hydboy77
04-27 11:53 PM
if what you said is correct then if dates move forward then people at NSC are going to get far more GC than TSC because 485 applications have been pre processed at NSC and TSC will not be able to match NSC in issuing GC
No TSC is not. TSC goes by priority date and not processing date. TSC I have seen follows different processing style. For e.g. if your namecheck/security check or some kind of check is pending they dont send you FP notice. Also they process applications if your PD is current/close to recent bulletin.
No TSC is not. TSC goes by priority date and not processing date. TSC I have seen follows different processing style. For e.g. if your namecheck/security check or some kind of check is pending they dont send you FP notice. Also they process applications if your PD is current/close to recent bulletin.
wallpaper sunset love kiss. This photo belongs to. Alician Jecies#39; photostream (
meridiani.planum
05-18 12:56 PM
If this passes this will be awesome for Ph.D. graduates.
and also for non-PhD folks like me. As they exempt these superstars from the queue, it also has the effect of making the queue smaller (slightly atleast) for everyone else. i personalyl know of two PhDs who are waiting in EB2 queue for the last 3 years...
and also for non-PhD folks like me. As they exempt these superstars from the queue, it also has the effect of making the queue smaller (slightly atleast) for everyone else. i personalyl know of two PhDs who are waiting in EB2 queue for the last 3 years...
akred
07-25 08:04 PM
I have found that SBI is the most cost effective one. There is some inconvienience as you have to register with them, but every transfer after that can be accomplished with a fax to their offices.
2011 sunset love kiss. Kiss Amongst The Sunset - San
caforum2
09-14 06:34 AM
for folks in US, you don't need to go to Chennai, You can chose whichever consulate you want. I choose New Delhi instead of Chennai recently and got appointment in 15 days in advance. I know Oct is full in Delhi, Kolkatta, Chennai and Mumbai. I would wait till Sept 20th to see Oct dats. Usually people book appointments and change the dates only closer to interview date.
more...
vnsriv
11-16 01:27 PM
Nov' 07 Processing times are not posted yet
USCIS is always slow
USCIS is always slow
Macaca
12-14 07:24 PM
A USCIS rule appears in a USCIS catalog or addendum. My International Student Advisor had a catalog of rules for F1, COPT and OPT. Everytime I did something out of the norm, I made a copy of the rules. I will keep these rules till I get the green card.
I was told that there is a 60 days period during which I can switch H1B between companies. To the best of my knowledge, it does not appear in a USCIS catalog: most persons say that it is true. My lawyer told me USCIS does not a rule for the period between company switching.
I was not aware of the 60 days grace period after OPT. Please let me know if you have seen it in a USCIS catalog.
I was told that consular approval can not be denied. I was close to being denied. The person before me was denied. Once you are out of the country, anything can happen. It depends on your country, your case and the officer handling the case.
The advantage of consular approval is that you get multiple entry visa.
Once again, a USCIS rule should appear in a USCIS catalog or addendum. The catalogs and addendums should be available online. Does anyone know about it?
Some things slip by but are noticed during the GC process.
Other concerns.
1. Kaplan was issuing I-20's in my time.
2. You are in status if your application is being processed by USCIS. (haven't seen the USCIS catalog)
I was told that there is a 60 days period during which I can switch H1B between companies. To the best of my knowledge, it does not appear in a USCIS catalog: most persons say that it is true. My lawyer told me USCIS does not a rule for the period between company switching.
I was not aware of the 60 days grace period after OPT. Please let me know if you have seen it in a USCIS catalog.
I was told that consular approval can not be denied. I was close to being denied. The person before me was denied. Once you are out of the country, anything can happen. It depends on your country, your case and the officer handling the case.
The advantage of consular approval is that you get multiple entry visa.
Once again, a USCIS rule should appear in a USCIS catalog or addendum. The catalogs and addendums should be available online. Does anyone know about it?
Some things slip by but are noticed during the GC process.
Other concerns.
1. Kaplan was issuing I-20's in my time.
2. You are in status if your application is being processed by USCIS. (haven't seen the USCIS catalog)
more...
gcseeker2002
02-20 03:16 PM
I was looking at the flcdatacenter website for Perm labors filed in 2006, and here are the numbers of total perm filed :
Total : 105960
India : 26636 = 25.2%
China : 8222 = 7.75%
No wonder china is moving faster in the EB categories
Total : 105960
India : 26636 = 25.2%
China : 8222 = 7.75%
No wonder china is moving faster in the EB categories
2010 sunset love kiss. I love the sunset would you; I love the sunset would you
Lasantha
01-31 02:16 PM
I am no expert but I think you are OK because of this phrase in your Labor.
Will accept any suitable combination of Education , training or expeirence in lieu of stated requirements.
I think the people who have problems with 3 year degrees do not have that clause in the LC. As long as you say suitable combination of Education , training or expeirence in lieu of stated requirements you should be fine.
But it won't hurt to get a good Credential Evaluation. Try Sheila Danzig at http://www.degreepeople.com
Please let me know whether my I-140 will be approved under EB3.I have 3 year bachelors degree(Maths) from India and 2yr diploma from Aptech. Your suggestions will be highly appreciated
Column 14
Education
Grade School : 8 years
High School : 4 years
College : 4 years
College Degree(Required) : Bachelor's Degree
Major Fied of Study : Computer Science*
Column 15
Travel and/or relocation required
*compluter Applications, Computer Information Systems, Electrical, Mechanical, Mathematcis, Physics or its foriegn Education Equivalent. Will accept any suitable combination of Education , training or expeirence in lieu of stated requirements.
Will accept any suitable combination of Education , training or expeirence in lieu of stated requirements.
I think the people who have problems with 3 year degrees do not have that clause in the LC. As long as you say suitable combination of Education , training or expeirence in lieu of stated requirements you should be fine.
But it won't hurt to get a good Credential Evaluation. Try Sheila Danzig at http://www.degreepeople.com
Please let me know whether my I-140 will be approved under EB3.I have 3 year bachelors degree(Maths) from India and 2yr diploma from Aptech. Your suggestions will be highly appreciated
Column 14
Education
Grade School : 8 years
High School : 4 years
College : 4 years
College Degree(Required) : Bachelor's Degree
Major Fied of Study : Computer Science*
Column 15
Travel and/or relocation required
*compluter Applications, Computer Information Systems, Electrical, Mechanical, Mathematcis, Physics or its foriegn Education Equivalent. Will accept any suitable combination of Education , training or expeirence in lieu of stated requirements.
more...
sobers
04-07 08:33 PM
Folks, I know you all are probably as deeply disappointed with the stalling of the Senate Immigration Bill as I am. But I guess i'm getting used to it now:mad: - had similar experience after S. 1932 relief was stripped out in December.
But instead of despairing, i'm now thinking of alternative ways to broaden our message and reach out to key lawmakers.
As you all may know, House Judiciary Committe Chairman Jim Sensenbrenner is going to be the Key House Negotiator on any Immigration Bill this year ....
Whether we like it or not, this is the hard truth.
The good news is that per se Sensenbrenner is not a restricionist. He is also not part of Tancredo Anti-Immigrant Caucus. However Sensenbrenner is against Illegal Immigration and Amnesty.
The bad news is that because of recent events (including attacks against him by latino/church activists, etc) he has decidedly moved to the right. He has probably hardened against his views to immigration, not just the illegal kind.
Since he is going to the point man on this issue, no doubts there, we ought to have a campaign to reveal the plight of legal immigrants to him. I'm convinced he's currently beseiged by restrictionist NumbersUSA, FAIR and CIS.org and being fed all his facts on immigration by these folks. We pay taxes, we obey laws, we wait in line patiently, we serve our local community here (for instance I've done many years of community work in the U.S. here and have been recognized for it), we enhance the compeititveness of this country by bringing our much needed skills to work for US business, and we do all this without taking a dime of public benefit. When restrictionists talk of how amnesty will be unfair to people waiting in long lines (that is Us Folks!), have they ever considered what to do to shorten these lines? Illegal immigration is unfair, but the legal immigration system is also broken - and unfair! We folks have the longest waits in the histroy of the US immigration system. If the (legal) system is not working properly, and here it is not, then people will have less incentive to follow it. Why should people follow the rules when it is much easier to get in without following the rules? So to deter illegal immigration ,you also have to show them the LEGAL immigration system works, and give prospective immigrants a good example.
Anyway, the point of all this rambling is this: I think we should have a campaign to bring some sense to sensenbrenner. I do not think he is a bad person per se. But he needs to be shown the light here- the genuine problems we are facing. We should have a webfax campaign now. Once the conference committee process starts, thousands of faxes start pouring in and staffers just count them and throw them in the bin. No one has time to read them.
But instead of despairing, i'm now thinking of alternative ways to broaden our message and reach out to key lawmakers.
As you all may know, House Judiciary Committe Chairman Jim Sensenbrenner is going to be the Key House Negotiator on any Immigration Bill this year ....
Whether we like it or not, this is the hard truth.
The good news is that per se Sensenbrenner is not a restricionist. He is also not part of Tancredo Anti-Immigrant Caucus. However Sensenbrenner is against Illegal Immigration and Amnesty.
The bad news is that because of recent events (including attacks against him by latino/church activists, etc) he has decidedly moved to the right. He has probably hardened against his views to immigration, not just the illegal kind.
Since he is going to the point man on this issue, no doubts there, we ought to have a campaign to reveal the plight of legal immigrants to him. I'm convinced he's currently beseiged by restrictionist NumbersUSA, FAIR and CIS.org and being fed all his facts on immigration by these folks. We pay taxes, we obey laws, we wait in line patiently, we serve our local community here (for instance I've done many years of community work in the U.S. here and have been recognized for it), we enhance the compeititveness of this country by bringing our much needed skills to work for US business, and we do all this without taking a dime of public benefit. When restrictionists talk of how amnesty will be unfair to people waiting in long lines (that is Us Folks!), have they ever considered what to do to shorten these lines? Illegal immigration is unfair, but the legal immigration system is also broken - and unfair! We folks have the longest waits in the histroy of the US immigration system. If the (legal) system is not working properly, and here it is not, then people will have less incentive to follow it. Why should people follow the rules when it is much easier to get in without following the rules? So to deter illegal immigration ,you also have to show them the LEGAL immigration system works, and give prospective immigrants a good example.
Anyway, the point of all this rambling is this: I think we should have a campaign to bring some sense to sensenbrenner. I do not think he is a bad person per se. But he needs to be shown the light here- the genuine problems we are facing. We should have a webfax campaign now. Once the conference committee process starts, thousands of faxes start pouring in and staffers just count them and throw them in the bin. No one has time to read them.
hair Sunset wallpaper drunk love
asphaltcowboy
05-27 10:31 AM
it's gotta be Soul's... the worst thing is the flippin' page transitions! I'm growing old waiting for them! congrats to everyone with a **** website
;)
;)
more...
chanduv23
05-05 08:49 AM
The info I got is I can not apply for 7th year based on the approved LC I have. But I can apply for 7th year based on the LC pending with PBEC. My problem is that LC applied in Marc 2005, is thr some other employer and I do not have any details of this application. I sent 3 emails to PBEC for screenshot which can be used as proof od pending LC and I can then apply for 7th year extension. But unfortunately I did not get any response from PBEC, I know some people get the response within 2-3 hrs from them????
Another possibility is if the pending I-140 is approved by Aug end I can apply for 3 year extension.
So I am totally uninformed what's the future. I talked with the lawyer who filed my earlier labor, she says we can demand for screenshot only in June, then we will get response from PBEC.
Hope this helps.
You need to contact your old employer for your L/C application info. If you cannot do that, try contacting their lawyer.
Another possibility is if the pending I-140 is approved by Aug end I can apply for 3 year extension.
So I am totally uninformed what's the future. I talked with the lawyer who filed my earlier labor, she says we can demand for screenshot only in June, then we will get response from PBEC.
Hope this helps.
You need to contact your old employer for your L/C application info. If you cannot do that, try contacting their lawyer.
hot Love Song Love Song # Sunset
angelfire76
12-07 04:28 PM
EB1 is typically for Phds with solid publications behind their belts.
In some cases the individual can sponsor himself without an employer as such people are considered a good value add to the US. In other cases, an employer has to have a bonafide job opening requiring such skills (mostly professors, research, etc.,). These people are usually given their Green cards in ceremonies unlike EB2/EB3 where the card is mailed out in a USPS envelope.
There is also an easy way. In some companies in India, people with 5-6 years of experience are promoted to Project manager roles and have a group of people reporting to them. If this company transfers them to the US to continue the same role, they become eligible for EB1. So in a typical case,
complete education at age 22 and join company x as a software engineer
get promoted to Project manager at age 27 (5 years later)
come to the US at age 28 ( a year later)
apply for GC on EB1 (directly apply for 140/485 as there is no Labor required and also PDs are current)
get GC at age 29
you are all set...get married, buy the mini-van (Odyssey or Sienna), perhaps open a India/Pakistan grocery store on the side which rents out pirated DVDs of desi movies and enjoy life!
I know you are being pointedly sarcastic at a section of green card applicants but Project Managers are not eligible for EB1. (Don't give that section any bright ideas) Only multi-national executives (VP and above are)
in addition to researchers who have exceptional track-record (no, publishing papers in IEEE digest doesn't count)
Haven't heard of EB1s getting GC in ceremonies. After all the little piece of plastic is not an award of merit or anything (even though lot of us seem to think so :D)
In some cases the individual can sponsor himself without an employer as such people are considered a good value add to the US. In other cases, an employer has to have a bonafide job opening requiring such skills (mostly professors, research, etc.,). These people are usually given their Green cards in ceremonies unlike EB2/EB3 where the card is mailed out in a USPS envelope.
There is also an easy way. In some companies in India, people with 5-6 years of experience are promoted to Project manager roles and have a group of people reporting to them. If this company transfers them to the US to continue the same role, they become eligible for EB1. So in a typical case,
complete education at age 22 and join company x as a software engineer
get promoted to Project manager at age 27 (5 years later)
come to the US at age 28 ( a year later)
apply for GC on EB1 (directly apply for 140/485 as there is no Labor required and also PDs are current)
get GC at age 29
you are all set...get married, buy the mini-van (Odyssey or Sienna), perhaps open a India/Pakistan grocery store on the side which rents out pirated DVDs of desi movies and enjoy life!
I know you are being pointedly sarcastic at a section of green card applicants but Project Managers are not eligible for EB1. (Don't give that section any bright ideas) Only multi-national executives (VP and above are)
in addition to researchers who have exceptional track-record (no, publishing papers in IEEE digest doesn't count)
Haven't heard of EB1s getting GC in ceremonies. After all the little piece of plastic is not an award of merit or anything (even though lot of us seem to think so :D)
more...
house Sunset Love Kiss.
chem2
07-21 01:23 PM
i posted the following on another thread back about a month ago. hopefully it will help you. haven't recd any soft or hard luds since the fingerprinting, though.
-----------
guys, until yesterday, i was in the same boat as all of you.
i-140/485/131/765 concurrently filed with tsc in Aug 2007. recd receipt notices, ead and ap without any problems in oct and nov 2007, but no fingerprint notices. called uscis couple of times (didn't open any sr's though), got standard response- application is under review, you'll be sent notices as part of the review process, don't ask when.
asked lawyer why no biometrics and he said that a lot of their clients have not recd theirs, but they were starting to see some come through (this was back in feb 2008). i also asked lawyer if it was advisable to contact local congressman/ senator for help and he advised against it, apparently if your file is with an io and your congressman/ senator sends a query, uscis has a limited amount of time to respond and the file is typically pulled from the io (don't know if i believe this, but that was the line i was fed).
finally got fed up and contacted local congressman's office; no help there either, got canned response from tsc- we recd x million applications last july and august and are trying to work through them.
then last month, i asked my senator's office to find out what was going on. this time i got a reponse back from tsc saying that they would send out notices shortly, if they hadn't done so. lo and behold, a week after receiving the tsc response from my senator's office, both my spouse and i recd fingerprint notices, which we completed yesterday.
-----------
guys, until yesterday, i was in the same boat as all of you.
i-140/485/131/765 concurrently filed with tsc in Aug 2007. recd receipt notices, ead and ap without any problems in oct and nov 2007, but no fingerprint notices. called uscis couple of times (didn't open any sr's though), got standard response- application is under review, you'll be sent notices as part of the review process, don't ask when.
asked lawyer why no biometrics and he said that a lot of their clients have not recd theirs, but they were starting to see some come through (this was back in feb 2008). i also asked lawyer if it was advisable to contact local congressman/ senator for help and he advised against it, apparently if your file is with an io and your congressman/ senator sends a query, uscis has a limited amount of time to respond and the file is typically pulled from the io (don't know if i believe this, but that was the line i was fed).
finally got fed up and contacted local congressman's office; no help there either, got canned response from tsc- we recd x million applications last july and august and are trying to work through them.
then last month, i asked my senator's office to find out what was going on. this time i got a reponse back from tsc saying that they would send out notices shortly, if they hadn't done so. lo and behold, a week after receiving the tsc response from my senator's office, both my spouse and i recd fingerprint notices, which we completed yesterday.
tattoo sunset love kiss. couple
imh1b
02-04 03:45 PM
How did you celebrate?
What are your changed plans now in life?
What are your changed plans now in life?
more...
pictures sunset love kiss. Love#39;s Kiss. Love#39;s Kiss. ArchaicRevival
Rockford
07-16 02:57 PM
Guys , read the core update on the home page !!!
dresses silhouette, love, man, woman,
Blog Feeds
01-27 08:30 AM
Summary
(LINK TO FULL REPORT BELOW)
Congress created the H-1B program in 1990 to enable U.S. employers to hire temporary, foreign workers in specialty occupations. The law capped the number of H-1B visas issued per fiscal year at 65,000. Since then, the cap has fluctuated with legislative changes. Congress asked GAO to assess the impact of the cap on the ability of domestic companies to innovate, while ensuring that U.S. workers are not disadvantaged. In response, GAO examined what is known about (1) employer demand for H-1B workers; (2) how the cap affects employer costs and decisions to move operations overseas; (3) H-1B worker characteristics and the potential impact of raising the cap; and (4) how well requirements of the H-1B program protect U.S. workers. GAO analyzed data from 4 federal agencies; interviewed agency officials, experts, and H-1B employers; and reviewed agency documents and literature.
In most years, demand for new H-1B workers exceeded the cap: From 2000 to 2009, demand for new H-1B workers tended to exceed the cap, as measured by the numbers of initial petitions submitted by employers who are subject to the cap. There is no way to precisely determine the level of any unmet demand among employers, since they tend to stop submitting (and the Department of Homeland Security stops tracking) petitions once the cap is reached each year. When we consider all initial petitions, including those from universities and research institutions that are not subject to the cap, we find that demand for new H-1B workers is largely driven by a small number of employers. Over the decade, over 14 percent of all initial petitions were submitted by cap-exempt employers, and only a few employers (fewer than 1 percent) garnered over one-quarter of all H-1B approvals. Most interviewed companies said the H-1B cap and program created costs, but were not factors in their decisions to move R&D overseas: The 34 H-1B employers GAO interviewed reported that the cap has created some additional costs, though the cap's impact depended on the size and maturity of the company. For example, in years when visas were denied by the cap, most large firms reported finding other (sometimes more costly) ways to hire their preferred job candidates. On the other hand, small firms were more likely to fill their positions with different candidates, which they said resulted in delays and sometimes economic losses, particularly for firms in rapidly changing technology fields. Limitations in agency data and systems hinder tracking the cap and H-1B workers over time: The total number of H-1B workers in the U.S. at any one time--and information about the length of their stay--is unknown, because (1) data systems among the various agencies that process such individuals are not linked so individuals cannot be readily tracked, and (2) H-1B workers are not assigned a unique identifier that would allow for tracking them over time--particularly if and when their visa status changes. Restricted agency oversight and statutory changes weaken protections for U.S. workers: Elements of the H-1B program that could serve as worker protections--such as the requirement to pay prevailing wages, the visa's temporary status, and the cap itself--are weakened by several factors. First, program oversight is fragmented and restricted. Second, the H-1B program lacks a legal provision for holding employers accountable to program requirements when they obtain H-1B workers through a staffing company. Third, statutory changes made to the H-1B program have, in combination and in effect, increased the pool of H-1B workers beyond the cap and lowered the bar for eligibility. Taken together, the multifaceted challenges identified in this report show that the H-1B program, as currently structured, may not be used to its full potential and may be detrimental in some cases. This report offers several matters for congressional consideration, including that Congress re-examine key H-1B program provisions and make appropriate changes as needed. GAO also recommends that the Departments of Homeland Security and Labor take steps to improve efficiency, flexibility, and monitoring of the H-1B program. Homeland Security disagreed with two recommendations and one matter, citing logistical and other challenges; however, we believe such challenges can be overcome. Labor did not respond to our recommendations.
Recommendations
Our recommendations from this work are listed below with a Contact for more information. Status will change from "In process" to "Open," "Closed - implemented," or "Closed - not implemented" based on our follow up work.
Director:Andrew SherrillTeam:Government Accountability Office: Education, Workforce, and Income SecurityPhone:(202) 512-7252
Matters for Congressional Consideration
Recommendation: To ensure that the H-1B program continues to meet the needs of businesses in a global economy while maintaining a balance of protections for U.S. workers, Congress may wish to consider reviewing the merits and shortcomings of key program provisions and making appropriate changes as needed. Such a review may include, but would not necessarily be limited to (1) the qualifications required for workers eligible under the H-1B program, (2) exemptions from the cap, (3) the appropriateness of H-1B hiring by staffing companies, (4) the level of the cap, and (5) the role the program should play in the U.S. immigration system in relationship to permanent residency.
Status: In process
Comments: When we determine what steps the Congress has taken, we will provide updated information.
Recommendation: To reduce duplication and fragmentation in the administration and oversight of the H-1B application process, consistent with past GAO matters for congressional consideration, Congress may wish to consider eliminating the requirement that employers first submit a Labor Condition Application (LCA) to the Department of Labor for certification, and require instead that employers submit this application along with the I-129 application to the Department of Homeland Security's U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services for review.
Status: In process
Comments: When we determine what steps the Congress has taken, we will provide updated information.
Recommendation: To improve the Department of Labor's ability to investigate and enforce employer compliance with H-1B program requirements, Congress may wish to consider granting the department subpoena power to obtain employer records during investigations under the H-1B program.
Status: In process
Comments: When we determine what steps the Congress has taken, we will provide updated information.
Recommendation: To help ensure the full protection of H-1B workers employed through staffing companies, Congress may wish to consider holding the employer where an H-1B visa holder performs work accountable for meeting program requirements to the same extent as the employer that submitted the LCA form.
Status: In process
Comments: When we determine what steps the Congress has taken, we will provide updated information.
Recommendations for Executive Action
Recommendation: To help ensure that the number of new H-1B workers who are subject to the cap--both entering the United States and changing to H-1B status within the United States--does not exceed the cap each year, U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services should take steps to improve its tracking of the number of approved H-1B applications and the number of issued visas under the cap by fully leveraging the transformation effort currently under way, which involves the adoption of an electronic petition processing system that will be linked to the Department of State's tracking system. Such steps should ensure that linkages to the Department of State's tracking system will provide Homeland Security with timely access to data on visa issuances, and that mechanisms for tracking petitions and visas against the cap are incorporated into U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services' business rules to be developed for the new electronic petition system.
Agency Affected: Department of Homeland Security
Status: In process
Comments: When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.
Recommendation: To address business concerns without undermining program integrity, U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services should, to the extent permitted by its existing statutory authority, explore options for increasing the flexibility of the application process for H-1B employers, such as (1) allowing employers to rank their applications for visa candidates so that they can hire the best qualified worker for the jobs in highest need; (2) distributing the applications granted under the annual cap in allotments throughout the year (e.g. quarterly); and (3) establishing a system whereby businesses with a strong track-record of compliance with H-1B regulations may use a streamlined application process.
Agency Affected: Department of Homeland Security
Status: In process
Comments: When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.
Recommendation: To improve the transparency and oversight of the posting requirement on the Labor Condition Application (LCA), as part of its current oversight role, the Employment and Training Administration should develop and maintain a centralized Web site, accessible to the public, where businesses must post notice of the intent to hire H-1B workers. Such notices should continue to specify the job category and worksite location noted on the LCA and required by statute on current noncentralized postings.
Agency Affected: Department of Labor
Status: In process
Comments: When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.
Recommendation: To improve the efficiency and effectiveness of its investigations of employer compliance with H-1B requirements, the Employment and Training Administration should provide Labor's Wage and Hour Division searchable access to the LCA database.
Agency Affected: Department of Labor
Status: In process
Comments: When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.
VIEW FULL REPORT (http://www.gao.gov/new.items/d1126.pdf)
More... (http://ashwinsharma.com/2011/01/25/h-1b-visa-program-reforms-are-needed-to-minimize-the-risks-and-costs-of-current-program.aspx?ref=rss)
(LINK TO FULL REPORT BELOW)
Congress created the H-1B program in 1990 to enable U.S. employers to hire temporary, foreign workers in specialty occupations. The law capped the number of H-1B visas issued per fiscal year at 65,000. Since then, the cap has fluctuated with legislative changes. Congress asked GAO to assess the impact of the cap on the ability of domestic companies to innovate, while ensuring that U.S. workers are not disadvantaged. In response, GAO examined what is known about (1) employer demand for H-1B workers; (2) how the cap affects employer costs and decisions to move operations overseas; (3) H-1B worker characteristics and the potential impact of raising the cap; and (4) how well requirements of the H-1B program protect U.S. workers. GAO analyzed data from 4 federal agencies; interviewed agency officials, experts, and H-1B employers; and reviewed agency documents and literature.
In most years, demand for new H-1B workers exceeded the cap: From 2000 to 2009, demand for new H-1B workers tended to exceed the cap, as measured by the numbers of initial petitions submitted by employers who are subject to the cap. There is no way to precisely determine the level of any unmet demand among employers, since they tend to stop submitting (and the Department of Homeland Security stops tracking) petitions once the cap is reached each year. When we consider all initial petitions, including those from universities and research institutions that are not subject to the cap, we find that demand for new H-1B workers is largely driven by a small number of employers. Over the decade, over 14 percent of all initial petitions were submitted by cap-exempt employers, and only a few employers (fewer than 1 percent) garnered over one-quarter of all H-1B approvals. Most interviewed companies said the H-1B cap and program created costs, but were not factors in their decisions to move R&D overseas: The 34 H-1B employers GAO interviewed reported that the cap has created some additional costs, though the cap's impact depended on the size and maturity of the company. For example, in years when visas were denied by the cap, most large firms reported finding other (sometimes more costly) ways to hire their preferred job candidates. On the other hand, small firms were more likely to fill their positions with different candidates, which they said resulted in delays and sometimes economic losses, particularly for firms in rapidly changing technology fields. Limitations in agency data and systems hinder tracking the cap and H-1B workers over time: The total number of H-1B workers in the U.S. at any one time--and information about the length of their stay--is unknown, because (1) data systems among the various agencies that process such individuals are not linked so individuals cannot be readily tracked, and (2) H-1B workers are not assigned a unique identifier that would allow for tracking them over time--particularly if and when their visa status changes. Restricted agency oversight and statutory changes weaken protections for U.S. workers: Elements of the H-1B program that could serve as worker protections--such as the requirement to pay prevailing wages, the visa's temporary status, and the cap itself--are weakened by several factors. First, program oversight is fragmented and restricted. Second, the H-1B program lacks a legal provision for holding employers accountable to program requirements when they obtain H-1B workers through a staffing company. Third, statutory changes made to the H-1B program have, in combination and in effect, increased the pool of H-1B workers beyond the cap and lowered the bar for eligibility. Taken together, the multifaceted challenges identified in this report show that the H-1B program, as currently structured, may not be used to its full potential and may be detrimental in some cases. This report offers several matters for congressional consideration, including that Congress re-examine key H-1B program provisions and make appropriate changes as needed. GAO also recommends that the Departments of Homeland Security and Labor take steps to improve efficiency, flexibility, and monitoring of the H-1B program. Homeland Security disagreed with two recommendations and one matter, citing logistical and other challenges; however, we believe such challenges can be overcome. Labor did not respond to our recommendations.
Recommendations
Our recommendations from this work are listed below with a Contact for more information. Status will change from "In process" to "Open," "Closed - implemented," or "Closed - not implemented" based on our follow up work.
Director:Andrew SherrillTeam:Government Accountability Office: Education, Workforce, and Income SecurityPhone:(202) 512-7252
Matters for Congressional Consideration
Recommendation: To ensure that the H-1B program continues to meet the needs of businesses in a global economy while maintaining a balance of protections for U.S. workers, Congress may wish to consider reviewing the merits and shortcomings of key program provisions and making appropriate changes as needed. Such a review may include, but would not necessarily be limited to (1) the qualifications required for workers eligible under the H-1B program, (2) exemptions from the cap, (3) the appropriateness of H-1B hiring by staffing companies, (4) the level of the cap, and (5) the role the program should play in the U.S. immigration system in relationship to permanent residency.
Status: In process
Comments: When we determine what steps the Congress has taken, we will provide updated information.
Recommendation: To reduce duplication and fragmentation in the administration and oversight of the H-1B application process, consistent with past GAO matters for congressional consideration, Congress may wish to consider eliminating the requirement that employers first submit a Labor Condition Application (LCA) to the Department of Labor for certification, and require instead that employers submit this application along with the I-129 application to the Department of Homeland Security's U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services for review.
Status: In process
Comments: When we determine what steps the Congress has taken, we will provide updated information.
Recommendation: To improve the Department of Labor's ability to investigate and enforce employer compliance with H-1B program requirements, Congress may wish to consider granting the department subpoena power to obtain employer records during investigations under the H-1B program.
Status: In process
Comments: When we determine what steps the Congress has taken, we will provide updated information.
Recommendation: To help ensure the full protection of H-1B workers employed through staffing companies, Congress may wish to consider holding the employer where an H-1B visa holder performs work accountable for meeting program requirements to the same extent as the employer that submitted the LCA form.
Status: In process
Comments: When we determine what steps the Congress has taken, we will provide updated information.
Recommendations for Executive Action
Recommendation: To help ensure that the number of new H-1B workers who are subject to the cap--both entering the United States and changing to H-1B status within the United States--does not exceed the cap each year, U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services should take steps to improve its tracking of the number of approved H-1B applications and the number of issued visas under the cap by fully leveraging the transformation effort currently under way, which involves the adoption of an electronic petition processing system that will be linked to the Department of State's tracking system. Such steps should ensure that linkages to the Department of State's tracking system will provide Homeland Security with timely access to data on visa issuances, and that mechanisms for tracking petitions and visas against the cap are incorporated into U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services' business rules to be developed for the new electronic petition system.
Agency Affected: Department of Homeland Security
Status: In process
Comments: When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.
Recommendation: To address business concerns without undermining program integrity, U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services should, to the extent permitted by its existing statutory authority, explore options for increasing the flexibility of the application process for H-1B employers, such as (1) allowing employers to rank their applications for visa candidates so that they can hire the best qualified worker for the jobs in highest need; (2) distributing the applications granted under the annual cap in allotments throughout the year (e.g. quarterly); and (3) establishing a system whereby businesses with a strong track-record of compliance with H-1B regulations may use a streamlined application process.
Agency Affected: Department of Homeland Security
Status: In process
Comments: When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.
Recommendation: To improve the transparency and oversight of the posting requirement on the Labor Condition Application (LCA), as part of its current oversight role, the Employment and Training Administration should develop and maintain a centralized Web site, accessible to the public, where businesses must post notice of the intent to hire H-1B workers. Such notices should continue to specify the job category and worksite location noted on the LCA and required by statute on current noncentralized postings.
Agency Affected: Department of Labor
Status: In process
Comments: When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.
Recommendation: To improve the efficiency and effectiveness of its investigations of employer compliance with H-1B requirements, the Employment and Training Administration should provide Labor's Wage and Hour Division searchable access to the LCA database.
Agency Affected: Department of Labor
Status: In process
Comments: When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.
VIEW FULL REPORT (http://www.gao.gov/new.items/d1126.pdf)
More... (http://ashwinsharma.com/2011/01/25/h-1b-visa-program-reforms-are-needed-to-minimize-the-risks-and-costs-of-current-program.aspx?ref=rss)
more...
makeup sunset love kiss. couple
gee_see
10-19 12:06 PM
As i mentioned in my first post, new job offer salary is more than prevailing wages for that location.
My concern is how USCIS will interpret AC21 cases where the salary is more than prevailing wages for the new location but less than specified in LC.
Does it help if we include a letter explaining salary difference and prevailing wage information for the new location from DOL site
Please advise
My concern is how USCIS will interpret AC21 cases where the salary is more than prevailing wages for the new location but less than specified in LC.
Does it help if we include a letter explaining salary difference and prevailing wage information for the new location from DOL site
Please advise
girlfriend sunset love kiss. kiss, lover, love, beach,
gc_chahiye
12-07 04:48 PM
... Project Managers are not eligible for EB1. (Don't give that section any bright ideas) Only multi-national executives (VP and above are)
in addition to researchers who have exceptional track-record (no, publishing papers in IEEE digest doesn't count
nope. My own manager in my previous company got his GC done in EB1. He is not a VP or anything, just a project manager! Some reports here, some in the india office + a nice case prepared by a top lawfirm and you can be all set.
in addition to researchers who have exceptional track-record (no, publishing papers in IEEE digest doesn't count
nope. My own manager in my previous company got his GC done in EB1. He is not a VP or anything, just a project manager! Some reports here, some in the india office + a nice case prepared by a top lawfirm and you can be all set.
hairstyles sunset love kiss. 21 sunsetkiss 13 kiss 10 love
SAPGURU
07-11 03:53 PM
I am not sure if my previous employer will support, even i am not sure if they have sent a I-140 cancellation request to USCIS.
Can i file 485 through my current employer based on previously approved I-140 as my current I-140 has priority date recapture request.
Can i file 485 through my current employer based on previously approved I-140 as my current I-140 has priority date recapture request.
kondur_007
02-15 06:26 PM
I have the same query:
Permit: using EAD and calling AC21
Role: exactly the same.
Salary: large difference (bayarea vs small city in under developed state) due to the prevailing wage at the new location is far lower.
Experts please advice.
As discussed above with cyrus mehta's blog: This is all discretionary:
My definition f discretionary: "You need a good lawyer which can wrap your sandwich in "golden wrap" and sell it for $45 instead of seeling it in a "brown bag" for $3.75. It's the same sandwich!!" It sounds harsh, but that's the reality when you deal with a demon called "Law and Lawyers".
Simple version: have it worded by a good lawyer to justify it and make it "same or similar". It is the "wrap" that determines the "price".
Good Luck.
Permit: using EAD and calling AC21
Role: exactly the same.
Salary: large difference (bayarea vs small city in under developed state) due to the prevailing wage at the new location is far lower.
Experts please advice.
As discussed above with cyrus mehta's blog: This is all discretionary:
My definition f discretionary: "You need a good lawyer which can wrap your sandwich in "golden wrap" and sell it for $45 instead of seeling it in a "brown bag" for $3.75. It's the same sandwich!!" It sounds harsh, but that's the reality when you deal with a demon called "Law and Lawyers".
Simple version: have it worded by a good lawyer to justify it and make it "same or similar". It is the "wrap" that determines the "price".
Good Luck.
jackisback
05-27 03:04 PM
I had e-filed for me and my wife on 05/14.
App went to NSC. Sent docs on 05/19 - delivered on 05/21
Soft LUD on 05/17, 05/18 and on 05/24
Got receipts on 05/21
Yesterday (05/25) got ASC notice for FP for my wife.. did not know that FP is needed for EAD.
I thought last time we got FP notice.. it said app type as I-485.. that time.. in July fiasco.. we had applied for 485/EAD/AP all together
Have not got my FP notice yet
I have a Que - my daughter is 7 and initially the attorney had applied for EAD for her too... but then after the first time (2007) I did not apply for her EAD.. I thought no point in wasting $340 every time..
Now since FP notices are coming for my wife and hopefully for me - how about FP notice for my daughter? Do I need to apply for EAD for her.. to get FP notice?
If I don't get FP notice for her - will her Case be ok?
App went to NSC. Sent docs on 05/19 - delivered on 05/21
Soft LUD on 05/17, 05/18 and on 05/24
Got receipts on 05/21
Yesterday (05/25) got ASC notice for FP for my wife.. did not know that FP is needed for EAD.
I thought last time we got FP notice.. it said app type as I-485.. that time.. in July fiasco.. we had applied for 485/EAD/AP all together
Have not got my FP notice yet
I have a Que - my daughter is 7 and initially the attorney had applied for EAD for her too... but then after the first time (2007) I did not apply for her EAD.. I thought no point in wasting $340 every time..
Now since FP notices are coming for my wife and hopefully for me - how about FP notice for my daughter? Do I need to apply for EAD for her.. to get FP notice?
If I don't get FP notice for her - will her Case be ok?
No comments:
Post a Comment