Anders �stberg
July 15th, 2004, 03:12 PM
Thanks Nick!
I have this goal, or more of a hope really, of coming home with one "OK" shot every time I go out. It doesn't always happen, but today makes up for a couple of those not so good days. :)
I have this goal, or more of a hope really, of coming home with one "OK" shot every time I go out. It doesn't always happen, but today makes up for a couple of those not so good days. :)
wallpaper Name Japanese Tattoos Designs
Blog Feeds
02-25 07:20 PM
AILA Leadership Has Just Posted the Following:
https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiBsrzHV9uatYRfKXd_LmYv3eAzgG8XLVkN0Ltgb4dVXKHTmKzNhUsjAZwQcEzy50DyQ2aU5ngT1s3lSJA9CyCYdPCQ0W65Ij57DrVVFTtDSkbfxIj2v3vnedeD1FaOsWw3plKKwhKOi6A/s320/2010-02-23+Magnifying+Glass.jpg (https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiBsrzHV9uatYRfKXd_LmYv3eAzgG8XLVkN0Ltgb4dVXKHTmKzNhUsjAZwQcEzy50DyQ2aU5ngT1s3lSJA9CyCYdPCQ0W65Ij57DrVVFTtDSkbfxIj2v3vnedeD1FaOsWw3plKKwhKOi6A/s1600-h/2010-02-23+Magnifying+Glass.jpg)
By Eleanor Pelta, AILA First Vice President
The latest salvo in the war against H-1B workers and their employers (and this time, they�ve thrown L-1�s in just for fun,) is the Economic Policy Institute�s briefing paper by Ron Hira, released last week, which concludes that the practice of using H-1B and L-1 workers and then sending them back to their home countries is bad for the economy. While Hira�s findings are certainly headline-grabbing, the road that Hira takes to get there is filled with twists, turns and manipulations and simply lacks real data.
Hira starts with the premise that some employers use H-1B�s and L visas as a bridge to permanent residence, and some employers use those categories for temporary worker mobility. (His particular political bent is belied by his constant usage of the term �guest-worker status��a term that brings with it the politically charged connotations of the European guest worker programs for unskilled workers�for the practice of bringing H-1B�s and L�s in to the U.S. on a temporary basis.) After examining his �data,� he divides the world of employers into two broad categories:
� Bad guys (generally foreign employers, no surprise, or U.S. employers with off-shore companies in India) that bring in H-1B and L workers for temporary periods, exploit them, underpay them and send them home after they get training from the American workers whose jobs they will outsource when they return home
� Good guys (U.S. corporations �Hira uses the more genteel label, �firms with traditional business models�) that bring H-1B and L workers to the U.S., pay them adequate wages, and sponsor them for permanent residence, thereby effecting a knowledge transfer to American colleagues that is good for the economy
Hira�s tool, a statistic he calls �immigration yield,� is simply a comparison of H-1B and L usage and the number of PERM applications filed by the highest users of those visas. He essentially concludes that because the highest users of H-1B�s and L�s are Indian consulting companies, and these companies have only a minimal number of PERM�s certified, they are using H�s and L�s as cheap temporary labor. He is unable to explain away the high number PERM filings of one of the IT consulting companies, and so he addresses this anomaly by saying �part of the explanation might be that it is headquartered in the United States.�
There are too many things wrong with this analysis to list in this blog, but here are a just a few ways in which Hira�s study is problematic:
Hira�s clear implication is that companies that don�t sponsor H-1B�s and L�s for PERM are using these workers instead of more expensive American labor. He ignores that fact the H-1B program has rules in place requiring payment of the prevailing wage to these workers. But even worse, he has not presented any data whatsoever on the average wages paid to these workers. He also doesn�t address the expense of obtaining such visas. He simply concludes that because they are here temporarily, they are underpaid.
Hira makes the argument that companies who use H-1B and L workers as temporary workers generally use their U.S. operations as a training ground for these workers and then send then back to their home countries to do the job that was once located here. Again, this assertion is not supported by any real statistical data about, or serious review of, the U.S. activities of such workers, but rather by anecdotal evidence and quotes from news stories taken out of context.
With respect to the fact that the L-1B visa requires specialized knowledge and so would normally preclude entry to the U.S. for the purpose of gaining training, Hira cites and outdated OIG report that alleges that adjudicators will approve any L-1B petition, because the standards are so broad. Those of use in the field struggling with the 10 page RFE�s typically issued automatically on any specialized knowledge petition would certainly beg to differ with that point.
Hira clearly implies that American jobs are lost because of H-1B and L �guest workers,� but has no direct statistical evidence of such job loss.
The fact is that usage of H-1B and L visas varies with the needs of the employer. Some employers use these programs to rotate experienced, professional workers into the United States and then send the workers abroad to continue their careers. Some employers bring H-1B�s and L�s into the U.S. to rely on their skills on a permanent basis. Judging from the fraud statistics as well as DOL enforcement actions, the majority of employers who use H-1B workers pay these workers adequate wages and comply with all of the DOL rules regarding use of these workers, whether the employers bring them in for temporary purposes or not. By the same token, the minority of employers who seek to abuse H and L workers may well do so, whether they intend to sponsor them for permanent residence or not. Indeed, arguably, the potential for long-term abuse is much worse in the situation in which a real �bad guy� employer is sponsoring an employee for a green card, because of the inordinate length of time it takes for many H-1B and L workers to obtain permanent residency due to backlogs.
Hira does make that last point, and it is just about the only one we agree on. Congress needs to create a streamlined way for employers to access and retain in the U.S. foreign expertise and talent, without at 10-15 year wait for permanent residence. But our economy still needs the ability for business to nimbly move talent to the U.S. on a temporary basis when needed, or to rotate key personnel internationally. In a world where global mobility means increased competitiveness, Hira�s �statistics� simply don�t support elimination of these crucial capability.https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/tracker/186823568153827945-6000198492670312275?l=ailaleadership.blogspot.com
More... (http://ailaleadership.blogspot.com/2010/02/epis-latest-study-of-h-1b-and-l-usage.html)
https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiBsrzHV9uatYRfKXd_LmYv3eAzgG8XLVkN0Ltgb4dVXKHTmKzNhUsjAZwQcEzy50DyQ2aU5ngT1s3lSJA9CyCYdPCQ0W65Ij57DrVVFTtDSkbfxIj2v3vnedeD1FaOsWw3plKKwhKOi6A/s320/2010-02-23+Magnifying+Glass.jpg (https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiBsrzHV9uatYRfKXd_LmYv3eAzgG8XLVkN0Ltgb4dVXKHTmKzNhUsjAZwQcEzy50DyQ2aU5ngT1s3lSJA9CyCYdPCQ0W65Ij57DrVVFTtDSkbfxIj2v3vnedeD1FaOsWw3plKKwhKOi6A/s1600-h/2010-02-23+Magnifying+Glass.jpg)
By Eleanor Pelta, AILA First Vice President
The latest salvo in the war against H-1B workers and their employers (and this time, they�ve thrown L-1�s in just for fun,) is the Economic Policy Institute�s briefing paper by Ron Hira, released last week, which concludes that the practice of using H-1B and L-1 workers and then sending them back to their home countries is bad for the economy. While Hira�s findings are certainly headline-grabbing, the road that Hira takes to get there is filled with twists, turns and manipulations and simply lacks real data.
Hira starts with the premise that some employers use H-1B�s and L visas as a bridge to permanent residence, and some employers use those categories for temporary worker mobility. (His particular political bent is belied by his constant usage of the term �guest-worker status��a term that brings with it the politically charged connotations of the European guest worker programs for unskilled workers�for the practice of bringing H-1B�s and L�s in to the U.S. on a temporary basis.) After examining his �data,� he divides the world of employers into two broad categories:
� Bad guys (generally foreign employers, no surprise, or U.S. employers with off-shore companies in India) that bring in H-1B and L workers for temporary periods, exploit them, underpay them and send them home after they get training from the American workers whose jobs they will outsource when they return home
� Good guys (U.S. corporations �Hira uses the more genteel label, �firms with traditional business models�) that bring H-1B and L workers to the U.S., pay them adequate wages, and sponsor them for permanent residence, thereby effecting a knowledge transfer to American colleagues that is good for the economy
Hira�s tool, a statistic he calls �immigration yield,� is simply a comparison of H-1B and L usage and the number of PERM applications filed by the highest users of those visas. He essentially concludes that because the highest users of H-1B�s and L�s are Indian consulting companies, and these companies have only a minimal number of PERM�s certified, they are using H�s and L�s as cheap temporary labor. He is unable to explain away the high number PERM filings of one of the IT consulting companies, and so he addresses this anomaly by saying �part of the explanation might be that it is headquartered in the United States.�
There are too many things wrong with this analysis to list in this blog, but here are a just a few ways in which Hira�s study is problematic:
Hira�s clear implication is that companies that don�t sponsor H-1B�s and L�s for PERM are using these workers instead of more expensive American labor. He ignores that fact the H-1B program has rules in place requiring payment of the prevailing wage to these workers. But even worse, he has not presented any data whatsoever on the average wages paid to these workers. He also doesn�t address the expense of obtaining such visas. He simply concludes that because they are here temporarily, they are underpaid.
Hira makes the argument that companies who use H-1B and L workers as temporary workers generally use their U.S. operations as a training ground for these workers and then send then back to their home countries to do the job that was once located here. Again, this assertion is not supported by any real statistical data about, or serious review of, the U.S. activities of such workers, but rather by anecdotal evidence and quotes from news stories taken out of context.
With respect to the fact that the L-1B visa requires specialized knowledge and so would normally preclude entry to the U.S. for the purpose of gaining training, Hira cites and outdated OIG report that alleges that adjudicators will approve any L-1B petition, because the standards are so broad. Those of use in the field struggling with the 10 page RFE�s typically issued automatically on any specialized knowledge petition would certainly beg to differ with that point.
Hira clearly implies that American jobs are lost because of H-1B and L �guest workers,� but has no direct statistical evidence of such job loss.
The fact is that usage of H-1B and L visas varies with the needs of the employer. Some employers use these programs to rotate experienced, professional workers into the United States and then send the workers abroad to continue their careers. Some employers bring H-1B�s and L�s into the U.S. to rely on their skills on a permanent basis. Judging from the fraud statistics as well as DOL enforcement actions, the majority of employers who use H-1B workers pay these workers adequate wages and comply with all of the DOL rules regarding use of these workers, whether the employers bring them in for temporary purposes or not. By the same token, the minority of employers who seek to abuse H and L workers may well do so, whether they intend to sponsor them for permanent residence or not. Indeed, arguably, the potential for long-term abuse is much worse in the situation in which a real �bad guy� employer is sponsoring an employee for a green card, because of the inordinate length of time it takes for many H-1B and L workers to obtain permanent residency due to backlogs.
Hira does make that last point, and it is just about the only one we agree on. Congress needs to create a streamlined way for employers to access and retain in the U.S. foreign expertise and talent, without at 10-15 year wait for permanent residence. But our economy still needs the ability for business to nimbly move talent to the U.S. on a temporary basis when needed, or to rotate key personnel internationally. In a world where global mobility means increased competitiveness, Hira�s �statistics� simply don�t support elimination of these crucial capability.https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/tracker/186823568153827945-6000198492670312275?l=ailaleadership.blogspot.com
More... (http://ailaleadership.blogspot.com/2010/02/epis-latest-study-of-h-1b-and-l-usage.html)
DSLStart
10-24 01:56 PM
My ex roomie came on a B1 visa on one way ticket, that too first time US visit. POE officer did ask him about it and he told employer was going to buy return ticket as dates weren't confirmed. They did made sure that he had a credit card. Don't know if same would apply for B2...
Hi,
My mother-in-law is coming to US on 2nd Dec on a one-way ticket, she will be going back around March 09 i.e. in almost 4 months.
As we dont know abt the dates as such of return so we have booked a one-way ticket from India to US.
Will there be any problem due to that at port of entry?
Do she also need to carry travel insurance along with her?
Thanks in advance.
Hi,
My mother-in-law is coming to US on 2nd Dec on a one-way ticket, she will be going back around March 09 i.e. in almost 4 months.
As we dont know abt the dates as such of return so we have booked a one-way ticket from India to US.
Will there be any problem due to that at port of entry?
Do she also need to carry travel insurance along with her?
Thanks in advance.
2011 tattoo designs names. tribal name tattoo designs; tribal name tattoo designs
gcformeornot
04-08 01:09 PM
Paper filed too... 2 main reasons.
No FP required at local office(so no day off... no kids hassle...)
With e-file you anyway need to send documents via post......
Beside Paper file is easy to self file so no cost difference....
No FP required at local office(so no day off... no kids hassle...)
With e-file you anyway need to send documents via post......
Beside Paper file is easy to self file so no cost difference....
more...
gc1024
07-17 06:46 PM
Another silly question.
Do I file again? My packet reached USCIS on July 2nd. It was not returned.
Do I file again? My packet reached USCIS on July 2nd. It was not returned.
jsb
01-21 09:07 AM
hi dionysus
i got this from some requirement agencies
If it really has some source of information (and is not a pure rumour), then it may come out as some kind of order that PD cutoff dates can only be moved forward (i.e. no retrogression). We all know, moving dates like a yoyo does not make any sense. It only tells that decision makers over there just don't know what they are doing. This order might force them to think and work before issuing new cutoff dates.
i got this from some requirement agencies
If it really has some source of information (and is not a pure rumour), then it may come out as some kind of order that PD cutoff dates can only be moved forward (i.e. no retrogression). We all know, moving dates like a yoyo does not make any sense. It only tells that decision makers over there just don't know what they are doing. This order might force them to think and work before issuing new cutoff dates.
more...
neoneo
07-30 12:03 AM
IMHO.. one thing for sure is that post school u need to join the same position as filed for GC. However being non resident has nothing to do with USICS. It's to do with IRS and the state tax agencies. Also, you wont go on "F-1" visa since you'll use AP. But you do need an I-20.(two different things ...similar to I-797 and H1)
So, the question to be asked is not "Can one goto F-1 visa after filing EAD" rather "Can one goto school after filing EAD ?".
I don't quite understand why one can't ( I'm sure there are reasons) If a person can stay at home or be self employed after applying for EAD/AP. Then IMHO that person can goto school too.
I think you can, however u need to join the same position for which the GC was filed and u need to be paying taxes.
Any suggestions ? .. also, what happens if your spouse is on F1 when the primary applicant files for 485/EAD/AP?
So, the question to be asked is not "Can one goto F-1 visa after filing EAD" rather "Can one goto school after filing EAD ?".
I don't quite understand why one can't ( I'm sure there are reasons) If a person can stay at home or be self employed after applying for EAD/AP. Then IMHO that person can goto school too.
I think you can, however u need to join the same position for which the GC was filed and u need to be paying taxes.
Any suggestions ? .. also, what happens if your spouse is on F1 when the primary applicant files for 485/EAD/AP?
2010 cross tattoo with names.
myeb2gc
04-27 10:03 AM
Hi Ram,
My employer company is smaller one, 15 only.
And no marketing, but he is good giving me incentives.
I am planning to go with bigger consulting firm so that they can market me well and .....
So i am thinking of change of employer.
So are my earlier 3 questions.
My employer company is smaller one, 15 only.
And no marketing, but he is good giving me incentives.
I am planning to go with bigger consulting firm so that they can market me well and .....
So i am thinking of change of employer.
So are my earlier 3 questions.
more...
sanju_dba
03-21 07:59 AM
Dear OP,
Congratulations!
read here MurthyDotCom : Marriage and I-485 Issues (http://www.murthy.com/news/UDmar485.html)
It might help exploring your issue.
Congratulations!
read here MurthyDotCom : Marriage and I-485 Issues (http://www.murthy.com/news/UDmar485.html)
It might help exploring your issue.
hair First Names Tattoo Designs 3
guchi472000
07-01 04:09 PM
Hi All,
I had a previous empoyer A > Then a Prefered Vendor B > Then a Client C.
Now I have transferred my H1 to a Preferred Vendor X & Still working on same project with the Client C, but with a different contract all togeather.
Preferred Vendor X > the Client C
Now the issues is , my previous employeer A is harassing me ( Vendor B is having no problems) , asking for money or filing a legal case agaist me,as I have signed a non-compete agreement with them. Can he do so ?? what can be the worst consequences?
I had a previous empoyer A > Then a Prefered Vendor B > Then a Client C.
Now I have transferred my H1 to a Preferred Vendor X & Still working on same project with the Client C, but with a different contract all togeather.
Preferred Vendor X > the Client C
Now the issues is , my previous employeer A is harassing me ( Vendor B is having no problems) , asking for money or filing a legal case agaist me,as I have signed a non-compete agreement with them. Can he do so ?? what can be the worst consequences?
more...
Munna Bhai
12-14 03:49 PM
I got I-140 RFE (EB2) for education as mentioned above I have 3 yrs education and 60+ months of experience and labour says BS or Equivalent Foreign degree with 60 months of experience.
However, the RFE says submit the evidence that it is equvalent to US 4 years degree 3 year Bachelor degree + if any other degrees. They also mentioned we do not want a simple evalutaion that has been done by private evaluators says it is equvalent to BS 4 years degrees. They want detailed explanation each degree and other diploma that is equivalent to US 10th grade, 4 years Degree by acceptable evaluator also include evalutor details.
I am in 6th year of H1B, donno what will happen. My company said it is simple RFE. Looking for other alternatives.......
get your own evaluation from http://www.wes.org/ or any other source, don't depend on company/attorney etc.
However, the RFE says submit the evidence that it is equvalent to US 4 years degree 3 year Bachelor degree + if any other degrees. They also mentioned we do not want a simple evalutaion that has been done by private evaluators says it is equvalent to BS 4 years degrees. They want detailed explanation each degree and other diploma that is equivalent to US 10th grade, 4 years Degree by acceptable evaluator also include evalutor details.
I am in 6th year of H1B, donno what will happen. My company said it is simple RFE. Looking for other alternatives.......
get your own evaluation from http://www.wes.org/ or any other source, don't depend on company/attorney etc.
hot Best art tattoo name designs
cinqsit
10-31 12:26 PM
Can someone please give me the website link to book a visa appointment?
Is it same for all consulates in India? I'm looking for Chennnai.
Thank you.
http://www.vfs-usa.co.in/ Yes its same for all consulates
Is it same for all consulates in India? I'm looking for Chennnai.
Thank you.
http://www.vfs-usa.co.in/ Yes its same for all consulates
more...
house tattoo lettering name, design
martinvisalaw
03-17 11:50 AM
1. If my PD is current, Will I eligible to apply I-485 using Employer A I-140 approved? No, not legally. You cannot base the 485 on a job offer that no longer exists. If there is a chance that Co. A will rehire you in the same position, and they will provide a letter saying that, you could file. However, there really must be an intention to be in that position when the 485 is approved or you are committing fraud.
2. What are the documents needed from employer A, if I want apply I-485?
See previous answer.
3. All my friends telling me, I can apply I-485, Is it true?
See previous answer.
2. What are the documents needed from employer A, if I want apply I-485?
See previous answer.
3. All my friends telling me, I can apply I-485, Is it true?
See previous answer.
tattoo tribal name tattoos. free
parablergh
08-27 02:26 PM
While it is usually best to have your company (or legal representative) communicate directly with USCIS, it is possible to contact them directly to determine if your petition has been received. You will need to know which office the petition was filed at (based on the location of the employment it should have been CSC or VSC) and the date of filing.
After you provide some personal information, you may be able to receive your receipt number verbally.
Unfortunately this has worked in some instances, but not in others - so good luck.
If this does not work, your company should be able to confirm if the checks were cashed. If so, your receipt number should be stamped on the back of the checks.
After you provide some personal information, you may be able to receive your receipt number verbally.
Unfortunately this has worked in some instances, but not in others - so good luck.
If this does not work, your company should be able to confirm if the checks were cashed. If so, your receipt number should be stamped on the back of the checks.
more...
pictures Cinese back tattoo
mohitb272
03-20 06:29 PM
Read the Yates memo...After 180 days of I485 pending, the employer's revocation of I140 has not effect on the GC application. But I know a few cases where this was an issue, so make sure you are armed with proof like pay stubs, employment letter et al.
dresses download tattoo designs
jazzy2
05-25 08:47 AM
Hi all
called Sen. Lindsey Graham
and Sen. John Macain
Both the numbers had an option on leaving a message or opinion on a legislation.
So i left a message ....
should i also speak to the staff??
jazzy2...
washington dc
called Sen. Lindsey Graham
and Sen. John Macain
Both the numbers had an option on leaving a message or opinion on a legislation.
So i left a message ....
should i also speak to the staff??
jazzy2...
washington dc
more...
makeup Custom Tattoo Designs Name
wandmaker
08-06 11:27 AM
Case Details:
EB2-I PD: 1/2/06 485@ TSC - MD: 6/30/07 RD: 7/2/07 ND: 10/2/07 AD: 8/6/08
Directly Filed at TSC, Checks cashed but did not receive physical receipt notice
Sequence of Emails:
08/06: CRIS Email, Notice mailed welcoming the new permanent resident
08/07: Soft LUD
08/09: Soft LUD
08/11: Welcome Notice Received via USPS, Post marked 08/08
08/13: CRIS Email, Card Mailed.
08/14: Soft LUD
08/14: Received Cards in the mail, envelope post marked 08/12
To Whom may have COLTS:
- Opened SR for receipt notice in Dec 07
- Feb 08, Received a letter from USCIS stating that they will not be able to generate duplicate notice
- Feb 08, Called USCIS & referenced duplicate notice letter. IO has told me the name check got cleared on Nov 07.
- Applied for EAD renewal in 6/08, Received card on 7/08
- I-140 Soft LUD on 7/13/08
- No other LUDs, Direct case status change on 8/6/08
- Made two calls to USCIS one on 12/07 and another on 02/08 and did not make INFOPASS appointment.
EB2-I PD: 1/2/06 485@ TSC - MD: 6/30/07 RD: 7/2/07 ND: 10/2/07 AD: 8/6/08
Directly Filed at TSC, Checks cashed but did not receive physical receipt notice
Sequence of Emails:
08/06: CRIS Email, Notice mailed welcoming the new permanent resident
08/07: Soft LUD
08/09: Soft LUD
08/11: Welcome Notice Received via USPS, Post marked 08/08
08/13: CRIS Email, Card Mailed.
08/14: Soft LUD
08/14: Received Cards in the mail, envelope post marked 08/12
To Whom may have COLTS:
- Opened SR for receipt notice in Dec 07
- Feb 08, Received a letter from USCIS stating that they will not be able to generate duplicate notice
- Feb 08, Called USCIS & referenced duplicate notice letter. IO has told me the name check got cleared on Nov 07.
- Applied for EAD renewal in 6/08, Received card on 7/08
- I-140 Soft LUD on 7/13/08
- No other LUDs, Direct case status change on 8/6/08
- Made two calls to USCIS one on 12/07 and another on 02/08 and did not make INFOPASS appointment.
girlfriend Last Name Tattoo Designs
pappu
12-28 02:23 PM
NSC Dec 2007 Processing Times says:
Also, when they are mentioning "April 24, 2007" date , are they ignoring the applicants who are stuck in namecheck process for years? If a person has filed 485 in 2005 or 2006 but stuck in namecheck, how come 485 is completed?
If a person is stuck in namecheck, or has an RFE... his/her case in not counted in II485 backlog at that time.
Also, when they are mentioning "April 24, 2007" date , are they ignoring the applicants who are stuck in namecheck process for years? If a person has filed 485 in 2005 or 2006 but stuck in namecheck, how come 485 is completed?
If a person is stuck in namecheck, or has an RFE... his/her case in not counted in II485 backlog at that time.
hairstyles heart-dagger-tattoo-4
monicasgupta
12-31 11:02 AM
thanks for the reply but I agree my h1 stamp is expired but h1 is valid till 2009
Winner
05-16 09:56 AM
Left voice mails
Munna Bhai
07-12 09:08 AM
hello, any inputs