TeddyKoochu
10-15 08:29 AM
Teddy
Is there any source on any site which gives idea that they are thinking of it. Since we have close to 800 members who joined for filling 485 when date is not current we can ask IV core to make this campaign officially and push for this one. Even we know 800 are not a good strength still it may help if govt is willing
gc_on_demand - Here are the links from other sites.
From Ron Gotcher's Forum
http://www.immigration-information.com/forums/general-immigration-questions/10321-uscis-considering-permit-pre-filing-i-485-applications-approved-i-140-a.html
I could not find anything on any official site. There are blogs going on all popular immigration sites on this topic.
I believe that since the agencies are thinking about this provision (Even though this has been in the news since a year) has better likelihood of being implemented.
skgs200,aksharan, cbpds the EAD / AP part appears to be disputed nobody is clear on this. Yes there maybe a fee for this but it does bring us a step closer.
Is there any source on any site which gives idea that they are thinking of it. Since we have close to 800 members who joined for filling 485 when date is not current we can ask IV core to make this campaign officially and push for this one. Even we know 800 are not a good strength still it may help if govt is willing
gc_on_demand - Here are the links from other sites.
From Ron Gotcher's Forum
http://www.immigration-information.com/forums/general-immigration-questions/10321-uscis-considering-permit-pre-filing-i-485-applications-approved-i-140-a.html
I could not find anything on any official site. There are blogs going on all popular immigration sites on this topic.
I believe that since the agencies are thinking about this provision (Even though this has been in the news since a year) has better likelihood of being implemented.
skgs200,aksharan, cbpds the EAD / AP part appears to be disputed nobody is clear on this. Yes there maybe a fee for this but it does bring us a step closer.
wallpaper chicas sexis de guatemala. www chicas sexis y calientes
dpp
02-21 01:25 PM
Dec 21, 2006
For those that can see the Feb updates can you please post what date they are showing for:
I-129 ( H1-B Speciality Occupation Extension of stay)
Thanks
For those that can see the Feb updates can you please post what date they are showing for:
I-129 ( H1-B Speciality Occupation Extension of stay)
Thanks
chanduv23
09-10 07:54 AM
Though there are companies that do have ethics - most of these people have exploited their employees and continue to behave unethically - they drive expensive cars and behave with arrogance on face of their employees who are working hard and earning for these cayotes.
These cayotes have this love affair with Attorneys - and they have this common protocol on how to handle their employee.
As long as the community is scared - wants to lie low and not want to rise - we will still be in this situation.
IV HAS PROVIDED AN EXCELLENT PLATFORM FOR ALL THE PEOPLE TO COME FORWARD.
I would recommend that IV members who are affected by such cayotes must utilize the resources IV has provided and try to get more media attention.
I encourage people to do youtube videos using hidden cameras when their employers are trying to talk or do dirty deals.
Write blogs, make all this visible.
These cayotes have this love affair with Attorneys - and they have this common protocol on how to handle their employee.
As long as the community is scared - wants to lie low and not want to rise - we will still be in this situation.
IV HAS PROVIDED AN EXCELLENT PLATFORM FOR ALL THE PEOPLE TO COME FORWARD.
I would recommend that IV members who are affected by such cayotes must utilize the resources IV has provided and try to get more media attention.
I encourage people to do youtube videos using hidden cameras when their employers are trying to talk or do dirty deals.
Write blogs, make all this visible.
2011 chicas sexis de guatemala.
Berkeleybee
02-14 03:06 PM
Thanks for the link to the 2005 report, Arihant.
Will look for stats for the next iteration of the presentation.
Will look for stats for the next iteration of the presentation.
more...
abhijitp
02-15 10:49 AM
^^
santb1975
02-13 04:57 PM
We have to do this
Lets do it for us!
Lets do it for us!
more...
eastindia
01-06 09:44 AM
I understand that this bill many not pass or even move any forward. I thought two senior senators from both parties showing interest in this topic is a great opportunity for IV to present our case in a different light. We have been clamoring about the difficulties we are facing because of the present delay in green card processing. Unfortunately this is only our problem and no one else really has to be bothered about it. If we present our case in a mutually beneficial point of view perhaps some of the politicians will have little more interest in our situation. Remember JFK’s famous words…”Ask not what the country can do for you….” If we write to Senators Kerry and Lugar now, even if the bill does not pass, they will consider our situation slightly differently next time CIR or another immigration bill is introduced in the congress. I think IV ought to present our case in all different angles possible rather than the one way approach of expecting mercy in our situation. Most importantly, I think the premise of the proposed Kerry/Lugar bill is very much applicable the folks in IV. Aren’t many people in this forum waiting for an opportunity to do some business on their own? That is how new immigrants in America have always been. We shouldn’t be any different. I am sure we cannot bring in the capital that senators are looking for. But why don’t they view us slightly differently?
If it is a great opportunity, why dont everyone work on it. Start with investing in IV and taking part in it. IV is you and me.
75% of us in this forum do not qualify for the legislation being proposed here!
You are saying we folks cannot even invest 100K into business?
Even if I agree with you for a second. According to you out of 50 thousand IV members 10 thousand members qualify for this legislation. 10 thousand is a very big number.
Where are these ten thousand members? Even if these 10 thousand members invest $25 per month to lobby this bill it will be 250K per month to lobby. This is a huge amount and they can lobby this bill easily. The problem I see in IV is that out of 50 thousand people only 50 people have $25 per month to invest to lobby their own issues. Rest everyone is just sitting here and only contributing opinions.
If it is a great opportunity, why dont everyone work on it. Start with investing in IV and taking part in it. IV is you and me.
75% of us in this forum do not qualify for the legislation being proposed here!
You are saying we folks cannot even invest 100K into business?
Even if I agree with you for a second. According to you out of 50 thousand IV members 10 thousand members qualify for this legislation. 10 thousand is a very big number.
Where are these ten thousand members? Even if these 10 thousand members invest $25 per month to lobby this bill it will be 250K per month to lobby. This is a huge amount and they can lobby this bill easily. The problem I see in IV is that out of 50 thousand people only 50 people have $25 per month to invest to lobby their own issues. Rest everyone is just sitting here and only contributing opinions.
2010 chicas sexis de guatemala. chicas sexis de barillas. barillas de hierro.
pappu
08-11 01:12 PM
Immigration Voice would like to thank its members for their continued support and dedication. Your contributions and volunteer efforts will enable us to work towards solving the issues that we all face during our employment based green card process.
The 2009 Ombudsman report released at the end of June 09, confirms the grim future that we conveyed to our members in the last newsletter. If no action is taken by the legislature, heavily retrogressed nationalities of India and China have an upwards of 10 to 20 years of wait ahead of them. The time to act is now. We cannot sit back and relax and hope for something good to happen. We have to act in order for favorable things to happen. To that end, we would like to impress upon our members the significance of our latest Advocacy Action Item
================================================== ====================================
IV Advocacy Action Item August 2009
The future is not in the hands of fate, but in ours. The summer August recess is here and the lawmakers are back in their constituencies. This is an opportunity for us to meet with them and address our issues and present solutions in preparation for the upcoming CIR. We must push for our agenda to get our provisions in the base bill as CIR is being drafted currently. If we do not get our provisions in the base bill then it is much harder to get them attached to the bill in the form of amendments.
IV therefore requests its members, to call up and start scheduling lawmaker meetings NOW. Please take appointments with your local lawmakers of both houses of Congress. You can find more information about how to reach your lawmaker in this guide http://immigrationvoice.org/media/HowTo_Guide_MeetLawmakers.doc
We are organizing national and state level calls to coordinate this effort. You will be given detailed instructions on how to schedule meetings, what to carry, and most importantly present the IV community’s agenda and present solutions. We have scheduled two nationwide calls on August 11 and 12 to get everyone started on this action item. You can find the details of these calls including the dial in numbers from your state chapter or on IV’s Donor Forum.
To that end, we have created multiple documents and support material that will go into your “Advocacy Packet” for you to carry for these lawmaker meetings. We have also created a Lawmaker Appointment Book http://immigrationvoice.org/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=80&Itemi d=36 where you will post the details of your lawmaker appointment and we will provide you with the advocacy packet. The idea is to at least have 2 or more people when going to any meeting with the lawmaker. More details of this action item can be found on this thread : http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/forum85-action-items-for-everyone/294611-iv-action-item-advocacy-month-august-2009-a.html
In summary there are three parts to this action item
1) Please start taking the appointments with your lawmakers now. . Once you take the appointment, update the details in the Lawmaker Appointment Book that is available on http://immigrationvoice.org/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=80&Itemi d=36 and you will receive the Advocacy Packet that you will need to take to the meetings.
2) Please attend any one of the following calls to get more details on this action item. These calls will also provide an opportunity for you to ask questions and get updates on CIR.
Call 1:
Tuesday August 11, 8 PM EST
Call 2
Wednesday August 12, 9 PM EST
3) Once you have your meetings, please email the details and feedback to info@immigrationvoice.org to help us follow up with their DC office with your feedback. Your detailed feedback will also help other members in their upcoming meetings with their representatives.
We must push ourselves harder and stronger in this month if we have to see the light at the end of the tunnel. Advocacy is an integral, essential and important part of democracy and we must exercise our first amendment right to demonstrate that we not only are highly skilled and are high income individuals but we are truly the best and the brightest Future Americans.
================================================== ========================================
Democracy, Advocacy and You
Each one of you can be an advocate for the change you seek. Advocacy is not just for lawyers and lobbyists. You do not need to be a member of a bar association or hold a JD (law degree). Advocacy is not something that can only be done by the wealthy and the powerful. The power of American democracy lies in the right to petition the government in a peaceful manner to redress grievances and advocate for change. It is a right given to every person on US soil by the first amendment in the constitution. Peaceful and legitimate advocacy is an essential part of a democratic society. There is nothing to be afraid of. Just because you call your local lawmaker’s office or send them an email or a fax or meet them to make your case, your pending green card is not going to be in jeopardy. We must understand that we cannot talk about frustrations and ideas on the message boards and forums without following through on those words by meeting our lawmakers. Words without action are futile.
Without any legislative action from congress, we all have a decade plus wait lying ahead of us. The retrogression is a reality and the nationality doesn’t matter. The priority date of your EB category doesn’t matter. Time to act is now. As the summer recess approaches for the congress in the month of august, the lawmakers will be back in their constituencies. This gives us an opportunity to meet with them as their constituents and make our case for our provisions to be included in the upcoming Comprehensive Immigration Reform. We have prepared an advocacy packet for you. Detailed instructions on how to set up meetings with your members of congress are included in it along with the supporting documents to make our case for Employment Based Green Card reforms.
Immigration Voice Advocacy is a grassroots effort. Each one of you must become an advocate for the change we seek. Together, we will bring America out of the current economic recession and strengthen the national security. As a highly educated and highly skilled future American living in this country legally, we must petition the lawmakers to address our issues and present the solutions. We hope that you put action behind your words and passion.
Thank You
Immigration Voice
The 2009 Ombudsman report released at the end of June 09, confirms the grim future that we conveyed to our members in the last newsletter. If no action is taken by the legislature, heavily retrogressed nationalities of India and China have an upwards of 10 to 20 years of wait ahead of them. The time to act is now. We cannot sit back and relax and hope for something good to happen. We have to act in order for favorable things to happen. To that end, we would like to impress upon our members the significance of our latest Advocacy Action Item
================================================== ====================================
IV Advocacy Action Item August 2009
The future is not in the hands of fate, but in ours. The summer August recess is here and the lawmakers are back in their constituencies. This is an opportunity for us to meet with them and address our issues and present solutions in preparation for the upcoming CIR. We must push for our agenda to get our provisions in the base bill as CIR is being drafted currently. If we do not get our provisions in the base bill then it is much harder to get them attached to the bill in the form of amendments.
IV therefore requests its members, to call up and start scheduling lawmaker meetings NOW. Please take appointments with your local lawmakers of both houses of Congress. You can find more information about how to reach your lawmaker in this guide http://immigrationvoice.org/media/HowTo_Guide_MeetLawmakers.doc
We are organizing national and state level calls to coordinate this effort. You will be given detailed instructions on how to schedule meetings, what to carry, and most importantly present the IV community’s agenda and present solutions. We have scheduled two nationwide calls on August 11 and 12 to get everyone started on this action item. You can find the details of these calls including the dial in numbers from your state chapter or on IV’s Donor Forum.
To that end, we have created multiple documents and support material that will go into your “Advocacy Packet” for you to carry for these lawmaker meetings. We have also created a Lawmaker Appointment Book http://immigrationvoice.org/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=80&Itemi d=36 where you will post the details of your lawmaker appointment and we will provide you with the advocacy packet. The idea is to at least have 2 or more people when going to any meeting with the lawmaker. More details of this action item can be found on this thread : http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/forum85-action-items-for-everyone/294611-iv-action-item-advocacy-month-august-2009-a.html
In summary there are three parts to this action item
1) Please start taking the appointments with your lawmakers now. . Once you take the appointment, update the details in the Lawmaker Appointment Book that is available on http://immigrationvoice.org/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=80&Itemi d=36 and you will receive the Advocacy Packet that you will need to take to the meetings.
2) Please attend any one of the following calls to get more details on this action item. These calls will also provide an opportunity for you to ask questions and get updates on CIR.
Call 1:
Tuesday August 11, 8 PM EST
Call 2
Wednesday August 12, 9 PM EST
3) Once you have your meetings, please email the details and feedback to info@immigrationvoice.org to help us follow up with their DC office with your feedback. Your detailed feedback will also help other members in their upcoming meetings with their representatives.
We must push ourselves harder and stronger in this month if we have to see the light at the end of the tunnel. Advocacy is an integral, essential and important part of democracy and we must exercise our first amendment right to demonstrate that we not only are highly skilled and are high income individuals but we are truly the best and the brightest Future Americans.
================================================== ========================================
Democracy, Advocacy and You
Each one of you can be an advocate for the change you seek. Advocacy is not just for lawyers and lobbyists. You do not need to be a member of a bar association or hold a JD (law degree). Advocacy is not something that can only be done by the wealthy and the powerful. The power of American democracy lies in the right to petition the government in a peaceful manner to redress grievances and advocate for change. It is a right given to every person on US soil by the first amendment in the constitution. Peaceful and legitimate advocacy is an essential part of a democratic society. There is nothing to be afraid of. Just because you call your local lawmaker’s office or send them an email or a fax or meet them to make your case, your pending green card is not going to be in jeopardy. We must understand that we cannot talk about frustrations and ideas on the message boards and forums without following through on those words by meeting our lawmakers. Words without action are futile.
Without any legislative action from congress, we all have a decade plus wait lying ahead of us. The retrogression is a reality and the nationality doesn’t matter. The priority date of your EB category doesn’t matter. Time to act is now. As the summer recess approaches for the congress in the month of august, the lawmakers will be back in their constituencies. This gives us an opportunity to meet with them as their constituents and make our case for our provisions to be included in the upcoming Comprehensive Immigration Reform. We have prepared an advocacy packet for you. Detailed instructions on how to set up meetings with your members of congress are included in it along with the supporting documents to make our case for Employment Based Green Card reforms.
Immigration Voice Advocacy is a grassroots effort. Each one of you must become an advocate for the change we seek. Together, we will bring America out of the current economic recession and strengthen the national security. As a highly educated and highly skilled future American living in this country legally, we must petition the lawmakers to address our issues and present the solutions. We hope that you put action behind your words and passion.
Thank You
Immigration Voice
more...
Blog Feeds
02-01 08:30 AM
Summary
(LINK TO FULL REPORT BELOW)
Congress created the H-1B program in 1990 to enable U.S. employers to hire temporary, foreign workers in specialty occupations. The law capped the number of H-1B visas issued per fiscal year at 65,000. Since then, the cap has fluctuated with legislative changes. Congress asked GAO to assess the impact of the cap on the ability of domestic companies to innovate, while ensuring that U.S. workers are not disadvantaged. In response, GAO examined what is known about (1) employer demand for H-1B workers; (2) how the cap affects employer costs and decisions to move operations overseas; (3) H-1B worker characteristics and the potential impact of raising the cap; and (4) how well requirements of the H-1B program protect U.S. workers. GAO analyzed data from 4 federal agencies; interviewed agency officials, experts, and H-1B employers; and reviewed agency documents and literature.
In most years, demand for new H-1B workers exceeded the cap: From 2000 to 2009, demand for new H-1B workers tended to exceed the cap, as measured by the numbers of initial petitions submitted by employers who are subject to the cap. There is no way to precisely determine the level of any unmet demand among employers, since they tend to stop submitting (and the Department of Homeland Security stops tracking) petitions once the cap is reached each year. When we consider all initial petitions, including those from universities and research institutions that are not subject to the cap, we find that demand for new H-1B workers is largely driven by a small number of employers. Over the decade, over 14 percent of all initial petitions were submitted by cap-exempt employers, and only a few employers (fewer than 1 percent) garnered over one-quarter of all H-1B approvals. Most interviewed companies said the H-1B cap and program created costs, but were not factors in their decisions to move R&D overseas: The 34 H-1B employers GAO interviewed reported that the cap has created some additional costs, though the cap's impact depended on the size and maturity of the company. For example, in years when visas were denied by the cap, most large firms reported finding other (sometimes more costly) ways to hire their preferred job candidates. On the other hand, small firms were more likely to fill their positions with different candidates, which they said resulted in delays and sometimes economic losses, particularly for firms in rapidly changing technology fields. Limitations in agency data and systems hinder tracking the cap and H-1B workers over time: The total number of H-1B workers in the U.S. at any one time--and information about the length of their stay--is unknown, because (1) data systems among the various agencies that process such individuals are not linked so individuals cannot be readily tracked, and (2) H-1B workers are not assigned a unique identifier that would allow for tracking them over time--particularly if and when their visa status changes. Restricted agency oversight and statutory changes weaken protections for U.S. workers: Elements of the H-1B program that could serve as worker protections--such as the requirement to pay prevailing wages, the visa's temporary status, and the cap itself--are weakened by several factors. First, program oversight is fragmented and restricted. Second, the H-1B program lacks a legal provision for holding employers accountable to program requirements when they obtain H-1B workers through a staffing company. Third, statutory changes made to the H-1B program have, in combination and in effect, increased the pool of H-1B workers beyond the cap and lowered the bar for eligibility. Taken together, the multifaceted challenges identified in this report show that the H-1B program, as currently structured, may not be used to its full potential and may be detrimental in some cases. This report offers several matters for congressional consideration, including that Congress re-examine key H-1B program provisions and make appropriate changes as needed. GAO also recommends that the Departments of Homeland Security and Labor take steps to improve efficiency, flexibility, and monitoring of the H-1B program. Homeland Security disagreed with two recommendations and one matter, citing logistical and other challenges; however, we believe such challenges can be overcome. Labor did not respond to our recommendations.
Recommendations
Our recommendations from this work are listed below with a Contact for more information. Status will change from "In process" to "Open," "Closed - implemented," or "Closed - not implemented" based on our follow up work.
Director:Andrew SherrillTeam:Government Accountability Office: Education, Workforce, and Income SecurityPhone:(202) 512-7252
Matters for Congressional Consideration
Recommendation: To ensure that the H-1B program continues to meet the needs of businesses in a global economy while maintaining a balance of protections for U.S. workers, Congress may wish to consider reviewing the merits and shortcomings of key program provisions and making appropriate changes as needed. Such a review may include, but would not necessarily be limited to (1) the qualifications required for workers eligible under the H-1B program, (2) exemptions from the cap, (3) the appropriateness of H-1B hiring by staffing companies, (4) the level of the cap, and (5) the role the program should play in the U.S. immigration system in relationship to permanent residency.
Status: In process
Comments: When we determine what steps the Congress has taken, we will provide updated information.
Recommendation: To reduce duplication and fragmentation in the administration and oversight of the H-1B application process, consistent with past GAO matters for congressional consideration, Congress may wish to consider eliminating the requirement that employers first submit a Labor Condition Application (LCA) to the Department of Labor for certification, and require instead that employers submit this application along with the I-129 application to the Department of Homeland Security's U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services for review.
Status: In process
Comments: When we determine what steps the Congress has taken, we will provide updated information.
Recommendation: To improve the Department of Labor's ability to investigate and enforce employer compliance with H-1B program requirements, Congress may wish to consider granting the department subpoena power to obtain employer records during investigations under the H-1B program.
Status: In process
Comments: When we determine what steps the Congress has taken, we will provide updated information.
Recommendation: To help ensure the full protection of H-1B workers employed through staffing companies, Congress may wish to consider holding the employer where an H-1B visa holder performs work accountable for meeting program requirements to the same extent as the employer that submitted the LCA form.
Status: In process
Comments: When we determine what steps the Congress has taken, we will provide updated information.
Recommendations for Executive Action
Recommendation: To help ensure that the number of new H-1B workers who are subject to the cap--both entering the United States and changing to H-1B status within the United States--does not exceed the cap each year, U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services should take steps to improve its tracking of the number of approved H-1B applications and the number of issued visas under the cap by fully leveraging the transformation effort currently under way, which involves the adoption of an electronic petition processing system that will be linked to the Department of State's tracking system. Such steps should ensure that linkages to the Department of State's tracking system will provide Homeland Security with timely access to data on visa issuances, and that mechanisms for tracking petitions and visas against the cap are incorporated into U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services' business rules to be developed for the new electronic petition system.
Agency Affected: Department of Homeland Security
Status: In process
Comments: When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.
Recommendation: To address business concerns without undermining program integrity, U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services should, to the extent permitted by its existing statutory authority, explore options for increasing the flexibility of the application process for H-1B employers, such as (1) allowing employers to rank their applications for visa candidates so that they can hire the best qualified worker for the jobs in highest need; (2) distributing the applications granted under the annual cap in allotments throughout the year (e.g. quarterly); and (3) establishing a system whereby businesses with a strong track-record of compliance with H-1B regulations may use a streamlined application process.
Agency Affected: Department of Homeland Security
Status: In process
Comments: When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.
Recommendation: To improve the transparency and oversight of the posting requirement on the Labor Condition Application (LCA), as part of its current oversight role, the Employment and Training Administration should develop and maintain a centralized Web site, accessible to the public, where businesses must post notice of the intent to hire H-1B workers. Such notices should continue to specify the job category and worksite location noted on the LCA and required by statute on current noncentralized postings.
Agency Affected: Department of Labor
Status: In process
Comments: When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.
Recommendation: To improve the efficiency and effectiveness of its investigations of employer compliance with H-1B requirements, the Employment and Training Administration should provide Labor's Wage and Hour Division searchable access to the LCA database.
Agency Affected: Department of Labor
Status: In process
Comments: When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.
VIEW FULL REPORT (http://www.gao.gov/new.items/d1126.pdf)
More... (http://ashwinsharma.com/2011/01/25/h-1b-visa-program-reforms-are-needed-to-minimize-the-risks-and-costs-of-current-program.aspx?ref=rss)
(LINK TO FULL REPORT BELOW)
Congress created the H-1B program in 1990 to enable U.S. employers to hire temporary, foreign workers in specialty occupations. The law capped the number of H-1B visas issued per fiscal year at 65,000. Since then, the cap has fluctuated with legislative changes. Congress asked GAO to assess the impact of the cap on the ability of domestic companies to innovate, while ensuring that U.S. workers are not disadvantaged. In response, GAO examined what is known about (1) employer demand for H-1B workers; (2) how the cap affects employer costs and decisions to move operations overseas; (3) H-1B worker characteristics and the potential impact of raising the cap; and (4) how well requirements of the H-1B program protect U.S. workers. GAO analyzed data from 4 federal agencies; interviewed agency officials, experts, and H-1B employers; and reviewed agency documents and literature.
In most years, demand for new H-1B workers exceeded the cap: From 2000 to 2009, demand for new H-1B workers tended to exceed the cap, as measured by the numbers of initial petitions submitted by employers who are subject to the cap. There is no way to precisely determine the level of any unmet demand among employers, since they tend to stop submitting (and the Department of Homeland Security stops tracking) petitions once the cap is reached each year. When we consider all initial petitions, including those from universities and research institutions that are not subject to the cap, we find that demand for new H-1B workers is largely driven by a small number of employers. Over the decade, over 14 percent of all initial petitions were submitted by cap-exempt employers, and only a few employers (fewer than 1 percent) garnered over one-quarter of all H-1B approvals. Most interviewed companies said the H-1B cap and program created costs, but were not factors in their decisions to move R&D overseas: The 34 H-1B employers GAO interviewed reported that the cap has created some additional costs, though the cap's impact depended on the size and maturity of the company. For example, in years when visas were denied by the cap, most large firms reported finding other (sometimes more costly) ways to hire their preferred job candidates. On the other hand, small firms were more likely to fill their positions with different candidates, which they said resulted in delays and sometimes economic losses, particularly for firms in rapidly changing technology fields. Limitations in agency data and systems hinder tracking the cap and H-1B workers over time: The total number of H-1B workers in the U.S. at any one time--and information about the length of their stay--is unknown, because (1) data systems among the various agencies that process such individuals are not linked so individuals cannot be readily tracked, and (2) H-1B workers are not assigned a unique identifier that would allow for tracking them over time--particularly if and when their visa status changes. Restricted agency oversight and statutory changes weaken protections for U.S. workers: Elements of the H-1B program that could serve as worker protections--such as the requirement to pay prevailing wages, the visa's temporary status, and the cap itself--are weakened by several factors. First, program oversight is fragmented and restricted. Second, the H-1B program lacks a legal provision for holding employers accountable to program requirements when they obtain H-1B workers through a staffing company. Third, statutory changes made to the H-1B program have, in combination and in effect, increased the pool of H-1B workers beyond the cap and lowered the bar for eligibility. Taken together, the multifaceted challenges identified in this report show that the H-1B program, as currently structured, may not be used to its full potential and may be detrimental in some cases. This report offers several matters for congressional consideration, including that Congress re-examine key H-1B program provisions and make appropriate changes as needed. GAO also recommends that the Departments of Homeland Security and Labor take steps to improve efficiency, flexibility, and monitoring of the H-1B program. Homeland Security disagreed with two recommendations and one matter, citing logistical and other challenges; however, we believe such challenges can be overcome. Labor did not respond to our recommendations.
Recommendations
Our recommendations from this work are listed below with a Contact for more information. Status will change from "In process" to "Open," "Closed - implemented," or "Closed - not implemented" based on our follow up work.
Director:Andrew SherrillTeam:Government Accountability Office: Education, Workforce, and Income SecurityPhone:(202) 512-7252
Matters for Congressional Consideration
Recommendation: To ensure that the H-1B program continues to meet the needs of businesses in a global economy while maintaining a balance of protections for U.S. workers, Congress may wish to consider reviewing the merits and shortcomings of key program provisions and making appropriate changes as needed. Such a review may include, but would not necessarily be limited to (1) the qualifications required for workers eligible under the H-1B program, (2) exemptions from the cap, (3) the appropriateness of H-1B hiring by staffing companies, (4) the level of the cap, and (5) the role the program should play in the U.S. immigration system in relationship to permanent residency.
Status: In process
Comments: When we determine what steps the Congress has taken, we will provide updated information.
Recommendation: To reduce duplication and fragmentation in the administration and oversight of the H-1B application process, consistent with past GAO matters for congressional consideration, Congress may wish to consider eliminating the requirement that employers first submit a Labor Condition Application (LCA) to the Department of Labor for certification, and require instead that employers submit this application along with the I-129 application to the Department of Homeland Security's U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services for review.
Status: In process
Comments: When we determine what steps the Congress has taken, we will provide updated information.
Recommendation: To improve the Department of Labor's ability to investigate and enforce employer compliance with H-1B program requirements, Congress may wish to consider granting the department subpoena power to obtain employer records during investigations under the H-1B program.
Status: In process
Comments: When we determine what steps the Congress has taken, we will provide updated information.
Recommendation: To help ensure the full protection of H-1B workers employed through staffing companies, Congress may wish to consider holding the employer where an H-1B visa holder performs work accountable for meeting program requirements to the same extent as the employer that submitted the LCA form.
Status: In process
Comments: When we determine what steps the Congress has taken, we will provide updated information.
Recommendations for Executive Action
Recommendation: To help ensure that the number of new H-1B workers who are subject to the cap--both entering the United States and changing to H-1B status within the United States--does not exceed the cap each year, U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services should take steps to improve its tracking of the number of approved H-1B applications and the number of issued visas under the cap by fully leveraging the transformation effort currently under way, which involves the adoption of an electronic petition processing system that will be linked to the Department of State's tracking system. Such steps should ensure that linkages to the Department of State's tracking system will provide Homeland Security with timely access to data on visa issuances, and that mechanisms for tracking petitions and visas against the cap are incorporated into U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services' business rules to be developed for the new electronic petition system.
Agency Affected: Department of Homeland Security
Status: In process
Comments: When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.
Recommendation: To address business concerns without undermining program integrity, U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services should, to the extent permitted by its existing statutory authority, explore options for increasing the flexibility of the application process for H-1B employers, such as (1) allowing employers to rank their applications for visa candidates so that they can hire the best qualified worker for the jobs in highest need; (2) distributing the applications granted under the annual cap in allotments throughout the year (e.g. quarterly); and (3) establishing a system whereby businesses with a strong track-record of compliance with H-1B regulations may use a streamlined application process.
Agency Affected: Department of Homeland Security
Status: In process
Comments: When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.
Recommendation: To improve the transparency and oversight of the posting requirement on the Labor Condition Application (LCA), as part of its current oversight role, the Employment and Training Administration should develop and maintain a centralized Web site, accessible to the public, where businesses must post notice of the intent to hire H-1B workers. Such notices should continue to specify the job category and worksite location noted on the LCA and required by statute on current noncentralized postings.
Agency Affected: Department of Labor
Status: In process
Comments: When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.
Recommendation: To improve the efficiency and effectiveness of its investigations of employer compliance with H-1B requirements, the Employment and Training Administration should provide Labor's Wage and Hour Division searchable access to the LCA database.
Agency Affected: Department of Labor
Status: In process
Comments: When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.
VIEW FULL REPORT (http://www.gao.gov/new.items/d1126.pdf)
More... (http://ashwinsharma.com/2011/01/25/h-1b-visa-program-reforms-are-needed-to-minimize-the-risks-and-costs-of-current-program.aspx?ref=rss)
hair chicas sexis de guatemala. en Fotos de Famosas y Mujeres
Suva
04-17 01:43 PM
Hello Frnds,
I would like to share some important information regarding AINP.
AINP Strategic recruiteement stream -U.S Visa holder is open.I directly spoke to the immigration officer.The only change is they are revising the NOC List thats it.I donno why people place messages with Half Knowledge.see u r Noc is in the below URL
WWW.ALBERTACANADA.COM\AINP
OP already mentioned the change was expected in the NOC list [On-Demand occupation list of Alberta]. Nobody told it would be closed after April 15. Did you see all the postings here before blaming others?
I would like to share some important information regarding AINP.
AINP Strategic recruiteement stream -U.S Visa holder is open.I directly spoke to the immigration officer.The only change is they are revising the NOC List thats it.I donno why people place messages with Half Knowledge.see u r Noc is in the below URL
WWW.ALBERTACANADA.COM\AINP
OP already mentioned the change was expected in the NOC list [On-Demand occupation list of Alberta]. Nobody told it would be closed after April 15. Did you see all the postings here before blaming others?
more...
vxg
09-08 04:50 PM
Thanks for starting this. I am in same boat, i called TSC and the IO told me my case was approved on 9/4/09 and i have an LUD on 9/4/09 however online status says case pending. I asked that to the IO and she says she does not know about the online status but in there system it is approved. I did that after i received a call from an IO from local field office ( i went for Infopass last week at local office) informing that my and my wife's cases were approved on 9/4/09.
I am hoping to get the cards as have to travel to India next week. The IO in Texas advised me to get the Passport stamped.
Bump! Anyone in same situation? What steps you took if any?
I am hoping to get the cards as have to travel to India next week. The IO in Texas advised me to get the Passport stamped.
Bump! Anyone in same situation? What steps you took if any?
hot chicas sexis de guatemala. chicas sexis de guatemala.
knnmbd
07-14 01:48 PM
EB3 retrog is completely hopeless in next 2 or 3 years unless the legislation release is passed. Lobbying is the only way to influence.
2 to 3 years is just wishful thinking. This is a permanent problem that we are faced with. Not to mention all the delays at the AOS stage including FBI checks and all that jazz. The only hope is the SKIL bill. WE NEED THIS MORE THAN ANY THING ELSE. I think we are at the cross-roads and this bill will well determine our future in this country
2 to 3 years is just wishful thinking. This is a permanent problem that we are faced with. Not to mention all the delays at the AOS stage including FBI checks and all that jazz. The only hope is the SKIL bill. WE NEED THIS MORE THAN ANY THING ELSE. I think we are at the cross-roads and this bill will well determine our future in this country
more...
house Chicas sexys y el fútbol 2
LostInGCProcess
09-19 05:51 PM
meaning I can work for company B now and even though my h1b renewal approves with company A? then when I feel like I can go out and reenter before the h1b renewal period ends?
sabr, could you be more elaborate regarding the 2 companies, where do u work, and who is offering you the job, how do they want to hire you, etc... Please explain clearly what your question is? Iam trying to say something and you are interpreting it differently and it looks like we are off pace somewhere.
sabr, could you be more elaborate regarding the 2 companies, where do u work, and who is offering you the job, how do they want to hire you, etc... Please explain clearly what your question is? Iam trying to say something and you are interpreting it differently and it looks like we are off pace somewhere.
tattoo chicas sexis de el salvador.
simplistik
06-06 05:20 PM
Yes!!!!!
LoL... so I take it those are yours then? :lol:
LoL... so I take it those are yours then? :lol:
more...
pictures de Chicas y Mujeres Sexys
abhi_022001
01-10 06:08 PM
I lost my job in november end ...I was working with one of the top most company in IT consulting in US(EDS/HP/CSC) like....in SAP field .Company was loosing pojects and bench was getting bigger...
I was lucky enough though to get another job within a month in somewhat stable industry in oil & gas..
I was lucky enough though to get another job within a month in somewhat stable industry in oil & gas..
dresses chicas sexis del salvador.
martinvisalaw
06-25 02:12 PM
1. My view on pre-adjudication is that they processing is done on the application and is put in an approvable status. once the PD is current and the immigrant visa number is available, then such an application can be approved. but it has to be noted that these applications can be reviewed again before approving and can be denied at that time.
2. when an AOS application is being adjudicated, if the underlying terms of the 485 application are not satisfied, then it can be denied. it does not matter if the PD is current. the 485 is based on the 140, which in turn is based on a bonafide job. using ac21, you can change employers, but i still feel that you need to be employed in a similar position and not looking for a similar position.
any thoughts anyone?
I agree. The argument that the AOS applicant doesn't need to have a job now is very aggressive and should only be used if absolutely necessary. If there is any chance of finding a new job soon, the first step would be to ask for more time to respond to the RFE.
2. when an AOS application is being adjudicated, if the underlying terms of the 485 application are not satisfied, then it can be denied. it does not matter if the PD is current. the 485 is based on the 140, which in turn is based on a bonafide job. using ac21, you can change employers, but i still feel that you need to be employed in a similar position and not looking for a similar position.
any thoughts anyone?
I agree. The argument that the AOS applicant doesn't need to have a job now is very aggressive and should only be used if absolutely necessary. If there is any chance of finding a new job soon, the first step would be to ask for more time to respond to the RFE.
more...
makeup makeup chicas sexis de el
fall2004us
03-22 02:43 PM
samswas - sorry for hijacking your thread a little bit.
here is my question:
Can I travel while EAD is still pending, though EAD is not being used, and mode of entry will be still H-1 and AP papers as backup.(no employment change)
here is my question:
Can I travel while EAD is still pending, though EAD is not being used, and mode of entry will be still H-1 and AP papers as backup.(no employment change)
girlfriend GUATEMALA-GRANADA;
fundo14
10-15 02:08 PM
Hi All,
I received an RFE on my pending 485 application:
Here is my case:
I am a derivative applicant working on my own H1
Here is the content of the RFE:
1. Please submit a properly completed form G325A. Submit all the documentary evidence to support your employment history listed in form G325A.
2. Clear copies of form W2 wage and Tax statements
3. Complete copies of properly filed Tax returns (IRS Form 1040)
4. Any additional document which confirms your employment history.
5. You must submit a currently dated letter from your intended permanent employer, describing your present job duties and position in the organization, your pre-offered position (if different from your current one) , the date you began employment and the offered salary or wage. Form letters are not acceptable. This letter should be in original and signed by an executive or officer of the organization who is authorized to make or confirm an offer of permanent employment. The letter must also indicate whether the terms and conditions of your employment based visa petition (or labor certification) continue to exist.
I can easily provide all the docs above (from number 1 to 4) but I am surprised why I am asked to provide a letter from my intended permanent employer since I am derivative applicant.
Anyone else in the same boat? please share your experience/ suggestion.
Thanks!
I received an RFE on my pending 485 application:
Here is my case:
I am a derivative applicant working on my own H1
Here is the content of the RFE:
1. Please submit a properly completed form G325A. Submit all the documentary evidence to support your employment history listed in form G325A.
2. Clear copies of form W2 wage and Tax statements
3. Complete copies of properly filed Tax returns (IRS Form 1040)
4. Any additional document which confirms your employment history.
5. You must submit a currently dated letter from your intended permanent employer, describing your present job duties and position in the organization, your pre-offered position (if different from your current one) , the date you began employment and the offered salary or wage. Form letters are not acceptable. This letter should be in original and signed by an executive or officer of the organization who is authorized to make or confirm an offer of permanent employment. The letter must also indicate whether the terms and conditions of your employment based visa petition (or labor certification) continue to exist.
I can easily provide all the docs above (from number 1 to 4) but I am surprised why I am asked to provide a letter from my intended permanent employer since I am derivative applicant.
Anyone else in the same boat? please share your experience/ suggestion.
Thanks!
hairstyles chicas sexis de guatemala. chicas sexis de guatemala.
raysaikat
08-04 11:36 AM
Hi, can someone help crack this puzzle?
I have an EB3 application with a PD of Nov 2002 (India). Filed I-485 in June 2007, along with medical forms etc. Of course, that category is 'unavailable' now.
In 2005, we started an EB2 application, within the same company, for a new job, this one requiring a Masters degree.
The EB2 I-140 was just approved, and the notice has the Nov 2002 Priority Date.
The attorney had earlier said they could port the priority dates from the EB3 to EB2 and interfile.
Now, he just called saying he is confused and not sure!
His views:
- There is no formal way to find out if the new I-140 was matched up with the old I-485.
- He says he will ask his peers and will also call USCIS Customer Service.
- He thinks we might need to file a new I-485 to support the new EB2 I-140 to show that there is a pending I-485 - because the underlying EB3 is Unavailable.
Appreciate any inputs!
Cheers!
IMHO, your best bet probably is filing another I-485 linking it with the new I-140 (EB2).
I have an EB3 application with a PD of Nov 2002 (India). Filed I-485 in June 2007, along with medical forms etc. Of course, that category is 'unavailable' now.
In 2005, we started an EB2 application, within the same company, for a new job, this one requiring a Masters degree.
The EB2 I-140 was just approved, and the notice has the Nov 2002 Priority Date.
The attorney had earlier said they could port the priority dates from the EB3 to EB2 and interfile.
Now, he just called saying he is confused and not sure!
His views:
- There is no formal way to find out if the new I-140 was matched up with the old I-485.
- He says he will ask his peers and will also call USCIS Customer Service.
- He thinks we might need to file a new I-485 to support the new EB2 I-140 to show that there is a pending I-485 - because the underlying EB3 is Unavailable.
Appreciate any inputs!
Cheers!
IMHO, your best bet probably is filing another I-485 linking it with the new I-140 (EB2).
go_guy123
01-20 10:29 AM
None of us here has little luck... We were close to CIR this year and now new math is in picture.. Two possibility for CIR in 2010...
(1) Dems will not touch it.
(2) GOP will not support it because people will think Dems passed it and that will help them to win midterm election.
CIR was impossible all along. It was delusional to think such a political hot potato can pass.
Not just my opinion ...but also that of IV board member: Greg Siskind.
The good part is as democratic party losses seats....the CIR lobby weakens and piecemeal will have better chance.
(1) Dems will not touch it.
(2) GOP will not support it because people will think Dems passed it and that will help them to win midterm election.
CIR was impossible all along. It was delusional to think such a political hot potato can pass.
Not just my opinion ...but also that of IV board member: Greg Siskind.
The good part is as democratic party losses seats....the CIR lobby weakens and piecemeal will have better chance.
andy_traps
03-26 07:31 PM
Hi,
Does anyone know if people on H4 are allowed to work unpaid? For example, can a person on an H4 visa file for an H1B visa with a start date of October 1st, 2007 but work on a volunteer basis (i.e., unpaid) at the same job while waiting for the H1B to come?
Thanks,
Andy
Does anyone know if people on H4 are allowed to work unpaid? For example, can a person on an H4 visa file for an H1B visa with a start date of October 1st, 2007 but work on a volunteer basis (i.e., unpaid) at the same job while waiting for the H1B to come?
Thanks,
Andy
No comments:
Post a Comment