go_guy123
05-19 03:50 PM
I am not aginst the OP or generalizing the B1 abuse. I am stating my opinion of what could be the reason behind the denial. You know, now a days even people are getting 221g for the H4 stamping. It does not matter what visa you are going for, the US consulates just looking for a execuse to reject. Not only in India, there are lot of people getting 221g in Canada, and got stuck up there.
Exactly the point. Years of H1B and B1 abuse by IT consulting vendors have brought to this
state.
The case of DSK , IMF ex-chief proves one teh point. I go agree he is innocent until guilty.
But yes he had lots of problems with women in the past....and got away because all were in Europe.
US is different and what looks like a minor issue B1 sent to work like H1B eventually gets the spotlight and faces severe crackdown.
Exactly the point. Years of H1B and B1 abuse by IT consulting vendors have brought to this
state.
The case of DSK , IMF ex-chief proves one teh point. I go agree he is innocent until guilty.
But yes he had lots of problems with women in the past....and got away because all were in Europe.
US is different and what looks like a minor issue B1 sent to work like H1B eventually gets the spotlight and faces severe crackdown.
wallpaper iker tattoo.
shreekhand
07-25 12:11 PM
Some clarifications needed here !
1.) Data entry is not done by adjudication officers (AO)
2.) Unless an AO is trained in a particular "production line"
(I-485, I-765 etc.) they cannot move them around
3.) Bear in mind AO's have the option to and do work from home too.
4.) The adjudication rate per past service center reports is
around 2 or3 cases per hour for I-485
The assumptions here are all the 50 guys are working only on EB cases no family and other cases, they are not doing any other data entry job like putting 450/ead/ap applications into system, they are not approving any of ead/ap cases. And they are working 8 hours daily. Looking at the general work environment around i bet the productive hrs in 8 hr work day is around 5/6 hrs. So keeping in mind these factors i feel the 80000 is okay number. They certainly need more staff. My 2 cents.
1.) Data entry is not done by adjudication officers (AO)
2.) Unless an AO is trained in a particular "production line"
(I-485, I-765 etc.) they cannot move them around
3.) Bear in mind AO's have the option to and do work from home too.
4.) The adjudication rate per past service center reports is
around 2 or3 cases per hour for I-485
The assumptions here are all the 50 guys are working only on EB cases no family and other cases, they are not doing any other data entry job like putting 450/ead/ap applications into system, they are not approving any of ead/ap cases. And they are working 8 hours daily. Looking at the general work environment around i bet the productive hrs in 8 hr work day is around 5/6 hrs. So keeping in mind these factors i feel the 80000 is okay number. They certainly need more staff. My 2 cents.
pappu
03-17 03:53 PM
Some recent news from USCIS.
======================================
H-1B Cap Exemptions Based on Relation or Affiliation
Released: March 16, 2011
USCIS - H-1B Cap Exemptions Based on Relation or Affiliation (http://www.uscis.gov/portal/site/uscis/menuitem.5af9bb95919f35e66f614176543f6d1a/?vgnextoid=2eb0652c630ce210VgnVCM100000082ca60aRCR D&vgnextchannel=68439c7755cb9010VgnVCM10000045f3d6a1 RCRD)
WASHINGTON— U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) announced today, in response to recent stakeholder feedback, that it is currently reviewing its policy on H-1B cap exemptions for non-profit entities that are related to or affiliated with an institution of higher education. Until further guidance is issued, USCIS is temporarily applying interim procedures to H-1B non-profit entity petitions filed with the agency seeking an exemption from the statutory H-1B numerical cap based on an affiliation with or relation to an institution of higher education.
Effective immediately, during this interim period USCIS will give deference to prior determinations made since June 6, 2006, that a non-profit entity is related to or affiliated with an institution of higher education – absent any significant change in circumstances or clear error in the prior adjudication – and, therefore, exempt from the H-1B statutory cap. However, the burden remains on the petitioner to show that its organization previously received approvals of its request for H-1B cap exemption as a non-profit entity that is related to or affiliated with an institution of higher education.
Petitioners may satisfy this burden by providing USCIS with evidence such as a copy of the previously approved cap-exempt petition (i.e. Form I-129 and pertinent attachments) and the previously issued applicable I-797 approval notice issued by USCIS since June 6, 2006, and any documentation that was submitted in support of the claimed cap exemption. Furthermore, USCIS suggests that petitioners include a statement attesting that their organization was approved as cap-exempt since June 6, 2006.
USCIS emphasizes that these measures will only remain in place on an interim basis. USCIS will engage the public on any forthcoming guidance.
The H-1B is a nonimmigrant visa that allows U.S. employers to temporarily employ foreign workers in specialty occupations. Unless determined to be exempt, H-1B petitions are subject to either the 65,000 statutory cap or the 20,000 statutory visa cap exemption. By statute, H-1B visas are subject to an annual numerical limit, or cap, of 65,000 visas each fiscal year. The first 20,000 petitions for these visas filed on behalf of individuals with U.S. master’s degrees or higher are exempt from this cap.
======================================
H-1B Cap Exemptions Based on Relation or Affiliation
Released: March 16, 2011
USCIS - H-1B Cap Exemptions Based on Relation or Affiliation (http://www.uscis.gov/portal/site/uscis/menuitem.5af9bb95919f35e66f614176543f6d1a/?vgnextoid=2eb0652c630ce210VgnVCM100000082ca60aRCR D&vgnextchannel=68439c7755cb9010VgnVCM10000045f3d6a1 RCRD)
WASHINGTON— U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) announced today, in response to recent stakeholder feedback, that it is currently reviewing its policy on H-1B cap exemptions for non-profit entities that are related to or affiliated with an institution of higher education. Until further guidance is issued, USCIS is temporarily applying interim procedures to H-1B non-profit entity petitions filed with the agency seeking an exemption from the statutory H-1B numerical cap based on an affiliation with or relation to an institution of higher education.
Effective immediately, during this interim period USCIS will give deference to prior determinations made since June 6, 2006, that a non-profit entity is related to or affiliated with an institution of higher education – absent any significant change in circumstances or clear error in the prior adjudication – and, therefore, exempt from the H-1B statutory cap. However, the burden remains on the petitioner to show that its organization previously received approvals of its request for H-1B cap exemption as a non-profit entity that is related to or affiliated with an institution of higher education.
Petitioners may satisfy this burden by providing USCIS with evidence such as a copy of the previously approved cap-exempt petition (i.e. Form I-129 and pertinent attachments) and the previously issued applicable I-797 approval notice issued by USCIS since June 6, 2006, and any documentation that was submitted in support of the claimed cap exemption. Furthermore, USCIS suggests that petitioners include a statement attesting that their organization was approved as cap-exempt since June 6, 2006.
USCIS emphasizes that these measures will only remain in place on an interim basis. USCIS will engage the public on any forthcoming guidance.
The H-1B is a nonimmigrant visa that allows U.S. employers to temporarily employ foreign workers in specialty occupations. Unless determined to be exempt, H-1B petitions are subject to either the 65,000 statutory cap or the 20,000 statutory visa cap exemption. By statute, H-1B visas are subject to an annual numerical limit, or cap, of 65,000 visas each fiscal year. The first 20,000 petitions for these visas filed on behalf of individuals with U.S. master’s degrees or higher are exempt from this cap.
2011 Man lying on motorcycle tattoo
WaitingYaar
10-01 12:32 PM
My PD is current, and also my processing date is outside the processing times currenlty published by NSC and I140 is approved. Not sure why AOS is still pending. Any thoughts? What I should do to expedite this. Thanks.
more...
sreedhar
11-06 10:22 AM
I see that for EB2 the PD is 01 APR 2004 now. I want to know if I-485 approvals is linked to this PD date or they will work independent to these days.
Thanks,
Sury
-------------------------------
PD : Feb'07
I-140 - Pending
I-131 - Approved
I-485 - Pending
Center: TEXAS SERVICE CENTER
Recieved EAD Card and FP done.
-------------------------------
Why you worried about PDs...Yours is 2007....have to wait several years.:D
Thanks,
Sury
-------------------------------
PD : Feb'07
I-140 - Pending
I-131 - Approved
I-485 - Pending
Center: TEXAS SERVICE CENTER
Recieved EAD Card and FP done.
-------------------------------
Why you worried about PDs...Yours is 2007....have to wait several years.:D
amitjoey
01-26 11:16 AM
Remember although this bill is only for PHD holders as it states now- It is too early to say if it will see the light of the day- if it will get through the committee and get on the calender and finally get on the floor.
It will go thru many rewrites and if it does have a chance on the floor, we can lobby and put our energy behind to make it better and try to get our provisions in it.
It is too early at this stage to comment on its chances and worse yet talk and fight about its contents.
It will go thru many rewrites and if it does have a chance on the floor, we can lobby and put our energy behind to make it better and try to get our provisions in it.
It is too early at this stage to comment on its chances and worse yet talk and fight about its contents.
more...
chinna2003
03-11 05:21 PM
This is a very subjective question of intent? If the employer has no problem and willing to support the petition and a job offer when the RFE arrives, how will the UCSIS ever determine intent.
Lets assume the greencard is approved and can it be revoked if i never work for the employer.
And will the fac that i worked for them in the past and resigned before filing a I 14o be a negative factor for adjudication.
Its 100% fraud and abuse. I'm suprised you even thought of asking about this. The answer is in your question.
Lets assume the greencard is approved and can it be revoked if i never work for the employer.
And will the fac that i worked for them in the past and resigned before filing a I 14o be a negative factor for adjudication.
Its 100% fraud and abuse. I'm suprised you even thought of asking about this. The answer is in your question.
2010 Biker Tattoos
morchu
05-14 12:04 PM
Not true.
Your H1B status starts from the "start date" shown in the COS/H1B approval notice. If the H1B is approved for this fiscal year, most probably it will be October 1, 2009. So till then you are in L1.
Also nothing prohibits you from re-entering on a valid L1 visa, but after re-entry you are assumed to be in L1 status. And you might end up filing COS petition one more time.
Now your question is interesting, because you are re-entering in a period of your L1 validity and I assume H1 is not valid for status till 2009 Oct.
I am not really sure about all the possible solutions in this situation. The solution I know is, enter using L1 and file another COS (not a full H1 petition, but just a COS, showing already approved H1).
Answer to OP;s questions are:
1. Yes
2. Might abandon the COS (not sure about this). But definitely your H1 is not abandoned.
3. Not automatic, another COS might be required.
Questions 4,5,6,7 are irrelavant after you file a COS on re-entry.
Since your H-1B change of status is approved, you are in H-1B Status now. In order to continue working on H-1B status after overseas trip, you must enter USA using H-1B visa stamp. This may require you to apply and get new H-1B visa stamp.
Please consider getting professional advice from your attorney before making any travel plans and what visa to use for re-entering.
______________________
Not a legal advice.
US citizen of Indian origin
.
Your H1B status starts from the "start date" shown in the COS/H1B approval notice. If the H1B is approved for this fiscal year, most probably it will be October 1, 2009. So till then you are in L1.
Also nothing prohibits you from re-entering on a valid L1 visa, but after re-entry you are assumed to be in L1 status. And you might end up filing COS petition one more time.
Now your question is interesting, because you are re-entering in a period of your L1 validity and I assume H1 is not valid for status till 2009 Oct.
I am not really sure about all the possible solutions in this situation. The solution I know is, enter using L1 and file another COS (not a full H1 petition, but just a COS, showing already approved H1).
Answer to OP;s questions are:
1. Yes
2. Might abandon the COS (not sure about this). But definitely your H1 is not abandoned.
3. Not automatic, another COS might be required.
Questions 4,5,6,7 are irrelavant after you file a COS on re-entry.
Since your H-1B change of status is approved, you are in H-1B Status now. In order to continue working on H-1B status after overseas trip, you must enter USA using H-1B visa stamp. This may require you to apply and get new H-1B visa stamp.
Please consider getting professional advice from your attorney before making any travel plans and what visa to use for re-entering.
______________________
Not a legal advice.
US citizen of Indian origin
.
more...
chanduv23
02-25 10:48 PM
Oracle applications, Oracle financials, Siebel, SAP are good fields to enter. Data warehousing is hot and a lot of people get trained. Consulting companies have fulltime trainers and there are a lot of courses you can take.
hair Biker tattoos Art
akred
06-01 02:41 AM
The White House has put up a fact sheet. Reason I came across it is because Google groups it together with our press releases when returning results. This fact sheet states twice that the bill will eliminate existing EB backlogs. Do they know something we don't?
http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2007/05/20070531-19.html
3. The Bill Will Eliminate The Current Application Backlog For Employment-Based Visas And Make 380,000 Green Cards Available Under The Merit-Based System - Up From 140,000 Employment-Based Visas Available Today.
Once The Backlogs Of Employment-Based Applicants And Family-Based Applicants Are Cleared, There Will Be 380,000 Green Cards Available Under The Merit-Based System - Up From 140,000 Employment-Based Green Cards Today. The bill makes 247,000 green cards immediately available under the merit-based system each year for the first five years after enactment.
Also, check out the sample points assignments at the end of the fact sheet.
http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2007/05/20070531-19.html
3. The Bill Will Eliminate The Current Application Backlog For Employment-Based Visas And Make 380,000 Green Cards Available Under The Merit-Based System - Up From 140,000 Employment-Based Visas Available Today.
Once The Backlogs Of Employment-Based Applicants And Family-Based Applicants Are Cleared, There Will Be 380,000 Green Cards Available Under The Merit-Based System - Up From 140,000 Employment-Based Green Cards Today. The bill makes 247,000 green cards immediately available under the merit-based system each year for the first five years after enactment.
Also, check out the sample points assignments at the end of the fact sheet.
more...
flexi
04-04 01:55 PM
... for your help! Now, what do you guys think about getting paid until the end of June by the 1st employer (but at the same time starting to work inofficially i.e. observing only for the 2nd employer) and then going back to work for a couple of weeks for the 1st employer but staring to get paid by the 2nd so that it's fair for both? Would that be legal? If not, there really isn't a good way to deal with this since the new H1Bs are valid not before Oct (if i'd apply for 2 H1Bs), right? I obviously don't want to jeopardize my visa to make my old employer happy so don't want to do anything that's not completely OK in that regard....
In regards to the timing of a petition for a transfer (leaving all the other stuff above aside for a moment), let's say i'd like to start at the new employer 1st of July - to be on the safe side I should get a lawyer, plan a week for them to get the petition ready and then i'd have to wait a couple weeks for the receipt notice (which then allows me to work for the new employer, correct?) - so that would make it 3 weeks?
Thanks again!
PS: more complicated now???
PPS: germany.... not india.... but would love to go there on the way back :cool:
In regards to the timing of a petition for a transfer (leaving all the other stuff above aside for a moment), let's say i'd like to start at the new employer 1st of July - to be on the safe side I should get a lawyer, plan a week for them to get the petition ready and then i'd have to wait a couple weeks for the receipt notice (which then allows me to work for the new employer, correct?) - so that would make it 3 weeks?
Thanks again!
PS: more complicated now???
PPS: germany.... not india.... but would love to go there on the way back :cool:
hot Award Winning Biker Tattoos
baba84
04-26 03:28 PM
what does your lawyer say about the matter?
more...
house Biker Tattoo
akhilmahajan
11-15 02:34 PM
Is there any possibility of organizing a statewide charity drive sponsored by IV state chapters during the holiday season. This is the season of giving. Why not organize it through IV state chapters. Proceeds can be donated to charities as suggested by donors. We can target
employers, congressmen, senators, relatives, friends....even anti immigrants will donate.
Anybody with prior experience of such fund raising, please comment. We also need to come up with a slogan for this campaign (It may be better if the slogan in itself is not related to immigration) . IV will just do a soft sell in this propaganda. This will increase IV name & also push respective state members to be active in their state chapters.
Comments?
The whole idea is to get people understand and above all accept the problem.
If people can accept the problem and come out willing to find out a solution, then anything can be done.
This is a good time to meet eh lawmakers as they will be coming back for the thanksgiving break. we can highlight our issue.
We can also help in setting up law maker meetings. Folks please contact your state chapters. People are waiting top help you, but if you dont decide to help yourself, then no one can help you.
Think about it.
GO IV GO. TOGTHER WE CAN.
employers, congressmen, senators, relatives, friends....even anti immigrants will donate.
Anybody with prior experience of such fund raising, please comment. We also need to come up with a slogan for this campaign (It may be better if the slogan in itself is not related to immigration) . IV will just do a soft sell in this propaganda. This will increase IV name & also push respective state members to be active in their state chapters.
Comments?
The whole idea is to get people understand and above all accept the problem.
If people can accept the problem and come out willing to find out a solution, then anything can be done.
This is a good time to meet eh lawmakers as they will be coming back for the thanksgiving break. we can highlight our issue.
We can also help in setting up law maker meetings. Folks please contact your state chapters. People are waiting top help you, but if you dont decide to help yourself, then no one can help you.
Think about it.
GO IV GO. TOGTHER WE CAN.
tattoo Biker Tattoo From
ck_b2001
12-11 01:29 PM
I read somewhere that CBP officers are instructed to make a photocopy themselves if 2 originals are not given.
The photocopying is best left to them as the one you make has potential of having been tampered.
TSC is giving out 2 original copies. I think it would be better to leave atleast one original to CBP officer at POE. Better record keeping on their end is good for future travel. There are designated counters with parole stamp so it is almost gaurenteed that you will be sent to a different counter from visitors line.
The photocopying is best left to them as the one you make has potential of having been tampered.
TSC is giving out 2 original copies. I think it would be better to leave atleast one original to CBP officer at POE. Better record keeping on their end is good for future travel. There are designated counters with parole stamp so it is almost gaurenteed that you will be sent to a different counter from visitors line.
more...
pictures hairstyles Biker Tattoo From
sledge_hammer
05-30 05:58 PM
Photo copies of LC? You mean approval or the application photocopies?
If you can get your hands on photocopies of Labor certificate, that would be awesome. Otherwise, make sure you at least have the following -
1. Experience letter (with last day of attendance)
2. I140 receipt
3. I485 receipt
4. Paystubs for 6 months of employment post I1485 receive date
You are good to go from there.
If you can get your hands on photocopies of Labor certificate, that would be awesome. Otherwise, make sure you at least have the following -
1. Experience letter (with last day of attendance)
2. I140 receipt
3. I485 receipt
4. Paystubs for 6 months of employment post I1485 receive date
You are good to go from there.
dresses Biker Tattoo
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)
more...
makeup Biker tattoos Art
LostInGCProcess
08-25 12:33 PM
>> even if she gets a 221(g) at the consulate can she return to US with the AP she has?
Yes. But she may need to use EAD in that case. Please check with your lawyer.
_________________
Not a legal advise.
Okay!! I'll have to ask a lawyer then...But most often I get good answers here in the IV forum, then asking the attorney...sometimes, i personally feel, they are not all that good with answers.
Yes. But she may need to use EAD in that case. Please check with your lawyer.
_________________
Not a legal advise.
Okay!! I'll have to ask a lawyer then...But most often I get good answers here in the IV forum, then asking the attorney...sometimes, i personally feel, they are not all that good with answers.
girlfriend Sturgis 2000 iker tattoo.
chinna2003
03-11 09:21 AM
I worked for an employer in WY 2004 as a physician and since then i resigned and moved onto another job with a new labor and I-140. However last year at the time of July isa bulletin fiasco, I asked my employer from WY in 2004 to file for an I-140 based on the previous approved labor condition in 2004 to retain that priority date under EB -2.
Employer knows I have no intent of joining them after the green card and I have my own practice , so i donot intend to join the practice.
In this scenario, if this considered a misuse of retaining priority date and how do i prove the intent and will the USCIS allow a situation like this?
Employer knows I have no intent of joining them after the green card and I have my own practice , so i donot intend to join the practice.
In this scenario, if this considered a misuse of retaining priority date and how do i prove the intent and will the USCIS allow a situation like this?
hairstyles Biker Tattoos Designs has
gcformeornot
01-09 04:20 PM
Its like going to tirupati and asking people if they have seen any mottai's [mottai - tamil, meaning shaved head].
:D
On another note, practically everybody over here has seen/heard somebody losing their jobs...
talking about only personal friends or co-workers. Please do not vote yes if its some body you don't know but heard of.
:D
On another note, practically everybody over here has seen/heard somebody losing their jobs...
talking about only personal friends or co-workers. Please do not vote yes if its some body you don't know but heard of.
krishnam70
07-18 12:34 PM
There's no need for you to be negative.
Obviously you have benefitted already from what's happened. Think about people who are stuck (just as you were up until recently) and want to 'try' to make things work for them too....
wish people were more understanding of others also. Why is it people forget what it was like for them when they were in same boat?
ps57002
There have been numerous threads in this forum about the utility of sending more flowers to USCIS, whitehouse, condi, Bush etc etc and there is no consenus on that. Now If you need to try to bring to attention the delays of the BEC try something innovative or if you feel flowers are the way to go
then go do it, but before doing that try to find out your audience, how many people are affected by this. In case of 485 retro there were thousands of people who were affected and so there was a tremendous response. Now while i do not deny that there might be same kind of numbers stuck in BEC you need to bring the issue in to focus and make a drive to bring in the believers.
The flower campaign started off as a small remark and some people believed it would work and just kept working on it and ultimately it 'may' have worked because of the organized activity that took place. Now if you believe it will work for BEC centers too go ahead with your plan( I am not sure IV will support it, initally the Gandhigiri did not have IV support too if i recall). If people believe it will work they will join the campaign. Publicise your efforts and you will see results.
go do it..
cheers
edit:
http://immigrationvoice.org/index.php?option=com_frontpage&Itemid=1
IV has recommendation to not use flowers going forward
BEC reduction is one of they key goals of IV going forward. so stay tight you should hear something soon
Obviously you have benefitted already from what's happened. Think about people who are stuck (just as you were up until recently) and want to 'try' to make things work for them too....
wish people were more understanding of others also. Why is it people forget what it was like for them when they were in same boat?
ps57002
There have been numerous threads in this forum about the utility of sending more flowers to USCIS, whitehouse, condi, Bush etc etc and there is no consenus on that. Now If you need to try to bring to attention the delays of the BEC try something innovative or if you feel flowers are the way to go
then go do it, but before doing that try to find out your audience, how many people are affected by this. In case of 485 retro there were thousands of people who were affected and so there was a tremendous response. Now while i do not deny that there might be same kind of numbers stuck in BEC you need to bring the issue in to focus and make a drive to bring in the believers.
The flower campaign started off as a small remark and some people believed it would work and just kept working on it and ultimately it 'may' have worked because of the organized activity that took place. Now if you believe it will work for BEC centers too go ahead with your plan( I am not sure IV will support it, initally the Gandhigiri did not have IV support too if i recall). If people believe it will work they will join the campaign. Publicise your efforts and you will see results.
go do it..
cheers
edit:
http://immigrationvoice.org/index.php?option=com_frontpage&Itemid=1
IV has recommendation to not use flowers going forward
BEC reduction is one of they key goals of IV going forward. so stay tight you should hear something soon
waitnwatch
04-21 02:37 PM
It is generally a good idea to go to any CBP and get the date put in. It is a pretty easy process. When the CBP folks say that an exit in 6 months in fine I guess they are correct in the sense that you have to stay illegally for over 180 days to be barred from reentry.
Anyway this should be pretty easy except that you have to find the time to go to your nearest international airport. For some it could be a 4 hour + drive!
Good luck
Anyway this should be pretty easy except that you have to find the time to go to your nearest international airport. For some it could be a 4 hour + drive!
Good luck
No comments:
Post a Comment