mbawa2574
02-15 05:20 PM
You are not saying there are more chinese and indians here, so that means what? that there are not more chinese and indians here?
As you said half the world population is indian or chinese and I'm saying this, rather than pure skill, is why there are more of them here. This is why I repeatedly protest your reference to only skills and brightness as the factor for the non balanced EB population.
If the world population is the reference, the US would have to take half of its immigrants from 2 countries, they clearly don't want that so they conciously set that rule.. u need them to change the rule u need to give them a reason that's useful for them not for you.
Can't you understand the meaning of fair shot and equality ? Let people apply in FIFO . Don't tell me what US wants ? No one has a clear idea of it.and suddenly people like you for your personal interests have started opposing IV's skill based initiative because your dates moved a little ahead and supporting existing discriminatory laws. What will happen when they retrogress again to 1999 next month ? What will be your stand then? Did you come to IV rally ? Probably not because you think of your personal interest and have nothing to do with the big picture.
As you said half the world population is indian or chinese and I'm saying this, rather than pure skill, is why there are more of them here. This is why I repeatedly protest your reference to only skills and brightness as the factor for the non balanced EB population.
If the world population is the reference, the US would have to take half of its immigrants from 2 countries, they clearly don't want that so they conciously set that rule.. u need them to change the rule u need to give them a reason that's useful for them not for you.
Can't you understand the meaning of fair shot and equality ? Let people apply in FIFO . Don't tell me what US wants ? No one has a clear idea of it.and suddenly people like you for your personal interests have started opposing IV's skill based initiative because your dates moved a little ahead and supporting existing discriminatory laws. What will happen when they retrogress again to 1999 next month ? What will be your stand then? Did you come to IV rally ? Probably not because you think of your personal interest and have nothing to do with the big picture.
wallpaper Princess Diana died after her
go_guy123
07-12 03:43 PM
BTW its taking anywhere between 52-65 weeks to get Canadian PR now. They process ur initial application after 52 weeks only and any time taken on top of it is extra..
cheers
Canada Immgration back is also visa post quota based unlike birth country
(not citizenship) based.
Therefore as an Indian if you apply in India then backlog is massive (5 yrs).
However just like in US system exceptions are there for Indians born outside India, Indians in US on H1B visa can apply in US where backlog is lesser.
In the Canadian system you can apply in your county of citizenship or country where you are admitted for more than 1 year (eg H1B , L1 ,F1 ,J1 )
cheers
Canada Immgration back is also visa post quota based unlike birth country
(not citizenship) based.
Therefore as an Indian if you apply in India then backlog is massive (5 yrs).
However just like in US system exceptions are there for Indians born outside India, Indians in US on H1B visa can apply in US where backlog is lesser.
In the Canadian system you can apply in your county of citizenship or country where you are admitted for more than 1 year (eg H1B , L1 ,F1 ,J1 )
Googler
02-14 03:30 PM
Just wanted to chime in to say that filing a lawsuit will only aid any campaign for admin fixes. The NC changes were done administratively but anyone who tells me that the scathing rulings from the federal courts had nothing to do with current changes is living in denial -- the recent rulings essentially shredded the legal basis for the form of these NC checks and attendant delays.
There is absolutely no reason not to pursue both options. It would be totally delicious to have USCIS testify in court and explain exactly how they f&$@-ed up badly enough to pervert congressional intent and waste approx 120K EB greencards in 2003-2004.
Write your letters (what does it take 10 min of your day), you have nothing to lose and something to gain by that. I did. But don't forget suing is the American way of justice.
There is absolutely no reason not to pursue both options. It would be totally delicious to have USCIS testify in court and explain exactly how they f&$@-ed up badly enough to pervert congressional intent and waste approx 120K EB greencards in 2003-2004.
Write your letters (what does it take 10 min of your day), you have nothing to lose and something to gain by that. I did. But don't forget suing is the American way of justice.
2011 Princess Diana is dead: and
vroapp
07-10 11:27 AM
:-)
more...
Macaca
01-18 08:44 AM
Law clearly tells that there should be valid job position for H1b at the time of filing. For consulting bodyshoppers will bring persons here and search for job. That is clearly violation of law.
Contract job has to be filled in weeks. But, it takes months and years to get H-1B approved. Thus, contracting is inherently speculative. This means, start date of a new H-1B contract and all following contracts, are not guaranteed.
Difference between Job shops and reputed Companies
Indian body shoppers employ a H1b Persons and many of them are in hourly. No project then no pay. No pay in bench is violation of law and both employee and employer are willingly accept that. So our body shoppers are attractive destination for GC aspirants.
The companies which follow rules are forced to pay bench or lay off. Companies may be under risk of heavy loss when there are too many people are in bench. That means companies which follow rules and regulations are making loss in tough times at the same time Body shops always make money and worst case scenario no loss no gain.
The revenue generated by a contractor is from his/her billing only; it is hard to calculate this amount for a non-contracting company like Intel. All contractor overhead (salary, benefits: insurance, H-1B/GC fee, ) and company profit have to come from this billing.
Still Desi companies are not following Labor laws.
I know a company in OHIO still exploiting H1Bs ... but payroll being generated.
Most (all?) US contractors are not paid on bench. Neither are they paid any benefits. (If they get paid on bench and/or benefits, it will be from the fixed overhead of their billing leading to smaller pay check: you are getting the same amount whichever way you want to spread it!)
This inequality was known by everyone including USCIS.
This means, that benched H-1B will stop getting paid on getting GC. Is this equality?
The 20% fraud/abuse that Slumdog Ron Hira barks is violation of such garbage-based laws created by him and Matloff. Another one is H-1B can not pay (some parts of) his/her H-1B/GC fee.
The only genuine laws are H-1B is paid (ignoring bench but including H-1B & GC overhead) below prevailing , company does not exist and H-1B is working in gas station (and increasing competition for Hira/Matloff's thorough bred US born asses).
Contract job has to be filled in weeks. But, it takes months and years to get H-1B approved. Thus, contracting is inherently speculative. This means, start date of a new H-1B contract and all following contracts, are not guaranteed.
Difference between Job shops and reputed Companies
Indian body shoppers employ a H1b Persons and many of them are in hourly. No project then no pay. No pay in bench is violation of law and both employee and employer are willingly accept that. So our body shoppers are attractive destination for GC aspirants.
The companies which follow rules are forced to pay bench or lay off. Companies may be under risk of heavy loss when there are too many people are in bench. That means companies which follow rules and regulations are making loss in tough times at the same time Body shops always make money and worst case scenario no loss no gain.
The revenue generated by a contractor is from his/her billing only; it is hard to calculate this amount for a non-contracting company like Intel. All contractor overhead (salary, benefits: insurance, H-1B/GC fee, ) and company profit have to come from this billing.
Still Desi companies are not following Labor laws.
I know a company in OHIO still exploiting H1Bs ... but payroll being generated.
Most (all?) US contractors are not paid on bench. Neither are they paid any benefits. (If they get paid on bench and/or benefits, it will be from the fixed overhead of their billing leading to smaller pay check: you are getting the same amount whichever way you want to spread it!)
This inequality was known by everyone including USCIS.
This means, that benched H-1B will stop getting paid on getting GC. Is this equality?
The 20% fraud/abuse that Slumdog Ron Hira barks is violation of such garbage-based laws created by him and Matloff. Another one is H-1B can not pay (some parts of) his/her H-1B/GC fee.
The only genuine laws are H-1B is paid (ignoring bench but including H-1B & GC overhead) below prevailing , company does not exist and H-1B is working in gas station (and increasing competition for Hira/Matloff's thorough bred US born asses).
iv_only_hope
07-21 09:20 PM
Ron gotcher says dates will go back yesteryears:
"Most likely, India E2 will retrogress in October back to late 2002 or early 2003. Don't count on rapid forward movement in the future."
He says he got this from DOS.
What abt this?
PS: I am just asking not arguing.
"Most likely, India E2 will retrogress in October back to late 2002 or early 2003. Don't count on rapid forward movement in the future."
He says he got this from DOS.
What abt this?
PS: I am just asking not arguing.
more...
pointlesswait
09-29 02:50 PM
like i had said in my earlier posts...this is retarded idea..to begin with...and still is..
cause...if anyone is even dreaming of buying a house thinking the home values are down ..think again..no matter how good ur credit rating is..you will have to pay high interest...and no one in their right mind will say that the home values have bottomed out..it will continue to fall ...
First of all for presuming that highly skilled immigrants who are waiting for GC are the only ones who can buy a house. Even 10 illegal aliens can come together and buy a house and share the mortgage.
Then, the economy is in it's cycle, it will pick up without more house buying. The issue is banks not lending to BUSINESSES not mortgages.
Most imporant, the proposal is same as saying "Sell me a GC". Ya, sure, that will pass the House and Senate.
Remember, nothing stops you from buying a house right now!!
cause...if anyone is even dreaming of buying a house thinking the home values are down ..think again..no matter how good ur credit rating is..you will have to pay high interest...and no one in their right mind will say that the home values have bottomed out..it will continue to fall ...
First of all for presuming that highly skilled immigrants who are waiting for GC are the only ones who can buy a house. Even 10 illegal aliens can come together and buy a house and share the mortgage.
Then, the economy is in it's cycle, it will pick up without more house buying. The issue is banks not lending to BUSINESSES not mortgages.
Most imporant, the proposal is same as saying "Sell me a GC". Ya, sure, that will pass the House and Senate.
Remember, nothing stops you from buying a house right now!!
2010 princess diana death pictures
sunny1000
12-13 05:06 PM
Good point. But point what we are discussing is whether the rules (per country based) made to process GC can be challenged in US Courts within its constitutional limits? If tomorrow US decides to shut down EB/FB we do not have problem. Certainly it has that right. But when US wishes to have those immigrants than do we (applicants - non -immigrants) have a right to challenge particular rule (here per country based limit) in Court?
The U.S government absolutely has that discretion to make any rule/law under the Foreign Policy doctrine which no Court will interfere. The analogy for this would be the rule - wet/dry policy - they follow with the Cuban immigrants who get a GC just based on landing on the U.S soil. Nobody can challenge that rule (which favors only migrants from Cuba - when Mexicans do the same, it is considered illegal) but, a cuban immigrant can challenge what constitutes U.S soil which the courts can decide.
In short, you cannot challenge the law itself but, can challenge how the law is interpreted.
The U.S government absolutely has that discretion to make any rule/law under the Foreign Policy doctrine which no Court will interfere. The analogy for this would be the rule - wet/dry policy - they follow with the Cuban immigrants who get a GC just based on landing on the U.S soil. Nobody can challenge that rule (which favors only migrants from Cuba - when Mexicans do the same, it is considered illegal) but, a cuban immigrant can challenge what constitutes U.S soil which the courts can decide.
In short, you cannot challenge the law itself but, can challenge how the law is interpreted.
more...
acecupid
08-15 10:22 AM
Collin Powell incident is America's problem. Even after the civil rights movement and equality to Blacks, they are still having discrimination. Just ask Black people in America and how they feel in their daily life.
So according to you by coming to America we should forget India because you will call us traitor? Have you heard how Jews in America are so strong and care for Israel even after becoming US citizens?
The fact is Indians are responsible for their own problems and greencard woes. They want to live in this sorry state and blame everyone else around them except themselves. They do not have any pride in their roots and thus flee their own country. They do not come to this country for betterment of their skills, education and experience but because they want to flee the country. There maybe exceptions but this is what I have seen in Indians who are on H1B or who have become US Citizens.
Why is your profile info empty ? Have you forgotten your motherland or where you came from ?
So according to you by coming to America we should forget India because you will call us traitor? Have you heard how Jews in America are so strong and care for Israel even after becoming US citizens?
The fact is Indians are responsible for their own problems and greencard woes. They want to live in this sorry state and blame everyone else around them except themselves. They do not have any pride in their roots and thus flee their own country. They do not come to this country for betterment of their skills, education and experience but because they want to flee the country. There maybe exceptions but this is what I have seen in Indians who are on H1B or who have become US Citizens.
Why is your profile info empty ? Have you forgotten your motherland or where you came from ?
hair Princess Diana had a weakness
ilikekilo
07-10 08:02 PM
Changed my mind. Updated my message. I appreciate your defense.
appreciate your ego strength man...thanks for the edit...u r the man..
appreciate your ego strength man...thanks for the edit...u r the man..
more...
angelfire76
01-14 02:12 PM
The memo is not very clear with respect to the employer-employee relationship. Most of the IT companies nowadays have moved to the contract model (e.g. IBM makes more money out of contract implementation of its own products or project implementation of other products, than from the sale and licensing of its products).
An argument can be made with the direct contract vs second-n level of contracts, but the memo is very generic and open to interpretation by an adjudicating officer (has anybody seen the minimum qualification required to get a job at USCIS as a case officer: its high school diploma).
An out-of-touch bureaucracy trying to tell corporates how to run their business is laughable at best. Of course I'm all for reducing and eliminating these middle-men, but by doing so the door's wide open for the mass offshoring of jobs.
The clause is still confusing: Infosys, CTS etc. also follow the "staffing" model as they don't really have in-house products that they implement at the client site. But you don't see their H-1Bs being denied. On the contrary USCIS is being very generous with the EB-1 GCs for the employees of these companies.
An argument can be made with the direct contract vs second-n level of contracts, but the memo is very generic and open to interpretation by an adjudicating officer (has anybody seen the minimum qualification required to get a job at USCIS as a case officer: its high school diploma).
An out-of-touch bureaucracy trying to tell corporates how to run their business is laughable at best. Of course I'm all for reducing and eliminating these middle-men, but by doing so the door's wide open for the mass offshoring of jobs.
The clause is still confusing: Infosys, CTS etc. also follow the "staffing" model as they don't really have in-house products that they implement at the client site. But you don't see their H-1Bs being denied. On the contrary USCIS is being very generous with the EB-1 GCs for the employees of these companies.
hot princess diana dead body.
bestia
02-14 01:43 PM
Bestia,
I am not fighting with you believe it or not - just that some things said on this forum are just downright nasty. FYI though.. the Congo WAS colonized and terrorized by the Europeans. Hear of the Belgian Congo?? I don't know about Sierra Leone though.
"Nasty" - might be just person's opinion. We don't have right to GC, but we have right to nasty opinions. I used to live in Maryland and was so tired of being careful when using words starting with "black*", "Afro*", "slave*", etc. Everything was always tended to be interpreted as implication, that someone is inferior to someone, etc. etc. The only solution was just to keep my mouth shut. And this is in country which is so proud of "free speech".
OK, I stand corrected, maybe not "colonized", but "settled" (still it's a wrong term - "immigrated"? Natives didn't have any immigration laws, though, so Europeans didn't brake any law). Europeans came here to build cities and live here. Congo was colonized for trading (robbing if you wish) purposes, slave trade, etc. That's the key difference.
But we are far from ROW/India+China debate :) I'm from ROW and it's my 8th year in the US, and all these years I'm "enjoying" not having any quota.
I am not fighting with you believe it or not - just that some things said on this forum are just downright nasty. FYI though.. the Congo WAS colonized and terrorized by the Europeans. Hear of the Belgian Congo?? I don't know about Sierra Leone though.
"Nasty" - might be just person's opinion. We don't have right to GC, but we have right to nasty opinions. I used to live in Maryland and was so tired of being careful when using words starting with "black*", "Afro*", "slave*", etc. Everything was always tended to be interpreted as implication, that someone is inferior to someone, etc. etc. The only solution was just to keep my mouth shut. And this is in country which is so proud of "free speech".
OK, I stand corrected, maybe not "colonized", but "settled" (still it's a wrong term - "immigrated"? Natives didn't have any immigration laws, though, so Europeans didn't brake any law). Europeans came here to build cities and live here. Congo was colonized for trading (robbing if you wish) purposes, slave trade, etc. That's the key difference.
But we are far from ROW/India+China debate :) I'm from ROW and it's my 8th year in the US, and all these years I'm "enjoying" not having any quota.
more...
house Like Princess Diana, First
gcnirvana
07-03 02:14 PM
Pappu,
If we reinstate the recent forums frame, we might get more hits to this thread. Now its hidden 3 layers deep and not many people go look for it. Just a thought.
BTW, I've sent my experience over the July VB ordeal to all the media contacts given here and the one I had from the past.
Go IV Go.
/\/\/\
If we reinstate the recent forums frame, we might get more hits to this thread. Now its hidden 3 layers deep and not many people go look for it. Just a thought.
BTW, I've sent my experience over the July VB ordeal to all the media contacts given here and the one I had from the past.
Go IV Go.
/\/\/\
tattoo Upcoming Princess
EB2IMMIGRANT
08-20 09:07 PM
Heat on SRK was because of scanner on Bollywood shows - US - World - NEWS - The Times of India (http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/news/world/us/Heat-on-SRK-was-because-of-scanner-on-Bollywood-shows/articleshow/4916759.cms)
more...
pictures hot Princess Diana#39;s death
vjkypally
06-16 04:55 PM
Why are we seeing posts related to porn on this site???????
dresses Princess Diana Inquest Day
walking_dude
02-13 02:11 PM
Most of these settlement suits were fought by organizations like American Baptist Churches, Catholic Church Services, AILF etc. Meaning, organizations which have a strong steady stream of revenue (unconnected to the lawsuit). Participants didn't have to pay any money out of pocket. And the organizations didn't have to raise money for the lawsuit.
IVs case will be different
1) Significant amount of funds will need to be raised. It will hamper other IV activities such as legislative and executive lobbying as contributions will get diverted. It will be hard to raise another 30k to lobby for adding IV provisions to any upcoming bill, if we are already in the middle of a 50k lawsuit.
2) We need to have a large number of plaintiffs ready to put their names on court papers. These plaintiffs also need to pay money for their participation.
Lawsuits do work. Apparently nobody checked the links I posted on page 1 so here are a few examples:
USCIS Settlement Notices and Agreements
American Baptist Churches v. Thornburgh (ABC) Settlement Agreement
Barahona-Gomez v Ashcroft
CSS
LULAC (Newman)
Ngwanyia v Gonzalez (Asylee Adjustment Case)
Notice of Proposed Settlement Agreement and Hearing in Kaplan, Et Al. v. Chertoff, Et Al., Civil Action No. 06-5304 in U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania
Notice to Persons Whose Naturalization Applications Were Denied by the Seattle, Spokane or Yakima Immigration Service
Proyecto San Pablo v INS
Ramos v Chertoff (02 C 8266, Northern District, Illinois)
Walters v Reno
Settlement Agreement Signed! Details available by clicking here. --2/9/05
IMPLEMENTATION OF NGWANYIA (ASYLEE ADJUSTMENT CASE) SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT Ngwanyia v. Gonzales, No. 02-502 (RHK) (D. Minn).
If you were granted asylum in the United States and have a pending application for adjustment of status, this settlement applies to you. Please refer to http://www.uscis.gov/files/article/NgwanyiaVGonzales.PDF In recent years immigration law had allowed only 10, 000 asylees per year to adjust their status to Lawful Permanent Residents. Under the settlement agreement, United States Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) will process an additional 31,000 asylee adjustments during the next three years. During fiscal year 2005, ending September 30, 2005, USCIS will process 8,000 of the additional 31,000, bringing the total number adjusted for the year to 18,000. USCIS will process at least 8,000 of the 31,000 during fiscal year 2006, (October 1, 2005 to September 30, 2006) with the remaining additional applications being processed in fiscal year 2007 (October 1, 2006 to September 30, 2007). The settlement also provides that asylees who have a pending application for adjustment of status may renew their employment authorization document (EAD) by requesting a multi-year EAD with a validity of up to five years. The multi-year EAD must be prepaid for the number of years requested. The cost of the multi-year EAD will be less than the cost of annual renewals by at least $20 per year. A requests for a fee waiver, if applicable, may be made pursuant to 8 C.F.R. � 103.7(c) Cost of multi-year EAD: 1 year card - $175.00 2 year card - $330.00 3 year card - $485.00
IVs case will be different
1) Significant amount of funds will need to be raised. It will hamper other IV activities such as legislative and executive lobbying as contributions will get diverted. It will be hard to raise another 30k to lobby for adding IV provisions to any upcoming bill, if we are already in the middle of a 50k lawsuit.
2) We need to have a large number of plaintiffs ready to put their names on court papers. These plaintiffs also need to pay money for their participation.
Lawsuits do work. Apparently nobody checked the links I posted on page 1 so here are a few examples:
USCIS Settlement Notices and Agreements
American Baptist Churches v. Thornburgh (ABC) Settlement Agreement
Barahona-Gomez v Ashcroft
CSS
LULAC (Newman)
Ngwanyia v Gonzalez (Asylee Adjustment Case)
Notice of Proposed Settlement Agreement and Hearing in Kaplan, Et Al. v. Chertoff, Et Al., Civil Action No. 06-5304 in U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania
Notice to Persons Whose Naturalization Applications Were Denied by the Seattle, Spokane or Yakima Immigration Service
Proyecto San Pablo v INS
Ramos v Chertoff (02 C 8266, Northern District, Illinois)
Walters v Reno
Settlement Agreement Signed! Details available by clicking here. --2/9/05
IMPLEMENTATION OF NGWANYIA (ASYLEE ADJUSTMENT CASE) SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT Ngwanyia v. Gonzales, No. 02-502 (RHK) (D. Minn).
If you were granted asylum in the United States and have a pending application for adjustment of status, this settlement applies to you. Please refer to http://www.uscis.gov/files/article/NgwanyiaVGonzales.PDF In recent years immigration law had allowed only 10, 000 asylees per year to adjust their status to Lawful Permanent Residents. Under the settlement agreement, United States Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) will process an additional 31,000 asylee adjustments during the next three years. During fiscal year 2005, ending September 30, 2005, USCIS will process 8,000 of the additional 31,000, bringing the total number adjusted for the year to 18,000. USCIS will process at least 8,000 of the 31,000 during fiscal year 2006, (October 1, 2005 to September 30, 2006) with the remaining additional applications being processed in fiscal year 2007 (October 1, 2006 to September 30, 2007). The settlement also provides that asylees who have a pending application for adjustment of status may renew their employment authorization document (EAD) by requesting a multi-year EAD with a validity of up to five years. The multi-year EAD must be prepaid for the number of years requested. The cost of the multi-year EAD will be less than the cost of annual renewals by at least $20 per year. A requests for a fee waiver, if applicable, may be made pursuant to 8 C.F.R. � 103.7(c) Cost of multi-year EAD: 1 year card - $175.00 2 year card - $330.00 3 year card - $485.00
more...
makeup princess diana dead body.
garybanz
01-14 09:50 AM
lol, looks like she wants all of it for herself. Wakeup sister...you might be smart but the rest of the people here are not fools.
Good Things about IV
1. IV Core does not conduct its business in the forum. They learnt this lesson a long time ago.
2. All their work is done in the donor forum and behind the scenes by volunteers
3. If they feel that any idea is worth pursuing they invite that person (with the idea) behind the scenes and pursue that idea
4. All the work is done by IV members themselves because they are helping themselves
5. IV members are investing time and money to do work which impacts a large number of immigrants
6. That is a professional way to do stuff and i admire the way work is done at IV
Concerns of IV
1. IV always states about the lack of will of people to do something for themselves
2. IV always states that people just comment on forum but do not step forward to do stuff
3. IV always says that people do not donate enough and without donation a grassroot organization will not survive
What IV is doing wrong
1. IV talks about a holistic approach whereby the benefit to EB community will trickle down and once EB2 will become current EB3 will get benefit of spillover
2. IV is assuming EB2 will become current but with the number of indians coming to USA and number of indian students who will graduate from MS courses in USA over the next 5 years EB2I will always be backlogged
3. Plus we are not even talking about EB2 ROW and EB3ROW demand which could go up
4. Supporting the DV 55k bill to US educated GC applicants on the whole looks like a great plan. Sure here are 55k and here are about 150 k GC applicants. 150 - 50 IS 100 K. So if the bill passes we reduce the backlog by 50 k. Now i will am one of the person who will be getting a GC because i am US educated but my opposition to this bill is on principle
5. What IV has to realise is that it is not only IV members specifically but it is a whole lot of non IV members who are EB3 who have been a bigger person in this whole immigration retorgression advocacy scheme of things till now.
How let me explain. We have seen EB3 persons from 2002 who are still waiting for GC and who are not getting spill over visas because EB2 is using up all the spill over visas. So do you see any EB3 now complaining about the rule change supported by IV and made by USCIS whereby EB2 gets spill over visas. NO we do not see any EB3 complaining. That is because EB3 as a whole understands that that rule in the past being interpeted in a wrong way and the current way is the correct interpetation. Sure the old method gave EB3 some extra spill over visa benefit but the new interpetation caused EB3 to dry up compleletly. Now that in itself is against the very nature of self preservation by definition, But EB3 went along for the greater good
What IV can do right
1. Now we have this 55K DV Bill. This is something different from the spillover (which is law and cannot be changed). This is one time oppurtunity to alieviate the sufferings of EB group as a whole. So can IV which is supposed to be talking for the whole EB community do the right thing here and ensure (with advocacy they are so good at) that IV's stand is that 55K visa are given to all GC applicant from retrogressed countries based on oldest priority date first irrespective of EB2 and EB3.
2. The concequence of such a move is that long retrogressed EB applicants will get relief (Which is one of the point IV talks about in their charter)
3. Sure Many US educated applicants from EB2 and EB3 will oppose this move because lets face it, this move impacts their getting GC sooner. And if they behave like that they are in the same category as EB2 guys on this forum who do not entertain any idea which will impact their getting GC soon.
What wil happen if IV does the above
1. The DV 55K bill will NEVER pass in congress. This along with the other bills we have seen will bite the dust because no one in the current economic scenario would like to see more immigrants (US educated or not)
2. The DV 55K bill will fail but IV would have achieved what it has failed to do till now. Get the support of EB3 community which they claim to represent.
Synopsis
How how does this work. This is a suggestion for discussion NOT a diktat to IV core to implement. If IV core does not allow discussion on this (and moderate this because frankly some of your existing advocacy group members and volunteers do not know what a discussion is and come out both fists swinging) then that is IV core perogative. they have that right since this is their system and they worked hard for it, and they believe what they say is right.
One question i do have for all the members who have argued with me here. Have you seen all the discussion i have participated under and my other posts. Please do that before yelling that i was a member since 2006 and freeloader and all that. You need to do this because if i am you enemy (Scounderal, Liad weed, Anti Immgrant, Future USA etc) then don't you think to know your enemy is better.
On a funny flip side ...............................
How will this be treated by the current members
Ohh He is a liar, cheat, sounderrl, absurer, voilent person, free loader, smooch, weed, Anti Immgrant, future USA and other unspeakable things
By the way guys i am a She not a He
Adieu/Ciao
Good Things about IV
1. IV Core does not conduct its business in the forum. They learnt this lesson a long time ago.
2. All their work is done in the donor forum and behind the scenes by volunteers
3. If they feel that any idea is worth pursuing they invite that person (with the idea) behind the scenes and pursue that idea
4. All the work is done by IV members themselves because they are helping themselves
5. IV members are investing time and money to do work which impacts a large number of immigrants
6. That is a professional way to do stuff and i admire the way work is done at IV
Concerns of IV
1. IV always states about the lack of will of people to do something for themselves
2. IV always states that people just comment on forum but do not step forward to do stuff
3. IV always says that people do not donate enough and without donation a grassroot organization will not survive
What IV is doing wrong
1. IV talks about a holistic approach whereby the benefit to EB community will trickle down and once EB2 will become current EB3 will get benefit of spillover
2. IV is assuming EB2 will become current but with the number of indians coming to USA and number of indian students who will graduate from MS courses in USA over the next 5 years EB2I will always be backlogged
3. Plus we are not even talking about EB2 ROW and EB3ROW demand which could go up
4. Supporting the DV 55k bill to US educated GC applicants on the whole looks like a great plan. Sure here are 55k and here are about 150 k GC applicants. 150 - 50 IS 100 K. So if the bill passes we reduce the backlog by 50 k. Now i will am one of the person who will be getting a GC because i am US educated but my opposition to this bill is on principle
5. What IV has to realise is that it is not only IV members specifically but it is a whole lot of non IV members who are EB3 who have been a bigger person in this whole immigration retorgression advocacy scheme of things till now.
How let me explain. We have seen EB3 persons from 2002 who are still waiting for GC and who are not getting spill over visas because EB2 is using up all the spill over visas. So do you see any EB3 now complaining about the rule change supported by IV and made by USCIS whereby EB2 gets spill over visas. NO we do not see any EB3 complaining. That is because EB3 as a whole understands that that rule in the past being interpeted in a wrong way and the current way is the correct interpetation. Sure the old method gave EB3 some extra spill over visa benefit but the new interpetation caused EB3 to dry up compleletly. Now that in itself is against the very nature of self preservation by definition, But EB3 went along for the greater good
What IV can do right
1. Now we have this 55K DV Bill. This is something different from the spillover (which is law and cannot be changed). This is one time oppurtunity to alieviate the sufferings of EB group as a whole. So can IV which is supposed to be talking for the whole EB community do the right thing here and ensure (with advocacy they are so good at) that IV's stand is that 55K visa are given to all GC applicant from retrogressed countries based on oldest priority date first irrespective of EB2 and EB3.
2. The concequence of such a move is that long retrogressed EB applicants will get relief (Which is one of the point IV talks about in their charter)
3. Sure Many US educated applicants from EB2 and EB3 will oppose this move because lets face it, this move impacts their getting GC sooner. And if they behave like that they are in the same category as EB2 guys on this forum who do not entertain any idea which will impact their getting GC soon.
What wil happen if IV does the above
1. The DV 55K bill will NEVER pass in congress. This along with the other bills we have seen will bite the dust because no one in the current economic scenario would like to see more immigrants (US educated or not)
2. The DV 55K bill will fail but IV would have achieved what it has failed to do till now. Get the support of EB3 community which they claim to represent.
Synopsis
How how does this work. This is a suggestion for discussion NOT a diktat to IV core to implement. If IV core does not allow discussion on this (and moderate this because frankly some of your existing advocacy group members and volunteers do not know what a discussion is and come out both fists swinging) then that is IV core perogative. they have that right since this is their system and they worked hard for it, and they believe what they say is right.
One question i do have for all the members who have argued with me here. Have you seen all the discussion i have participated under and my other posts. Please do that before yelling that i was a member since 2006 and freeloader and all that. You need to do this because if i am you enemy (Scounderal, Liad weed, Anti Immgrant, Future USA etc) then don't you think to know your enemy is better.
On a funny flip side ...............................
How will this be treated by the current members
Ohh He is a liar, cheat, sounderrl, absurer, voilent person, free loader, smooch, weed, Anti Immgrant, future USA and other unspeakable things
By the way guys i am a She not a He
Adieu/Ciao
girlfriend Death of Princess Diana
msp1976
02-16 11:12 AM
This is a link provided by akred....
http://academic.udayton.edu/race/02rights/immigr09.htm
This is required reading for all those who want to understand the attitudes of the anti immigration folks like the numbersUSA et al.....
http://academic.udayton.edu/race/02rights/immigr09.htm
This is required reading for all those who want to understand the attitudes of the anti immigration folks like the numbersUSA et al.....
hairstyles hairstyles diana dead body.
unitednations
02-20 12:59 AM
How much investment is required to do this using the L1-A? This appears to be a better option than the EB-5 where money is tied up for years.
You have to work for the company outside USA for one year. therefore, you gotta be out for one year.
I am not advocating this but if a person were to go back home and wanted to come back later then al they need to do is start a business (could be consulting). After it has been running for a year then come to USA on L-1A to open up a sales/operational office and then open up your consulting company and start hiring/placing people.
Note: You need to ensure that the company is real back home to get through consular process.
I am actually very surprised at people. I would have thought that now people have come to realize that this could take a long time that people would dig in and start lobbying harder; strategizing, etc., instead, I am seeing more postings of people going back home; canada, australia, england, etc.
I will give you my story. I came here in 1993 and stayed until 1996. Didn't really think about staying here permanently. In 1996 my colleague who was from Bahamas on H-1 got me on a conference call with company attornies about doing greencard. We asked her of the process and she told that the rules were you had to work with the company for 18 months; the process could take 3 to 4 years and then you had to stay for 3 years after the greencard got approved. We both just looked at each other and thought there was no way we would do it. He went back to Bahamas and I went back to Canada thinking i wasn't going to come back and why wait anyways.
Three years later I decided I missed USA (note: Canada isn't much different but I still missed the "system" and the rush of working in the big economy with the biggest companies. I came back and stuck in greencard process now for many years.
My conclusion is that I made a mistake of going back and should have stayed the first time around. Something for everyoen to consider going back to other countries or back home.
You have to work for the company outside USA for one year. therefore, you gotta be out for one year.
I am not advocating this but if a person were to go back home and wanted to come back later then al they need to do is start a business (could be consulting). After it has been running for a year then come to USA on L-1A to open up a sales/operational office and then open up your consulting company and start hiring/placing people.
Note: You need to ensure that the company is real back home to get through consular process.
I am actually very surprised at people. I would have thought that now people have come to realize that this could take a long time that people would dig in and start lobbying harder; strategizing, etc., instead, I am seeing more postings of people going back home; canada, australia, england, etc.
I will give you my story. I came here in 1993 and stayed until 1996. Didn't really think about staying here permanently. In 1996 my colleague who was from Bahamas on H-1 got me on a conference call with company attornies about doing greencard. We asked her of the process and she told that the rules were you had to work with the company for 18 months; the process could take 3 to 4 years and then you had to stay for 3 years after the greencard got approved. We both just looked at each other and thought there was no way we would do it. He went back to Bahamas and I went back to Canada thinking i wasn't going to come back and why wait anyways.
Three years later I decided I missed USA (note: Canada isn't much different but I still missed the "system" and the rush of working in the big economy with the biggest companies. I came back and stuck in greencard process now for many years.
My conclusion is that I made a mistake of going back and should have stayed the first time around. Something for everyoen to consider going back to other countries or back home.
sbabunle
04-29 12:31 PM
That means---> Once the labor is approved you have to use it in 45 days.
ie apply for 140 in 45 days or LC is expired...I'm glad they did not propose to file I485 in 45 days :D
I think 45 days is too short. Since LC cannot replaced, it cannot be used for anyone else. So I dont understand why they need an expiry date too...At lease a LC should be valid for 6 months.
But we have to wait and see what the final rule is. There may be some changes fromt he proposed rule.
babu
Can you anyone tell what the lines highlighted below in blue means ?
************************************************** ******
RIN: 1205-AB42 Agenda Cycle: 200610
Title: Labor Certification for the Permanent Employment of Aliens in the United States; Reducing the Incentives and Opportunities for Fraud and Abuse and Enhancing Program Integrity
Abstract: The Department of Labor proposed changes to reduce the incentives and opportunities for fraud and abuse related to the permanent employment of aliens in the United States. Among other key changes, the Department is eliminating the current practice of allowing the substitution of alien beneficiaries on applications and approved labor certifications. DOL proposed to further reduce the likelihood of the submission of fraudulent applications for the permanent employment of aliens in the United States by proposing a 45-day deadline for employers to file approved permanent labor certifications in support of a petition with the Department of Homeland Security. The Final Rule expressly prohibits the sale, barter, or purchase of permanent labor certifications or applications, as well as related payments. The proposed rule also addresses enforcement mechanisms to protect program integrity, including debarment with appeal rights. These amendments would apply to employers using both the Application for Alien Employment Certification (Form ETA 750) or the Application for Permanent Employment Certification (Form ETA 9089).
************************************************** *******
i got the above info from the OMB website below -
http://www.reginfo.gov/public/do/eoViewRule?ruleID=269657
ie apply for 140 in 45 days or LC is expired...I'm glad they did not propose to file I485 in 45 days :D
I think 45 days is too short. Since LC cannot replaced, it cannot be used for anyone else. So I dont understand why they need an expiry date too...At lease a LC should be valid for 6 months.
But we have to wait and see what the final rule is. There may be some changes fromt he proposed rule.
babu
Can you anyone tell what the lines highlighted below in blue means ?
************************************************** ******
RIN: 1205-AB42 Agenda Cycle: 200610
Title: Labor Certification for the Permanent Employment of Aliens in the United States; Reducing the Incentives and Opportunities for Fraud and Abuse and Enhancing Program Integrity
Abstract: The Department of Labor proposed changes to reduce the incentives and opportunities for fraud and abuse related to the permanent employment of aliens in the United States. Among other key changes, the Department is eliminating the current practice of allowing the substitution of alien beneficiaries on applications and approved labor certifications. DOL proposed to further reduce the likelihood of the submission of fraudulent applications for the permanent employment of aliens in the United States by proposing a 45-day deadline for employers to file approved permanent labor certifications in support of a petition with the Department of Homeland Security. The Final Rule expressly prohibits the sale, barter, or purchase of permanent labor certifications or applications, as well as related payments. The proposed rule also addresses enforcement mechanisms to protect program integrity, including debarment with appeal rights. These amendments would apply to employers using both the Application for Alien Employment Certification (Form ETA 750) or the Application for Permanent Employment Certification (Form ETA 9089).
************************************************** *******
i got the above info from the OMB website below -
http://www.reginfo.gov/public/do/eoViewRule?ruleID=269657
mantric
12-14 01:46 PM
many of the immigration laws that are affecting us were put in place way before the IT boom that brought most of us here. people are right that the intention behind them is not malicious. but a law set in the 1960s may turn out to have a discriminatory effect in the 2000s. circumstances change and we live in the present not in the past.
lazycis case was good at pointing out the key clause in the constitution that may help us. it's the due process clause in the 14th amendment, which extends not just to citizens.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fourteenth_Amendment_to_the_United_States_Constitu tion
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Due_process_clause
"nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws."
lazycis case argument is a case from 1975 of a case for retired people over 65 who had been in the country less than 5 years, drawing state medicare benefits.
the EB community has on other hand has a median age of 32, most have stayed here for 5-10 years at least, consists of net contributors to the US economy and has passed many educational, legal and career barriers to get here. after all this just when our careers are about to fly, many of us find our opportunities being crushed because of our nationality.
mbartosik case argument is of prisoners in gitmo. even they could challenge the court and get something better than what they had - a military tribunal vs no tribunal earlier.
are we pension drawing dependants of state, or criminals or prisoners to suffer silently for years and years like this at the prime of our lives ?
is'nt the EB community being deprived of liberty ? has the EB community received due process ?
the tipping point from influencing the lawmakers to challenging the laws in court comes when people realise that lawmakers are indifferent to their cause for whatever reason, and some way is needed to bring attention to their immediate suffering.
before we rush to say checkmate with a particular strategy, let's understand the chessboard and the moves available on it. by knowing our rights under the constitution that's all we are doing. this knowledge may be useful in influencing the lawmakers also, in raising the caps for example to reduce the discriminatory consequences of current laws.
agreed that we need an abundance of caution and we will most likely lose the case given we are arguing from a position of extreme weakness. yet the constitution does promise us due process as residents of this great land. let's think about that as well.
some precedents for legal challenges to immigration laws exist on the ACLU and Rajiv Khanna websites.
lazycis case was good at pointing out the key clause in the constitution that may help us. it's the due process clause in the 14th amendment, which extends not just to citizens.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fourteenth_Amendment_to_the_United_States_Constitu tion
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Due_process_clause
"nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws."
lazycis case argument is a case from 1975 of a case for retired people over 65 who had been in the country less than 5 years, drawing state medicare benefits.
the EB community has on other hand has a median age of 32, most have stayed here for 5-10 years at least, consists of net contributors to the US economy and has passed many educational, legal and career barriers to get here. after all this just when our careers are about to fly, many of us find our opportunities being crushed because of our nationality.
mbartosik case argument is of prisoners in gitmo. even they could challenge the court and get something better than what they had - a military tribunal vs no tribunal earlier.
are we pension drawing dependants of state, or criminals or prisoners to suffer silently for years and years like this at the prime of our lives ?
is'nt the EB community being deprived of liberty ? has the EB community received due process ?
the tipping point from influencing the lawmakers to challenging the laws in court comes when people realise that lawmakers are indifferent to their cause for whatever reason, and some way is needed to bring attention to their immediate suffering.
before we rush to say checkmate with a particular strategy, let's understand the chessboard and the moves available on it. by knowing our rights under the constitution that's all we are doing. this knowledge may be useful in influencing the lawmakers also, in raising the caps for example to reduce the discriminatory consequences of current laws.
agreed that we need an abundance of caution and we will most likely lose the case given we are arguing from a position of extreme weakness. yet the constitution does promise us due process as residents of this great land. let's think about that as well.
some precedents for legal challenges to immigration laws exist on the ACLU and Rajiv Khanna websites.
No comments:
Post a Comment