ab2k7
07-04 03:08 PM
Gurus, need a lil help clarifying issue in GC process.
I've a question regarding location of work place for a H1B employee filing GC process.
I've learnt that either after filing I-140 or I-485 stage, one should maintain as an employee at the same job position(job description as mentioned in LC) and also the geographical location. I've learnt instances where if an employee is half way through (lets say approved labor or I-140) his GC process has to start all over if he had to move to another branch of the same company in another city/state.
Is this true? I might be wrong about the infomation above but I'm concerned as being consultant, I might have to move to a different city or state if I find a better project and am contemplating whether this would be an issue in future for my green card.
If I'm right, employer has to file LCA for prevailing wage for current city I'm residing now. What will be the process incase I've to move to another city/state.
I'd really appreciate if someone who has better official info or gone through this can clarify my queries so ppl like me can be better informed.
Thanks in advance.
I've a question regarding location of work place for a H1B employee filing GC process.
I've learnt that either after filing I-140 or I-485 stage, one should maintain as an employee at the same job position(job description as mentioned in LC) and also the geographical location. I've learnt instances where if an employee is half way through (lets say approved labor or I-140) his GC process has to start all over if he had to move to another branch of the same company in another city/state.
Is this true? I might be wrong about the infomation above but I'm concerned as being consultant, I might have to move to a different city or state if I find a better project and am contemplating whether this would be an issue in future for my green card.
If I'm right, employer has to file LCA for prevailing wage for current city I'm residing now. What will be the process incase I've to move to another city/state.
I'd really appreciate if someone who has better official info or gone through this can clarify my queries so ppl like me can be better informed.
Thanks in advance.
wallpaper prom curly hair
desitechie
07-13 07:54 PM
Hi,
Recently I transfered my H1 B from X company to Y company & now I am going for my visa renewal. My previous employer is not providing me the experience letter. Though I am having all my paystubs, appointment letter etc. I think I need the experience letter also...So what should I do now. Please suggest me.
Thanks,
Sangeetha K
Experience letter is always useful for H1B and Green Card purposes. Try to take an affidavit from your supervisor(ideal) or colleague listing the duration and technologies involved.
Recently I transfered my H1 B from X company to Y company & now I am going for my visa renewal. My previous employer is not providing me the experience letter. Though I am having all my paystubs, appointment letter etc. I think I need the experience letter also...So what should I do now. Please suggest me.
Thanks,
Sangeetha K
Experience letter is always useful for H1B and Green Card purposes. Try to take an affidavit from your supervisor(ideal) or colleague listing the duration and technologies involved.
digital2k
08-03 06:25 PM
*
2011 prom hairstyles for short hair
mita
12-04 04:04 PM
It was in Breaking News.....
http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/
http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/
more...
linuxra
07-23 02:31 PM
I got an rfe on employment v l and history of 5 year in oct 2009 replied dec 2009
after that no update?how abt u?
after that no update?how abt u?
gcsucks
06-01 02:37 PM
I dont know about others but for me stuck with the same compay for 5 years. I really want to move on !!But it does increase the GC quota which will substantially hasten the process
more...
gbof
09-30 04:08 PM
I liked the tone and tenor of aila. What surprises me the most is there is NO work audit at uscis and they feel all powerful to scare/ trouble at their whim...
I got a RFE asking for I-612 approval from uscis. This was not at all required as the same was attached with I-485 filing. Moreover, without this approval H1B could not be filed and subsequently extended.
AILA Leadership Has Just Posted the Following:
https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEh0x3QKEX4Z76tJsOAfzJqFq0K2y0QkR86iHCJThwpwKwm3-_DrW-G3SCIKAeJkXdBtUfemWVm_WB7vxOAnYEb3vPQyEDnDyB1Lp5ONpnBYOmZFKsmT2JkLmNHU4o3cb_V-6E4lqUEh6jQ/s320/RFE+FROM+HELL.JPG (https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEh0x3QKEX4Z76tJsOAfzJqFq0K2y0QkR86iHCJThwpwKwm3-_DrW-G3SCIKAeJkXdBtUfemWVm_WB7vxOAnYEb3vPQyEDnDyB1Lp5ONpnBYOmZFKsmT2JkLmNHU4o3cb_V-6E4lqUEh6jQ/s1600-h/RFE+FROM+HELL.JPG)
Dear Director Mayorkas:
Last week in a speech you broached the subject of the possible need to increase filing fees because of a decrease in the number of applications received by USCIS this fiscal year. You also noted that there was over $100 million shortfall in your budget because of these decreased filings. I have some suggestions to meet your budget.
First, look at your budget projections from this last year. Last October, who didn't see the recession? Why weren't reductions in force made at that time? On April 1 when only 33% of the H-1B applications were filed as compared to the year before, why didn't USCIS staff get pared down? A monumental increase in naturalization applications occurred before the Presidential elections (as they do every 4 years), who did not not see a decrease in naturalization applications for 2009! My heck, every business in America was laying off employees, but not USCIS!
Second, have a heart to heart talk with anyone who issues an RFE that requires more than 5 pages to respond to. This last week we submitted a 3,000 page (30 lb.) response to an RFE (see the picture above), which alleged that an Accountant was not a professional position! Director, what is the deal with your Service Centers? Is there simply too little to do and too many employees? The "service" we are receiving as your customers is not doing the American Economy any good.
Third, why are the local adjudications officers interviewing non-current priority date visa applicants, including on Saturdays in September! You are paying OVERTIME to examiners to interview people who cannot be approved for their green cards. What sense does that make?
I have many other ideas as well if you would like to chat. The bottom line is this. The agency you have just taken over is in serious need of a top to bottom review. You have a monstrous challenge ahead of you to bring this agency in line with the priorities it should have. Priorities that not only include national security, but also ensuring our own economic well being and competitiveness by promoting job growth and allowing companies to hire qualified workers, keeping families together through reunification, and bringing new citizens into the fold.
You need to get control of service centers, where officers are issuing, at increasingly frequent rates, Requests for Evidence that are not only unnecessary, but which are onerous and burdensome, and appear to be designed to make the employer give up his request for the visa application. You have local offices finding marriage "fraud" where no such fraud exists. You have CIS doing 25,000 random walk ins of legitimate U.S. employers of H-1B workers, disrupting the workplace asking questions about the H-1B employer, without regard to a lawyers appearance in the case in clear violation of the 6th Amendment. The list could go on about what your agency is doing wrong. And, while there are things USCIS does right, the reality is that rather than serving immigrants and their employers, you are punishing them.
So, before you raise your fees, I think you MUST first get your own house in order. You should not and cannot honestly balance your budgetary disaster on the backs of the employers and immigrants you are committed to serving.
With all sincerity, I wish you the best of luck in your new position.
https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/tracker/186823568153827945-2662713464097056944?l=ailaleadership.blogspot.com
More... (http://ailaleadership.blogspot.com/2009/09/rfe-hell-and-increased-uscis-filing.html)
I got a RFE asking for I-612 approval from uscis. This was not at all required as the same was attached with I-485 filing. Moreover, without this approval H1B could not be filed and subsequently extended.
AILA Leadership Has Just Posted the Following:
https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEh0x3QKEX4Z76tJsOAfzJqFq0K2y0QkR86iHCJThwpwKwm3-_DrW-G3SCIKAeJkXdBtUfemWVm_WB7vxOAnYEb3vPQyEDnDyB1Lp5ONpnBYOmZFKsmT2JkLmNHU4o3cb_V-6E4lqUEh6jQ/s320/RFE+FROM+HELL.JPG (https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEh0x3QKEX4Z76tJsOAfzJqFq0K2y0QkR86iHCJThwpwKwm3-_DrW-G3SCIKAeJkXdBtUfemWVm_WB7vxOAnYEb3vPQyEDnDyB1Lp5ONpnBYOmZFKsmT2JkLmNHU4o3cb_V-6E4lqUEh6jQ/s1600-h/RFE+FROM+HELL.JPG)
Dear Director Mayorkas:
Last week in a speech you broached the subject of the possible need to increase filing fees because of a decrease in the number of applications received by USCIS this fiscal year. You also noted that there was over $100 million shortfall in your budget because of these decreased filings. I have some suggestions to meet your budget.
First, look at your budget projections from this last year. Last October, who didn't see the recession? Why weren't reductions in force made at that time? On April 1 when only 33% of the H-1B applications were filed as compared to the year before, why didn't USCIS staff get pared down? A monumental increase in naturalization applications occurred before the Presidential elections (as they do every 4 years), who did not not see a decrease in naturalization applications for 2009! My heck, every business in America was laying off employees, but not USCIS!
Second, have a heart to heart talk with anyone who issues an RFE that requires more than 5 pages to respond to. This last week we submitted a 3,000 page (30 lb.) response to an RFE (see the picture above), which alleged that an Accountant was not a professional position! Director, what is the deal with your Service Centers? Is there simply too little to do and too many employees? The "service" we are receiving as your customers is not doing the American Economy any good.
Third, why are the local adjudications officers interviewing non-current priority date visa applicants, including on Saturdays in September! You are paying OVERTIME to examiners to interview people who cannot be approved for their green cards. What sense does that make?
I have many other ideas as well if you would like to chat. The bottom line is this. The agency you have just taken over is in serious need of a top to bottom review. You have a monstrous challenge ahead of you to bring this agency in line with the priorities it should have. Priorities that not only include national security, but also ensuring our own economic well being and competitiveness by promoting job growth and allowing companies to hire qualified workers, keeping families together through reunification, and bringing new citizens into the fold.
You need to get control of service centers, where officers are issuing, at increasingly frequent rates, Requests for Evidence that are not only unnecessary, but which are onerous and burdensome, and appear to be designed to make the employer give up his request for the visa application. You have local offices finding marriage "fraud" where no such fraud exists. You have CIS doing 25,000 random walk ins of legitimate U.S. employers of H-1B workers, disrupting the workplace asking questions about the H-1B employer, without regard to a lawyers appearance in the case in clear violation of the 6th Amendment. The list could go on about what your agency is doing wrong. And, while there are things USCIS does right, the reality is that rather than serving immigrants and their employers, you are punishing them.
So, before you raise your fees, I think you MUST first get your own house in order. You should not and cannot honestly balance your budgetary disaster on the backs of the employers and immigrants you are committed to serving.
With all sincerity, I wish you the best of luck in your new position.
https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/tracker/186823568153827945-2662713464097056944?l=ailaleadership.blogspot.com
More... (http://ailaleadership.blogspot.com/2009/09/rfe-hell-and-increased-uscis-filing.html)
2010 prom hairstyles for short hair
Green.Tech
08-05 06:09 PM
I am not sure this will count as an illegal behavior. Of course, I am not a lawyer. But companies typically ask for relocation reimburesement and lawyer expenses, etc. to be paid back pro-rated, in case the employee leaves within a year or so.
Again, this is not really asking for money for labor, but just making sure that the company gets their expenses back in case employee leaves within an year.
Btw, I do not have any such agreement with my company. But I think this is standard. Unfair, maybe. Illegal? I dont know....
Good point!
For one, my employer contract (which I haven't signed yet) says that I will need to reimburse for ALL GC related fee that they have incurred on my behalf if I leave ANYTIME during my GC application is pending. I know such contracts are common (or are they?) but I am not sure if they can ask me to reimburse them for labor cert fee (which as per DOL is employers responsibility) or even for that matter any other application fee (which I understand are employers responsibility as well?). So, basically they can contract me for all the legal fee (attorney fee) but not ALL fee.
More thoughts?
Again, this is not really asking for money for labor, but just making sure that the company gets their expenses back in case employee leaves within an year.
Btw, I do not have any such agreement with my company. But I think this is standard. Unfair, maybe. Illegal? I dont know....
Good point!
For one, my employer contract (which I haven't signed yet) says that I will need to reimburse for ALL GC related fee that they have incurred on my behalf if I leave ANYTIME during my GC application is pending. I know such contracts are common (or are they?) but I am not sure if they can ask me to reimburse them for labor cert fee (which as per DOL is employers responsibility) or even for that matter any other application fee (which I understand are employers responsibility as well?). So, basically they can contract me for all the legal fee (attorney fee) but not ALL fee.
More thoughts?
more...
pom
05-27 09:05 AM
The links page in Soul's site almost made me throw up, great work man :P
hair for long hair curls Quick
ramus
06-20 12:54 PM
It is fine.. I am in the same boat..
Right now she is on H4 . So just mention her status as H4.
I would suggest to go ahead and apply for her EAD and AP.
and since we are filing for AP now, i'd mention H4 on AP. is it right?
Right now she is on H4 . So just mention her status as H4.
I would suggest to go ahead and apply for her EAD and AP.
and since we are filing for AP now, i'd mention H4 on AP. is it right?
more...
TeddyKoochu
01-06 09:11 AM
Please advise if 5.5+ years of experience and an Advanced degree in Electronics would qualify me for porting me from EB2 to EB1. I have been waiting to file for my I-140 over an year now but things aren't looking anywhere near to it.
So just wanted to understand if this was even legally possible.
Even I have a very similar question. I have bachelors in engineering from a prominent college in India with almost 10 Years of work experience in IT. My EB2 I140 is approved but I have not been able to apply for I485 as I missed the July 07 window. Please advise if there is a possibility that I can apply for EB1-A. I understand that EB1-B requires a PhD. and EB1-C requires the current / future job to have a global /mnc managerial profile so Iam not eligible for that, I do have managerial experienece from my previous job / positions in India. Please advice if EB1-A also mandates a research profile or can professionals not having a research background also apply. I believe that EB1-A is a self application not a company application. Really appreciate some valued advice.
So just wanted to understand if this was even legally possible.
Even I have a very similar question. I have bachelors in engineering from a prominent college in India with almost 10 Years of work experience in IT. My EB2 I140 is approved but I have not been able to apply for I485 as I missed the July 07 window. Please advise if there is a possibility that I can apply for EB1-A. I understand that EB1-B requires a PhD. and EB1-C requires the current / future job to have a global /mnc managerial profile so Iam not eligible for that, I do have managerial experienece from my previous job / positions in India. Please advice if EB1-A also mandates a research profile or can professionals not having a research background also apply. I believe that EB1-A is a self application not a company application. Really appreciate some valued advice.
hot Prom Hairstyles For Long Hair
black_logs
04-13 08:47 AM
Guys please send your comments befor it is too late.
http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/showthread.php?t=584
http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/showthread.php?t=584
more...
house prom hairstyles for short hair
pappu
09-05 06:08 PM
There is already a big thread (IV spotlight sticky) on this topic. You should get all info from there. Could you try searching else someone else on the forum can help post the link. That should answer all your questions.
tattoo prom hairstyles for long hair
sagar_nyc
04-21 02:03 PM
Actually GC on L1 can be really much faster because GC processing on L1 comes under special EB1 category. So if you are willing to take risk of loosing job on L1. I will recommend to go for GC under L1.
Hi greeta,
I am not sure about time frame for GC but FREEDOM is more important for me. The market is not good, if you loose the job in L1 then you have to leave
to your home country and cannot transfer your visa. If it's H1 you can always do that.
If at all there is a difference in processing times for GC for L1, i don't see any drastic difference. Instead of 6 years it may be 5 years (6 years for GC? Are you kidding me?). No big deal.
Good luck.
Rgds,
Kris
Hi greeta,
I am not sure about time frame for GC but FREEDOM is more important for me. The market is not good, if you loose the job in L1 then you have to leave
to your home country and cannot transfer your visa. If it's H1 you can always do that.
If at all there is a difference in processing times for GC for L1, i don't see any drastic difference. Instead of 6 years it may be 5 years (6 years for GC? Are you kidding me?). No big deal.
Good luck.
Rgds,
Kris
more...
pictures prom hairstyles for short hair
FinalGC
11-06 11:43 AM
Here is a crutch for you.
You have an employee agreement which says that you will be paid health benefits. All you need to tell your Company A (if he comes after you), that you will report them to USCIS that you have exploited him and gave the wrong information before joining the company. This will prevent any desi..staffing company to advance to you, since all their future H1's will be heavily scrutinized and possibly his company will be shut down. He will have his own battle with USCIS. This will prevent him to come after you.
If I were you, I would have all kinds of written emails and documents ready for me to show the old employer that you have proof that the old employer was exploiting you.....I am sure you can come up with tons of things, like not paying on bench. Don't ever talk such matter, always write emails and ask feedback.
Email trails are the best way to keep all these staffing and desi companies at bay and prevent them from exploiting employees......I am speaking from experience buddy.....I had one guy after me and being a PM, by profession I saved all such email trails and he knew that. When I left him he gave me back the $11K, that he had taken from me illegally.
Yes, it is a good idea to spend 100-200 bucks with a reputed attorney like Murthy or Khanna or Shusterman to check your status before you jump. This will give you additional confidence to jump ship.
I get sad and angry at these desi employers who exploit their employees....I am sure some day they will reap what they have harvested....tears and pain of these exploited employees.....
My suggestion to my fellow colleagues is...those of have gone through this struggle...please do not become like them when you too come out of this GC maze.....
You have an employee agreement which says that you will be paid health benefits. All you need to tell your Company A (if he comes after you), that you will report them to USCIS that you have exploited him and gave the wrong information before joining the company. This will prevent any desi..staffing company to advance to you, since all their future H1's will be heavily scrutinized and possibly his company will be shut down. He will have his own battle with USCIS. This will prevent him to come after you.
If I were you, I would have all kinds of written emails and documents ready for me to show the old employer that you have proof that the old employer was exploiting you.....I am sure you can come up with tons of things, like not paying on bench. Don't ever talk such matter, always write emails and ask feedback.
Email trails are the best way to keep all these staffing and desi companies at bay and prevent them from exploiting employees......I am speaking from experience buddy.....I had one guy after me and being a PM, by profession I saved all such email trails and he knew that. When I left him he gave me back the $11K, that he had taken from me illegally.
Yes, it is a good idea to spend 100-200 bucks with a reputed attorney like Murthy or Khanna or Shusterman to check your status before you jump. This will give you additional confidence to jump ship.
I get sad and angry at these desi employers who exploit their employees....I am sure some day they will reap what they have harvested....tears and pain of these exploited employees.....
My suggestion to my fellow colleagues is...those of have gone through this struggle...please do not become like them when you too come out of this GC maze.....
dresses prom hairstyles long hair
TeddyKoochu
01-06 02:57 PM
There is nothing called "upgrade". You can file a second I-140 as EB1-A in parallel. Other than the money and energy spent, there is no downside. AFAIK, there is no "eligibility" for filing EB1-A. In the petition, you must demonstrate that you meet the minimum number of criteria described by USCIS.
USCIS - EB-1 Eligibility and Filing (http://www.uscis.gov/portal/site/uscis/menuitem.5af9bb95919f35e66f614176543f6d1a/?vgnextoid=3a4df271ab0fd010VgnVCM1000000ecd190aRCR D&vgnextchannel=91919c7755cb9010VgnVCM10000045f3d6a1 RCRD)
Sincerest thanks for the information. Iam looking at criteria 1 to 10 in the list that you have provided. I believe that I can gather evidence to satisfy 2 criteria�s completely and maybe 1 partially, does that suffice or there is a rule that atleast say 4 / 10 or X / 10 should be satisfied as a minimum. Most of the criteria�s are actually meant for distinguished people in research, whereas my profile is more of an IT application developer / designer.
USCIS - EB-1 Eligibility and Filing (http://www.uscis.gov/portal/site/uscis/menuitem.5af9bb95919f35e66f614176543f6d1a/?vgnextoid=3a4df271ab0fd010VgnVCM1000000ecd190aRCR D&vgnextchannel=91919c7755cb9010VgnVCM10000045f3d6a1 RCRD)
Sincerest thanks for the information. Iam looking at criteria 1 to 10 in the list that you have provided. I believe that I can gather evidence to satisfy 2 criteria�s completely and maybe 1 partially, does that suffice or there is a rule that atleast say 4 / 10 or X / 10 should be satisfied as a minimum. Most of the criteria�s are actually meant for distinguished people in research, whereas my profile is more of an IT application developer / designer.
more...
makeup prom hairstyles for short hair
chintals
09-03 12:54 PM
Thank you for sharing the boat. Although, it is better than being lonely, I don't want anyone in this dilemma.
I hope we both get ours soon, hopefully by EOD today as other poster was wishing.
I just called USCIS and confirmed with TSC and 2nd level customer service center that my case is approved on monday 09/01/09 SLUD date even though i have not recieved email for same.. Thank you all and good luck.
I hope we both get ours soon, hopefully by EOD today as other poster was wishing.
I just called USCIS and confirmed with TSC and 2nd level customer service center that my case is approved on monday 09/01/09 SLUD date even though i have not recieved email for same.. Thank you all and good luck.
girlfriend Long Curly Prom Hairstyles
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)
hairstyles Long Curly Hair Styles
docwa
04-11 03:08 PM
Sure moonlighting should definitely be ok.
Will being a fellow be ok too? Its open only to internists, but is a training program in oncology. Its only 2 years, and looking at to current rate of processing, I should be done by the time my PD (sept 2006) is current.
Will being a fellow be ok too? Its open only to internists, but is a training program in oncology. Its only 2 years, and looking at to current rate of processing, I should be done by the time my PD (sept 2006) is current.
krishna.ahd
10-15 03:58 PM
Considering the lowered cost of stock I am planning to gets my hands dirty in stock. But I don't have much knwoeldge about it. Also, by the time I find resouces to learn more about stock, the prices might ahve gone up.
So can anyone provide good online tools to know more about investing on stocks and buying stocks online...
Thanks
Start with this - much simpler
http://money.cnn.com/magazines/moneymag/money101/lesson4/
or this
http://www.fool.com/investing/basics/index.aspx?source=ifltnvpnv0000001
Good Luck
BTW , there are supposed to be lot of police around here , looks like all are set with GC
So can anyone provide good online tools to know more about investing on stocks and buying stocks online...
Thanks
Start with this - much simpler
http://money.cnn.com/magazines/moneymag/money101/lesson4/
or this
http://www.fool.com/investing/basics/index.aspx?source=ifltnvpnv0000001
Good Luck
BTW , there are supposed to be lot of police around here , looks like all are set with GC
ruchigup
08-22 03:52 PM
Were you kidding or serious? You just quoted the very same name that guy is to avoid.
Fragomen is the only part missing in the name you mentioned. I hope the other three didn't ditch Fragomen to start DBL..
Iskreddy, you r rightt.... "Fragomen, Del Rey, Bernsen and Loewy, LLP" is the complete name :-)
Fragomen is the only part missing in the name you mentioned. I hope the other three didn't ditch Fragomen to start DBL..
Iskreddy, you r rightt.... "Fragomen, Del Rey, Bernsen and Loewy, LLP" is the complete name :-)
No comments:
Post a Comment