logiclife
08-03 05:25 PM
I worked for a firm for last couple of years and then moved to another firm. Now I want to apply for a Perm process and need the Experience letter. My previous employer has issued me the experience letter without my roles and responsibility:
It was an unprotected word file, so I changed it and incorporated the roles and responsibilty and my self submitted it to my employer; Now i am afraid if they are going to verify it.
1. What is the INS verification process?
2. Do employer can verifty it by Fax?
3. What can happen if INS came to know that everything was fine except the roles and responsibilities was included afterwards?
What you did was creative (in a bad way). Sorta illegal. And sorta forgerish and borderline fraudulent. I am not judging you, I am just telling you how it sounds.
Now, how did you add material to the word document that was already signed? And therin lies the bad part.
Anyways, correspondence between USCIS and employer/lawyer/employee is always thru mail. I dont think they communicate thru faxes.
Now, if for some reason INS (and by the way, its USCIS now) came to know afterwards, then you are in a deep hole because it sounds like fraud. Fraud is grounds of denial of immigration benefits (any benefit, like H1, or GC or citizenship). Besides, roles and responsibilities are not really needed if the letter says that all conditions in labor cert and 140 are still valid and employment is still offered as per labor cert. Then you dont need detailed description of what you are doing. And even if you felt the urge to add that part in your letter, why didnt you just ask them that?
It was an unprotected word file, so I changed it and incorporated the roles and responsibilty and my self submitted it to my employer; Now i am afraid if they are going to verify it.
1. What is the INS verification process?
2. Do employer can verifty it by Fax?
3. What can happen if INS came to know that everything was fine except the roles and responsibilities was included afterwards?
What you did was creative (in a bad way). Sorta illegal. And sorta forgerish and borderline fraudulent. I am not judging you, I am just telling you how it sounds.
Now, how did you add material to the word document that was already signed? And therin lies the bad part.
Anyways, correspondence between USCIS and employer/lawyer/employee is always thru mail. I dont think they communicate thru faxes.
Now, if for some reason INS (and by the way, its USCIS now) came to know afterwards, then you are in a deep hole because it sounds like fraud. Fraud is grounds of denial of immigration benefits (any benefit, like H1, or GC or citizenship). Besides, roles and responsibilities are not really needed if the letter says that all conditions in labor cert and 140 are still valid and employment is still offered as per labor cert. Then you dont need detailed description of what you are doing. And even if you felt the urge to add that part in your letter, why didnt you just ask them that?
wallpaper shiny hair semi-straight
cahaba
04-13 12:36 AM
Hello All,
I came across this site while researching for *urgent* solutions or options that my friend needs to pursue or has.
These are my friend's details --
EB3 -- India.
I140 approved in July 2007.
485 filed in July 2007.
MS in Engg from USA.
MBA in Finance from top ten school in USA.
Has applied for couple of patents in tech field.
Author of few papers in tech field.
My friend worked for his green card petitioning employer for 7 years in a technical position on H1 visa. He had to leave this job under some unfavorable circumstances around a month back. He has now taken a job as Marketing Manager for a big firm and is using his EAD. Two weeks back he has received an RFE on his 485 application. (Very curious and bad timing indeed too). This RFE needs a Employment Verification Letter. The current position that my friend works as does not match the position description on his labor petition. The RFE reply needs to be sent in within next 2 weeks.
What are his options to reply to the RFE? One of the lawyers that was consulted said that since Green Card is for a future position, he needs to get a legit letter from a future employer that the employer is willing to hire my friend after he gets his green card.
Also suggested were EB2-NIW and self-employment options.
What would you suggest -- best course of action? Would you know anybody who has gone through a similar situation. Any fallback options that my friend needs to evaluate?
I really appreciate all your replies. Pl treat this as very urgent.
Thanks.
I came across this site while researching for *urgent* solutions or options that my friend needs to pursue or has.
These are my friend's details --
EB3 -- India.
I140 approved in July 2007.
485 filed in July 2007.
MS in Engg from USA.
MBA in Finance from top ten school in USA.
Has applied for couple of patents in tech field.
Author of few papers in tech field.
My friend worked for his green card petitioning employer for 7 years in a technical position on H1 visa. He had to leave this job under some unfavorable circumstances around a month back. He has now taken a job as Marketing Manager for a big firm and is using his EAD. Two weeks back he has received an RFE on his 485 application. (Very curious and bad timing indeed too). This RFE needs a Employment Verification Letter. The current position that my friend works as does not match the position description on his labor petition. The RFE reply needs to be sent in within next 2 weeks.
What are his options to reply to the RFE? One of the lawyers that was consulted said that since Green Card is for a future position, he needs to get a legit letter from a future employer that the employer is willing to hire my friend after he gets his green card.
Also suggested were EB2-NIW and self-employment options.
What would you suggest -- best course of action? Would you know anybody who has gone through a similar situation. Any fallback options that my friend needs to evaluate?
I really appreciate all your replies. Pl treat this as very urgent.
Thanks.
GCDream
02-20 08:12 PM
Here is what I have after analyzing the FLC Data Center MDB files
>2001 May 8 = 504 Certified Labors
2002 = 79784 Certified Labors
2003 = 62912 Certified Labors
2004 = 43582 Certified Labors
Total: 186782 Certified Labors
The above data is for world
Let's say India is 25% of world and 75% of India is in EB3
This gives 186782 * 0.25 * 0.75 = 35022 for India from 2001 to 2004
Since the country of the alien is available for Perm, let's use it for 2005 and 2006
2005 India = 1350
2006 India = 22298
Total for India in 2005 and 2006 = 23648
Pending in BEC: 111000
Applying the same formula for India EB3: 111000 * 0.25 * 0.75 = 20812
Total for India in all years till Dec 2006 = 35022 + 23648 + 20812 = 79482
Let's say 20% labors are duplicate or deserted. This gives 79482 * 0.80 = 63586
Total for India in all years till Dec 2006 with Dependents = 63586 * 2.2 = 139889
Total EB3 visas for India in a year: 140000 * 0.07 * 0.286 = 2802
Without any Law:
139889/2802 = 50 Years
Assuming CIR passes with
1. Dependents not counted
2. EB visas increased from 140,000 to 650,000
3. Per country quota raised to 10%
4. Exempts advanced degree holders
Total EB3 India visas per year = 650,000 * 0.1 * 0.286 = 18590
Total for India in all years till Dec 2006 without dependents: 63586
Assuming 20% have advanced degree holders = 63586 * 0.2 = 12717
Total for India in all years till Dec 2006 without dependents and advanced degree holders
= 63586 - 12717 = 50869
For India EB3 Priority date to reach Dec 2006 = 50869/18590 = 2.7 Years
Conclusion
Without Law: 50 Years :confused:
With Law: 2.7 Years :D
>2001 May 8 = 504 Certified Labors
2002 = 79784 Certified Labors
2003 = 62912 Certified Labors
2004 = 43582 Certified Labors
Total: 186782 Certified Labors
The above data is for world
Let's say India is 25% of world and 75% of India is in EB3
This gives 186782 * 0.25 * 0.75 = 35022 for India from 2001 to 2004
Since the country of the alien is available for Perm, let's use it for 2005 and 2006
2005 India = 1350
2006 India = 22298
Total for India in 2005 and 2006 = 23648
Pending in BEC: 111000
Applying the same formula for India EB3: 111000 * 0.25 * 0.75 = 20812
Total for India in all years till Dec 2006 = 35022 + 23648 + 20812 = 79482
Let's say 20% labors are duplicate or deserted. This gives 79482 * 0.80 = 63586
Total for India in all years till Dec 2006 with Dependents = 63586 * 2.2 = 139889
Total EB3 visas for India in a year: 140000 * 0.07 * 0.286 = 2802
Without any Law:
139889/2802 = 50 Years
Assuming CIR passes with
1. Dependents not counted
2. EB visas increased from 140,000 to 650,000
3. Per country quota raised to 10%
4. Exempts advanced degree holders
Total EB3 India visas per year = 650,000 * 0.1 * 0.286 = 18590
Total for India in all years till Dec 2006 without dependents: 63586
Assuming 20% have advanced degree holders = 63586 * 0.2 = 12717
Total for India in all years till Dec 2006 without dependents and advanced degree holders
= 63586 - 12717 = 50869
For India EB3 Priority date to reach Dec 2006 = 50869/18590 = 2.7 Years
Conclusion
Without Law: 50 Years :confused:
With Law: 2.7 Years :D
2011 Kim Kardashian Goes Blonde:
nixstor
05-14 07:28 PM
This is totally ludacris to me. Even though the bulletin expects movement going forward, there is no assurance that the dates will not go back. On the flip side, I am wondering if USCIS/DOS wanted to fully utilize the 140K visas this year and just moved the dates too much ahead. If thats the case, the dates might not move again or retrogress back further. DOS official Oppenheimer mentioned that atleast 10-11k were wasted last year. I still feel that the dates are going to go back some time sooner or later without congressional law changes.
This means that we have to stay put and work towards our common goal of getting the system fixed.
This means that we have to stay put and work towards our common goal of getting the system fixed.
more...
GCBy3000
07-14 09:57 AM
Folks,
understand IV is a non-profit org and they are not full time employees of IV and getting paid for what they are doing. Entire IV active members and sleeping members are one team with set of goals.
Probably from my experience with IV activities I beleive IV would have known this news a week before. When we are talking about this, they might be working out a plan with QGA. Leave them free and let them do their job. It is not an easy task for volunteers. Each member is in different location and they have to co-ordinate etc etc. I do not know why people are DEMANDING from IV as if they are shareholders.
understand IV is a non-profit org and they are not full time employees of IV and getting paid for what they are doing. Entire IV active members and sleeping members are one team with set of goals.
Probably from my experience with IV activities I beleive IV would have known this news a week before. When we are talking about this, they might be working out a plan with QGA. Leave them free and let them do their job. It is not an easy task for volunteers. Each member is in different location and they have to co-ordinate etc etc. I do not know why people are DEMANDING from IV as if they are shareholders.
123456mg
07-20 03:32 AM
Immigration attorneys normally send more than required documents to avoid getting RFEs later on. In this case, the reason people send W-2s (though it is not mandated) and tax returns is to show that you were working and were making approximately equal amount that was mentioned on you H-1B LCA.
Asking for W-2 or tax returns are within the powers of AOS adjudicator and s/he can raise an RFE for such "discretionary evidence".
The tax returns prove that you did not have any other source of income (that directly contradicts your H-1B compliance) and thus you were not employed on another part-time job or any other business of that fashion and complied to the terms of H-1B rules.
There are various factors to consider here:
1. If you know that your H-1B LCA had substantially higher amount and you did not make that much (cause you were on bench or any other reason), it would be far better not to send it. By sending your W-2 in such case, you are actually weakening your case and the AOS officer is going to find it out and will have RFE for it and later you will have a lot of explaining to do. Also, if you had any other form(s) of income (like some people use to make money in day trading and that forms their additional income), it will be wiser not to send your income tax returns and create additonal issues.
2. If you know that you made almost similar amount as mentioned on your H-1B LCA, then you will have to send all W-2 and income tax statements from the time when you were last inspected or paroled by the US immigration officer. Do not give anymore than what is really required of you. By giving unnecessorily more information, you may cause additional issues later on.
Asking for W-2 or tax returns are within the powers of AOS adjudicator and s/he can raise an RFE for such "discretionary evidence".
The tax returns prove that you did not have any other source of income (that directly contradicts your H-1B compliance) and thus you were not employed on another part-time job or any other business of that fashion and complied to the terms of H-1B rules.
There are various factors to consider here:
1. If you know that your H-1B LCA had substantially higher amount and you did not make that much (cause you were on bench or any other reason), it would be far better not to send it. By sending your W-2 in such case, you are actually weakening your case and the AOS officer is going to find it out and will have RFE for it and later you will have a lot of explaining to do. Also, if you had any other form(s) of income (like some people use to make money in day trading and that forms their additional income), it will be wiser not to send your income tax returns and create additonal issues.
2. If you know that you made almost similar amount as mentioned on your H-1B LCA, then you will have to send all W-2 and income tax statements from the time when you were last inspected or paroled by the US immigration officer. Do not give anymore than what is really required of you. By giving unnecessorily more information, you may cause additional issues later on.
more...
paskal
12-27 04:43 PM
follow up call today
details are the SAME
10pm cst
we will try to keep to the point and keep it short
please attend
details are the SAME
10pm cst
we will try to keep to the point and keep it short
please attend
2010 Kim Kardashian Makeup
permfiling
02-09 04:22 PM
A correction, it is for 3 years infact not 4 and the I-94 stamped at POE was 1 month short of 3 years.
more...
dpp
07-27 03:02 PM
I-485, 765 and 131 forms are for the applicant who wants to adjust status/ work/travel. So, applicant signature is required. Even though you fill G28, that is for authorizing the attorney in preparing and submitting the forms.
I think no one otherthan the actual applicant can sign the forms. If attorney represent you, then he will sign in his part, thats it. But you need to sign your part anyway.
Please ask your attorney why he did like that.
Yeah, he did, but no form is signed by me. Moreover I have not given any authorization form.
Is it OK.
Please confirm.
Thanks for the earlier reply.
I think no one otherthan the actual applicant can sign the forms. If attorney represent you, then he will sign in his part, thats it. But you need to sign your part anyway.
Please ask your attorney why he did like that.
Yeah, he did, but no form is signed by me. Moreover I have not given any authorization form.
Is it OK.
Please confirm.
Thanks for the earlier reply.
hair Kim Kardashian wavy hairstyles
ranand00
08-17 07:58 AM
been in pittsburgh for 8 yrs.license renewal no problem at pittsburgh downtown office.
need letter from employer and h1,thats it.
go to a different office or talk to the suprevisor.
hope it helps
anand
need letter from employer and h1,thats it.
go to a different office or talk to the suprevisor.
hope it helps
anand
more...
swarnapuri
06-26 12:48 PM
There is a news in news article thread that Senators Cantwell & Kyl have proposed a amendment which will open up a parallel employer sponsored GC path. Anyone has information regarding this amendment?
hot kim kardashian hair.
sundarpn
08-03 06:45 PM
Is the below in bold which mambarg has mentioned true?
I thought once an I-140 is approved, one carries that priority date for life.... (even if the 140 is revoked). At any point if he files another 140, the priority date can be ported.
its news to me that 485+180 day rule applied to mere porting of priority date too?
Question 11. When is an I-140 no longer valid for porting purposes?
Answer: An I-140 is no longer valid for porting purposes when:
A. an I-140 is withdrawn before the alien�s I-485 has been pending 180 days, or
B. an I-140 is denied or revoked at any time except when it is revoked based on a withdrawal that was submitted after an I-485 has been pending for 180 days.
I thought once an I-140 is approved, one carries that priority date for life.... (even if the 140 is revoked). At any point if he files another 140, the priority date can be ported.
its news to me that 485+180 day rule applied to mere porting of priority date too?
Question 11. When is an I-140 no longer valid for porting purposes?
Answer: An I-140 is no longer valid for porting purposes when:
A. an I-140 is withdrawn before the alien�s I-485 has been pending 180 days, or
B. an I-140 is denied or revoked at any time except when it is revoked based on a withdrawal that was submitted after an I-485 has been pending for 180 days.
more...
house Kim Kardashian Signing
GCNirvana007
04-08 06:26 PM
As if your ID has any value?
Who cares about annonymous IDs anyways. :D:D:D
Thanks. Hope you get GC soon as well.
Who cares about annonymous IDs anyways. :D:D:D
Thanks. Hope you get GC soon as well.
tattoo kim kardashian
lapisguy
07-25 05:42 PM
Hi,
I was going thru the chain of I-140 issues, my case is a bit similar but wanted some expert advice...
My employer filed I-140 in June but I did not get any approval yet so my employer ask me to wait until it approved then file for I-485?
Are there chances that if I file I-485 it would get rejected?
I was going thru the chain of I-140 issues, my case is a bit similar but wanted some expert advice...
My employer filed I-140 in June but I did not get any approval yet so my employer ask me to wait until it approved then file for I-485?
Are there chances that if I file I-485 it would get rejected?
more...
pictures Kim Kardashian hair styles
bbenhill
01-09 04:06 PM
applies to generan legal immigrant population.
How about instead of survey we put it as a sticky note to announce if someone have information that in his/her place is hiring. With that way we can help all people who got laid off and this site can be a networking website.
Please give me green if you like my idea :D
How about instead of survey we put it as a sticky note to announce if someone have information that in his/her place is hiring. With that way we can help all people who got laid off and this site can be a networking website.
Please give me green if you like my idea :D
dresses Kim Kardashian
buddhaas
02-02 03:57 PM
Why Is H-1B A Dirty Word?
By Eleanor Pelta, AILA First Vice President
H-1B workers certainly seem to be under fire these days on many fronts. A new memo issued by USCIS on the employer-employee relationship imposes new extra-regulatory regulations on the types of activities in which H-1B workers can engage as well as the types of enterprises that can petition for H-1B workers. The memo targets the consulting industry directly, deftly slips in a new concept that seems to prohibit H-1B petitions for employer-owners of businesses, and will surely constitute an open invitation to the Service Centers to hit H-1B petitioners with a new slew of kitchen-sink RFE's. On another front, USCIS continues to make unannounced H-1B site visits, often repeatedly to the same employer. Apart from the "in-terrorem" impact of such visits, I personally cannot see the utility of three different visits to the same employer, particularly after the first one or two visits show that the employer is fully compliant.
But USCIS isn't the only agency that is rigorously targeting H-1B's. An AILA member recently reported that CBP pulled newly-arrived Indian nationals holding H-1B visas out of an immigration inspection line and reportedly placed them in Expedited Removal. The legal basis of those actions is still unclear. However, the tactic is too close to racial profiling for my own comfort.
Finally, recent H-1B "skirmishes" include various U.S. consular posts in India issuing "pink letters" that are, simply put, consular "RFE's" appearing to question the bona fides of the H-1B and requesting information on a host of truly repetitive and/or irrelevant topics. Much of the information that is routinely requested on a pink letter is already in the copy of the H-1B visa petition. Some of the letters request payroll information for all employees of the sponsoring company, a ridiculous request in most instances, particularly for major multi-national companies. One of the most frustrating actions we are seeing from consular officers in this context is the checking off or highlighting of every single category of additional information on the form letter, whether directly applicable or not, in effect a "paper wall" that must be overcome before an applicant can have the H-1B visa issued. Very discouraging to both employer and employee.
How have we come to a point in time where the H-1B category in and of itself is so disdained and mistrusted? Of course I'm aware that instances of fraud have cast this category in a bad light. But I think that vehemence of the administrative attack on the H-1B category is so disproportionate to the actual statistics about fraud. And interestingly, the disproportionate heavy-handed administrative reaction comes not from the agency specifically tasked with H-1B enforcement—the Department of Labor—but from CIS, CBP and State. Sometimes I just have to shake my head and ask myself what makes people so darn angry about a visa category that, at bottom, is designed to bring in relatively tiny number of really smart people to work in U.S. businesses of any size. It has to be a reaction against something else.
Yes, a great number of IT consultants come to the US on H-1B's. It is important to remember that so many of these individuals are extremely well-educated, capable people, working in an industry in which there are a large number of high profile players. And arguably, the high profile consulting companies have the most at stake if they do not focus on compliance, as they are the easiest enforcement target and they need their business model to work in the U.S. in order to survive. Some people may not like the business model, although arguably IT consulting companies provide needed services that allow US businesses, such as banks and insurance companies to focus on their own core strengths. Like it or not, though, this business model is perfectly legal under current law, and the agencies that enforce our immigration laws have no business trying to eviscerate it by policy or a pattern of discretionary actions.
It is true that some IT consulting companies' practices have been the focus of fraud investigations. But DOL has stringent rules in place to deal with the bad guys. Benching H-1B workers without pay, paying below the prevailing wage, sending H-1B workers on long-term assignments to a site not covered by an LCA—these are the practices we most often hear about, and every single one of these is a violation of an existing regulation that could be enforced by the Department of Labor. When an employer violates wage and hour rules, DOL investigates the practices and enforces the regulations against that employer. But no one shuts down an entire industry as a result.
And the IT consulting industry is not the only user of the H-1B visa. Let's not forget how many other critical fields use H-1B workers. In my own career alone, I have seen H-1B petitions for nanoscientists, ornithologists, CEO's of significant not for profit organizations, teachers, applied mathematicians, risk analysts, professionals involved in pharmaceutical research and development, automotive designers, international legal experts, film editors, microimaging engineers. H-1B's are valuable to small and large businesses alike, arguably even more to that emerging business that needs one key expert to develop a new product or service and get the business off the ground.
The assault on H-1B's is not only offensive, it's dangerous. Here's why:
* H-1B's create jobs—statistics show that 5 jobs are created in the U.S. for every H-1B worker hired. An administrative clamp-down in the program will hinder this job creation. And think about the valuable sharing of skills and expertise between H-1B workers and U.S. workers—this is lost when companies are discouraged from using the program.
* The anti-H-1B assault dissuades large businesses from conducting research and development in the US, and encourages the relocation of those facilities in jurisdictions that are friendlier to foreign professionals.
* The anti-H-1B assault chills the formation of small businesses in the US, particularly in emerging technologies. This will most certainly be one of the long-term results of USCIS' most recent memo.
* The attack on H-1B's offends our friends and allies in the world. An example: Earlier this year India –one of the U.S.'s closest allies --announced new visa restrictions on foreign nationals working there. Surely the treatment of Indian national H-1B workers at the hands of our agencies involved in the immigration process would not have escaped the attention of the Indian government as they issued their own restrictions.
* The increasing challenges in the H-1B program may have the effect of encouraging foreign students who were educated in the U.S. to seek permanent positions elsewhere.
Whatever the cause of the visceral reaction against H-1B workers might be—whether it stems from a fear that fraud will become more widespread or whether it is simply a broader reaction against foreign workers that often raises its head during any down economy –I sincerely hope that the agencies are able to gain some perspective on the program that allows them to treat legitimate H-1B employers and employees with the respect they deserve and to effectively enforce against those who are non-compliant, rather than casting a wide net and treating all H-1B users as abusers.
source link : http://ailaleadership.blogspot.com/2010/02/why-is-h-1b-dirty-word.html#comment-form
By Eleanor Pelta, AILA First Vice President
H-1B workers certainly seem to be under fire these days on many fronts. A new memo issued by USCIS on the employer-employee relationship imposes new extra-regulatory regulations on the types of activities in which H-1B workers can engage as well as the types of enterprises that can petition for H-1B workers. The memo targets the consulting industry directly, deftly slips in a new concept that seems to prohibit H-1B petitions for employer-owners of businesses, and will surely constitute an open invitation to the Service Centers to hit H-1B petitioners with a new slew of kitchen-sink RFE's. On another front, USCIS continues to make unannounced H-1B site visits, often repeatedly to the same employer. Apart from the "in-terrorem" impact of such visits, I personally cannot see the utility of three different visits to the same employer, particularly after the first one or two visits show that the employer is fully compliant.
But USCIS isn't the only agency that is rigorously targeting H-1B's. An AILA member recently reported that CBP pulled newly-arrived Indian nationals holding H-1B visas out of an immigration inspection line and reportedly placed them in Expedited Removal. The legal basis of those actions is still unclear. However, the tactic is too close to racial profiling for my own comfort.
Finally, recent H-1B "skirmishes" include various U.S. consular posts in India issuing "pink letters" that are, simply put, consular "RFE's" appearing to question the bona fides of the H-1B and requesting information on a host of truly repetitive and/or irrelevant topics. Much of the information that is routinely requested on a pink letter is already in the copy of the H-1B visa petition. Some of the letters request payroll information for all employees of the sponsoring company, a ridiculous request in most instances, particularly for major multi-national companies. One of the most frustrating actions we are seeing from consular officers in this context is the checking off or highlighting of every single category of additional information on the form letter, whether directly applicable or not, in effect a "paper wall" that must be overcome before an applicant can have the H-1B visa issued. Very discouraging to both employer and employee.
How have we come to a point in time where the H-1B category in and of itself is so disdained and mistrusted? Of course I'm aware that instances of fraud have cast this category in a bad light. But I think that vehemence of the administrative attack on the H-1B category is so disproportionate to the actual statistics about fraud. And interestingly, the disproportionate heavy-handed administrative reaction comes not from the agency specifically tasked with H-1B enforcement—the Department of Labor—but from CIS, CBP and State. Sometimes I just have to shake my head and ask myself what makes people so darn angry about a visa category that, at bottom, is designed to bring in relatively tiny number of really smart people to work in U.S. businesses of any size. It has to be a reaction against something else.
Yes, a great number of IT consultants come to the US on H-1B's. It is important to remember that so many of these individuals are extremely well-educated, capable people, working in an industry in which there are a large number of high profile players. And arguably, the high profile consulting companies have the most at stake if they do not focus on compliance, as they are the easiest enforcement target and they need their business model to work in the U.S. in order to survive. Some people may not like the business model, although arguably IT consulting companies provide needed services that allow US businesses, such as banks and insurance companies to focus on their own core strengths. Like it or not, though, this business model is perfectly legal under current law, and the agencies that enforce our immigration laws have no business trying to eviscerate it by policy or a pattern of discretionary actions.
It is true that some IT consulting companies' practices have been the focus of fraud investigations. But DOL has stringent rules in place to deal with the bad guys. Benching H-1B workers without pay, paying below the prevailing wage, sending H-1B workers on long-term assignments to a site not covered by an LCA—these are the practices we most often hear about, and every single one of these is a violation of an existing regulation that could be enforced by the Department of Labor. When an employer violates wage and hour rules, DOL investigates the practices and enforces the regulations against that employer. But no one shuts down an entire industry as a result.
And the IT consulting industry is not the only user of the H-1B visa. Let's not forget how many other critical fields use H-1B workers. In my own career alone, I have seen H-1B petitions for nanoscientists, ornithologists, CEO's of significant not for profit organizations, teachers, applied mathematicians, risk analysts, professionals involved in pharmaceutical research and development, automotive designers, international legal experts, film editors, microimaging engineers. H-1B's are valuable to small and large businesses alike, arguably even more to that emerging business that needs one key expert to develop a new product or service and get the business off the ground.
The assault on H-1B's is not only offensive, it's dangerous. Here's why:
* H-1B's create jobs—statistics show that 5 jobs are created in the U.S. for every H-1B worker hired. An administrative clamp-down in the program will hinder this job creation. And think about the valuable sharing of skills and expertise between H-1B workers and U.S. workers—this is lost when companies are discouraged from using the program.
* The anti-H-1B assault dissuades large businesses from conducting research and development in the US, and encourages the relocation of those facilities in jurisdictions that are friendlier to foreign professionals.
* The anti-H-1B assault chills the formation of small businesses in the US, particularly in emerging technologies. This will most certainly be one of the long-term results of USCIS' most recent memo.
* The attack on H-1B's offends our friends and allies in the world. An example: Earlier this year India –one of the U.S.'s closest allies --announced new visa restrictions on foreign nationals working there. Surely the treatment of Indian national H-1B workers at the hands of our agencies involved in the immigration process would not have escaped the attention of the Indian government as they issued their own restrictions.
* The increasing challenges in the H-1B program may have the effect of encouraging foreign students who were educated in the U.S. to seek permanent positions elsewhere.
Whatever the cause of the visceral reaction against H-1B workers might be—whether it stems from a fear that fraud will become more widespread or whether it is simply a broader reaction against foreign workers that often raises its head during any down economy –I sincerely hope that the agencies are able to gain some perspective on the program that allows them to treat legitimate H-1B employers and employees with the respect they deserve and to effectively enforce against those who are non-compliant, rather than casting a wide net and treating all H-1B users as abusers.
source link : http://ailaleadership.blogspot.com/2010/02/why-is-h-1b-dirty-word.html#comment-form
more...
makeup kim kardashian blonde hair
Libra
08-10 03:03 PM
Signed up for 50$ monthly
girlfriend Kim Kardashian Long Straight
amsgc
04-22 09:59 PM
Indian companies like wipro, infosys discourage GC processes.
If that is the case, then PDs should move forward once we are past FY2004.
The question is, how many are there in FY2004?!!
If that is the case, then PDs should move forward once we are past FY2004.
The question is, how many are there in FY2004?!!
hairstyles Anna Kournikova wigs hair
Sunx_2004
05-14 04:42 PM
I was under impression that there is last quarter quota still remain...
Based on below they used it all...
:confused:
I am sure this is noticed by many :
"E. EMPLOYMENT THIRD PREFERENCE VISA AVAILABILITY
Demand for numbers, primarily by Citizenship and Immigration Services Offices for adjustment of status cases, is expected to bring the Employment Third preference category very close to the annual numerical limit in June. As a result, this category is likely to experience retrogressions or visa unavailability beginning in July. Such action would only be temporary, however, and a complete recovery of the cut-off dates would occur for October, the first month of the new fiscal year. "
Based on below they used it all...
:confused:
I am sure this is noticed by many :
"E. EMPLOYMENT THIRD PREFERENCE VISA AVAILABILITY
Demand for numbers, primarily by Citizenship and Immigration Services Offices for adjustment of status cases, is expected to bring the Employment Third preference category very close to the annual numerical limit in June. As a result, this category is likely to experience retrogressions or visa unavailability beginning in July. Such action would only be temporary, however, and a complete recovery of the cut-off dates would occur for October, the first month of the new fiscal year. "
CRAZYMONK
08-16 03:26 PM
There is not direct signed contract with the client and old employer. There are like 3 layers inbetween client and the old employer. old employer have contract with the middle vendor not the client.
But, one problem is this old employer made me sign the Employee Agreement document when i was going for my visa stamping. He is using that Agreement and using it against me. And also in the offer letter which he gave me he said he will revise or increase my pay every 6 months but never did that and he didn't gave any medical benifits also.
Thanks,
Srikanth
Srikanth,
It all depends on the language in the Agreement that you signed. More over in some state doesn't consider these kind of agreements.
Tell him that you are going to complain to DOL if he threatens you. Even though he sues you, as the reason behind your H1 transfer is not getting paid in time, there are very good chances getting final verdict in your favor.
So don't worry.
But, one problem is this old employer made me sign the Employee Agreement document when i was going for my visa stamping. He is using that Agreement and using it against me. And also in the offer letter which he gave me he said he will revise or increase my pay every 6 months but never did that and he didn't gave any medical benifits also.
Thanks,
Srikanth
Srikanth,
It all depends on the language in the Agreement that you signed. More over in some state doesn't consider these kind of agreements.
Tell him that you are going to complain to DOL if he threatens you. Even though he sues you, as the reason behind your H1 transfer is not getting paid in time, there are very good chances getting final verdict in your favor.
So don't worry.
gcnj
03-17 02:45 PM
If you do h1 transfer then the advantage is incase your 485 application gets denied for any reason you will still be in legal status ,where as in case you use EAD and any 485 denial you will be out of status immediately.
No comments:
Post a Comment