Welcome notice mailed on Jan 22nd 2010
22) Welcome Notice and Cards received on Jan 30th.
22) I485 approval notices sent on Jan 26th 2010 - Did not received yet.
For me it is a bumpy ride. I went through most of the steps in the immigration (RFE's, Denials, MTR's, Appeals ..)
I wish all the best for all IV memebers waiting in GC queue or waiting to apply for I485.
Thanks
Finally after nine years in US my Green Card is approved.
On this very day in 2001 i was in flight to USA
1) Came to US on Feb 1st 2001
2) Changed employer in 2002 and GC applied in 2003 in EB3
3) After 2 years, changed the employer in 2004 and applied GC in EB2 at the end of 2004
4) Application with the DOL sent to the BEC
5) DOL approved the petition in Jan 2007
6) Applied I140 in April 2007
7) Applied I485 in July 2007
8) FP completed and EAD received in September 2007
9) I140 RFE Aug 2008
10) I140 denied in March 2009 - Reason is Too may petitions from the employer
11) Appeal sent in April 2009
12) Once the dates are current in Sep 2009, i talked to the attorney and decided to file a new I140 with the same labor
13) New I140 filed in Sep 2009
14) Received a notice from USCIS to withdraw the appeal inorder to process the new I140
15) Appeal withdrawn in October 2009
16) New I140 approved in Nov 2009
17) FP notices received in November for I485
18) FP done in December 2009
19) Infopass appointment in Jan 2010. Background check is completed
20) Received CPO emails for both the cases on Jan 21st 2010
21) Welcome notice mailed on Jan 22nd 2010
22) Welcome Notice and Cards received on Jan 30th.
22) I485 approval notices sent on Jan 26th 2010 - Did not received yet.
For me it is a bumpy ride. I went through most of the steps in the immigration (RFE's, Denials, MTR's, Appeals ..)
I wish all the best for all IV memebers waiting in GC queue or waiting to apply for I485.
Thanks
2010 funny quotes with pics. funny
pd_recapturing
08-22 04:13 PM
"Fragomen, Del Rey, Bernsen and Loewy, LLP" are doing my H1-B transfer and I had a good experience dealing with them so far (though brief).
Only thing is for GC I am little reluctant due to their PERM cases being the traget of audit
Why do u need them for gc ? Your 485 is already pending.
Only thing is for GC I am little reluctant due to their PERM cases being the traget of audit
Why do u need them for gc ? Your 485 is already pending.
more...
asanghi
02-26 02:48 PM
No need for AP. If someone mails him the GC, he can get back to the U.S. with it.
Please recheck your info before dispensing advice. Adjustment of Status application is based on premise that you are already present in USA. At the time approval, you should be present in USA. Thus the need for AP. If your Green card AOS application has been approved while you are out of country. You NEED AP to enter.
Please recheck your info before dispensing advice. Adjustment of Status application is based on premise that you are already present in USA. At the time approval, you should be present in USA. Thus the need for AP. If your Green card AOS application has been approved while you are out of country. You NEED AP to enter.
hair funny quotes urdu. funny
rolrblade
07-27 04:44 PM
do they have to attach copy of email with the application?
In my case my application was filed on 2nd July but my attorney asked me to send the email on 3rd July just for records.
you are fine : read this from USCIS website:
Attorneys and accredited representatives filing any petition or immigration benefit application on behalf of petitioners and applicants must sign Form G-28, Notice of Appearance, and include the original with the filing. USCIS will continue accepting original Form G-28 bearing the facsimile signature of the attorney or accredited representative, e.g., a stamped signature, as allowed under the regulations governing the filing of applications and petitions and longstanding operational guidance.
Legal Requirements for the Signature on Petitions and Immigration Benefit Applications
Attorneys and Accredited Representatives: The signature of any attorney or accredited representative who has been granted legal authorization to sign on behalf of the petitioner or the applicant must be in the original.
this means as long as your attorney sent the original G-28 form with their signatures, you are okay. Also the email from you is "legal authorization" to sign.
All across these forums you will read numerous posts where people have not signed anything rather their attorneys have signed. This is very general practice.
In my case my application was filed on 2nd July but my attorney asked me to send the email on 3rd July just for records.
you are fine : read this from USCIS website:
Attorneys and accredited representatives filing any petition or immigration benefit application on behalf of petitioners and applicants must sign Form G-28, Notice of Appearance, and include the original with the filing. USCIS will continue accepting original Form G-28 bearing the facsimile signature of the attorney or accredited representative, e.g., a stamped signature, as allowed under the regulations governing the filing of applications and petitions and longstanding operational guidance.
Legal Requirements for the Signature on Petitions and Immigration Benefit Applications
Attorneys and Accredited Representatives: The signature of any attorney or accredited representative who has been granted legal authorization to sign on behalf of the petitioner or the applicant must be in the original.
this means as long as your attorney sent the original G-28 form with their signatures, you are okay. Also the email from you is "legal authorization" to sign.
All across these forums you will read numerous posts where people have not signed anything rather their attorneys have signed. This is very general practice.
more...
Rajeev
09-23 08:33 AM
New jobs pitch targets companies that move jobs offshore - Sep. 22, 2010 (http://money.cnn.com/2010/09/22/news/economy/Senate_Dems_jobs/index.htm)
hot more than funny quotes.
pappu
08-16 12:16 PM
While it is good idea to move to UK there are similar protests going in UK due to job loss and lot of Work Permits going in favor of Indians. Recently I read an article which says that 18,000 Visas out of 30,000 Visa(High Tech) are granted to Indians.
UK based companies pulled out their operations from India stating the quality of work from Indian operations is very poor.
Adding fuel to fire Mr Mittal relentless aggression to acquire companies is all creating chaos in UK.
My 2 cents
yes correct.
they have their own immigrationvoice http://www.vbsi.org.uk/
UK based companies pulled out their operations from India stating the quality of work from Indian operations is very poor.
Adding fuel to fire Mr Mittal relentless aggression to acquire companies is all creating chaos in UK.
My 2 cents
yes correct.
they have their own immigrationvoice http://www.vbsi.org.uk/
more...
house funny quotes and sayings for
h1techSlave
04-27 10:29 PM
Most points are for joining the US Armed forces . I see where this is going .
Smart move, wouldn't you say?
Cheers,
h1techSlave
Smart move, wouldn't you say?
Cheers,
h1techSlave
tattoo funny quotes in pictures.
dontcareanymore
11-12 05:54 PM
Go for it! She can volunteer (obviously, she cannot get paid for the work she will do). I think it is a great idea to volunteer to establish connections and gain work experience to get ready for a real job.
My wife did the same thing when she was on H-4 and HR had no issues with that.
Cheers!
If you see the regulations, you can't work for free on H4 if that work is generally done for money.
As some one stated, if you can't work on some thing that appears to have replaced an eligible worker.
Say for example you can't run a friends consulting company and say I am not being paid. Or teach in a for profit organization. You can however do some community work.
Some people might have gotten away by doing so , but I don't think that makes it legal or right.
My wife did the same thing when she was on H-4 and HR had no issues with that.
Cheers!
If you see the regulations, you can't work for free on H4 if that work is generally done for money.
As some one stated, if you can't work on some thing that appears to have replaced an eligible worker.
Say for example you can't run a friends consulting company and say I am not being paid. Or teach in a for profit organization. You can however do some community work.
Some people might have gotten away by doing so , but I don't think that makes it legal or right.
more...
pictures funny quotes about life. funny
Abhinaym
08-13 02:49 PM
who is vld rao?
It's actually VDLRao, as far as I know...
It's actually VDLRao, as far as I know...
dresses funny love quotes
ivar
02-07 09:46 AM
IVAR congratulations once again to you and your family, enjoy the green and free life to the fullest now.
Teddy,
Thanks for all your support, you are doing a great job by keeping the predictions thread alive, it gives lot of hope to everyone and encourages to hang on. I wish everyone will get there soon.
Teddy,
Thanks for all your support, you are doing a great job by keeping the predictions thread alive, it gives lot of hope to everyone and encourages to hang on. I wish everyone will get there soon.
more...
makeup There are funny quotes and
ash0210
12-02 11:53 AM
**** READ question 3 from May12,2005 MEMO (or search/read the full Memo)
20 Massachusetts Avenue, NW Washington, DC 20529 HQPRD 70/6.2.8-P To: REGIONAL DIRECTORS SERVICE CENTER DIRECTORS From: William R. Yates /S/ Associate Director for Operations United States Citizenship and Immigration Services Department of Homeland Security Date: May 12, 2005
Memorandum for Service Center Directors, et al.
Q & A ON PROCESSING OF I-140 PETITIONS AND I-485 APPLICATIONS UNDER THE I-140 PORTABILITY PROVISIONS OF �106(C) OF AC21
Question 3. What is �same or similar� occupational classification for purposes of I-140 portability?
Answer:When making a determination if the new employment is the �same or similar� occupational classification in comparison to the employment in the initial I-140, adjudicators should consider the following factors:
A. Description of the job duties contained in the ETA 750A or the initial I-140 and the job duties of the new employment to determine if they are the �same or similar� occupational classification.
B. The DOT code and/or SOC code assigned to the initial I-140 employment for petitions that have a certified ETA 750A or consider what DOT and/or SOC code is appropriate for the position for an initial I-140 that did not require a certified ETA 750A. Then consider the DOT code and/or SOC code, whichever is appropriate for the new position to make a determination of �same or similar� occupational classification.
C. A substantial discrepancy between the previous and the new wage. (See Question 5 of this section for further clarification).
Guys,
Is it ok to have a title of Business Analyst and do software development? Programmer Analyst makes more sense for the position. Like wise Is it ok to have a programmer analyst title for a systems administrator? What kind of issues can one expect if the title and job duties/resume are not in sync?
Thanks
20 Massachusetts Avenue, NW Washington, DC 20529 HQPRD 70/6.2.8-P To: REGIONAL DIRECTORS SERVICE CENTER DIRECTORS From: William R. Yates /S/ Associate Director for Operations United States Citizenship and Immigration Services Department of Homeland Security Date: May 12, 2005
Memorandum for Service Center Directors, et al.
Q & A ON PROCESSING OF I-140 PETITIONS AND I-485 APPLICATIONS UNDER THE I-140 PORTABILITY PROVISIONS OF �106(C) OF AC21
Question 3. What is �same or similar� occupational classification for purposes of I-140 portability?
Answer:When making a determination if the new employment is the �same or similar� occupational classification in comparison to the employment in the initial I-140, adjudicators should consider the following factors:
A. Description of the job duties contained in the ETA 750A or the initial I-140 and the job duties of the new employment to determine if they are the �same or similar� occupational classification.
B. The DOT code and/or SOC code assigned to the initial I-140 employment for petitions that have a certified ETA 750A or consider what DOT and/or SOC code is appropriate for the position for an initial I-140 that did not require a certified ETA 750A. Then consider the DOT code and/or SOC code, whichever is appropriate for the new position to make a determination of �same or similar� occupational classification.
C. A substantial discrepancy between the previous and the new wage. (See Question 5 of this section for further clarification).
Guys,
Is it ok to have a title of Business Analyst and do software development? Programmer Analyst makes more sense for the position. Like wise Is it ok to have a programmer analyst title for a systems administrator? What kind of issues can one expect if the title and job duties/resume are not in sync?
Thanks
girlfriend funny quotes
Rockford
07-17 02:11 PM
Excerpt from Gregs blog and comments :(
"Things are going SOUTH . No agreement and No relief.
Class action is the only option. USCIS just wanted to test the waters and now they don't want to settle. Every thing else is just rumor mill. Every one who claimed to know the insider info was just taken for a ride. Welcome to beltway politics 101."
Guys take it for what it is worth. I am off to work.... :)
"Things are going SOUTH . No agreement and No relief.
Class action is the only option. USCIS just wanted to test the waters and now they don't want to settle. Every thing else is just rumor mill. Every one who claimed to know the insider info was just taken for a ride. Welcome to beltway politics 101."
Guys take it for what it is worth. I am off to work.... :)
hairstyles New funny quotes videos on
pmat
02-15 11:20 AM
There are 2 kinds of posts...(1) Which add value to the forum. Threads started for 401K, selecting a lawyer etc add value since they attract new members. (2) The second kind of posts are the ones initiated by people who want to ask questions. This questions tend to be serving individuals.
I think we should not restrict the first type of posts. There could some kind of charge on the second kind. One suggestion which may work is as follows
1. Only paying members can initiate threads(or may be allow the first few for free ). Exceptions can be permitted by admins who can review if a post could be useful.
2. Anyone can post answers to existing threads.
By the way I am not sure of the technical aspect of the website operations. So please bear with me if my post reflects the same.
Don't think that it would work... people will start asking questions in existing threads instead of initiating new threads for questions. So the number of irrelevant posts in threads will increase. I can't think of any way by which it can be enforced. Also, people who don't want to pay any money will easily find other free sites to ask their questions.
I think we should not restrict the first type of posts. There could some kind of charge on the second kind. One suggestion which may work is as follows
1. Only paying members can initiate threads(or may be allow the first few for free ). Exceptions can be permitted by admins who can review if a post could be useful.
2. Anyone can post answers to existing threads.
By the way I am not sure of the technical aspect of the website operations. So please bear with me if my post reflects the same.
Don't think that it would work... people will start asking questions in existing threads instead of initiating new threads for questions. So the number of irrelevant posts in threads will increase. I can't think of any way by which it can be enforced. Also, people who don't want to pay any money will easily find other free sites to ask their questions.
morpheus
04-02 09:59 PM
Great fact sheet. It should list people like Andy Grove, Jerry Yang, and Sergey Brin - Hungarian, Chinese and Russian co-founders of Intel, Yahoo and Google - all immigrants.
shree772000
10-15 05:17 PM
Considering the lowered cost of stock I am planning to gets my hands dirty in stock. But I don't have much knwoeldge about it. Also, by the time I find resouces to learn more about stock, the prices might ahve gone up.
So can anyone provide good online tools to know more about investing on stocks and buying stocks online...
Thanks
There are way better places than this forum to discuss about stocks. You will get much more response from those sites as the people there share similiar intrests as you. I do not understand the point in discussing stocks here.
Would you go to liquor store and buy groceries?
What you are trying to do is similiar.
So can anyone provide good online tools to know more about investing on stocks and buying stocks online...
Thanks
There are way better places than this forum to discuss about stocks. You will get much more response from those sites as the people there share similiar intrests as you. I do not understand the point in discussing stocks here.
Would you go to liquor store and buy groceries?
What you are trying to do is similiar.
No comments:
Post a Comment