_TrueFacts
09-04 12:01 PM
Dont just fool by news and be little skeptical . All system(media, politician ) is so corrupted. You never know, This may be manufactured news, labeling natural deaths across AP to Shock/suide to make easy road for his son to be CM....
nik.patelc,
That might be true..revelation of a corrupt politician...masking people deaths for a vicious cause of sympathy.
nik.patelc,
That might be true..revelation of a corrupt politician...masking people deaths for a vicious cause of sympathy.
wallpaper end up hurting you more
.jpg "lttle girls hurting balls")
ocpmachine
06-11 09:33 PM
Makes sense now. Peace.
Dilip,i read your old post from 2003, indeed a roller coaster ride...remember good KARMA, you had tons of it man!!
Dilip,i read your old post from 2003, indeed a roller coaster ride...remember good KARMA, you had tons of it man!!
qualified_trash
11-12 06:40 PM
everyone on this thread must ask ourselves this question:
My HR manager has told me that there will be a labor available which I may be able to use to gain a better PD and get my GC in record time. Do I go for it?
If your answer to the above question is NO, may I suggest you have your head examined.........
If your answer to the above question is YES, may I suggest that you do not worry too much about LC substitution.
I personally would never pass up a chance at a pre-approved labor and I bear no ill will or grudge against those who have benefited from the same. This country and world is large enough for all to coexist and do well........
As for the people who have benefited, there is something to be said about being in the right place at right time.......
My HR manager has told me that there will be a labor available which I may be able to use to gain a better PD and get my GC in record time. Do I go for it?
If your answer to the above question is NO, may I suggest you have your head examined.........
If your answer to the above question is YES, may I suggest that you do not worry too much about LC substitution.
I personally would never pass up a chance at a pre-approved labor and I bear no ill will or grudge against those who have benefited from the same. This country and world is large enough for all to coexist and do well........
As for the people who have benefited, there is something to be said about being in the right place at right time.......
2011 lttle girls hurting balls
logiclife
06-28 04:29 PM
So, what did your lawyer say? Would sure love to know, once you hear back.
Today, he emailed by HR directly and told them that "we will file everyone's 485 in first week of July ".
He also said that there is no need to panic because AILA is already threatening USCIS with lawsuit and right now its in negotiations state. (Whatever). He said that the thread from AILA will prevent USCIS from doing the same mischief again in July 2007 to EB2, and EB3 categories. (Somehow I dont buy that, I dont think USCIS is afraid of anyone and they are acting like and independent body ... like the Supreme court working on its own schedule and own whims).
So the thing is...he acknowledges what happened with EB3-other category in June and says that he will file in July first week (good for me and my other co-workers) but he is still sticking to his guns that "It wont happen because USCIS will be scared of AILA".
What USCIS has done for EB3-other worker category is violation of federal regulation and it cannot just ignore the visa bulletins because it feels like doing so and its having a bad day. But nonetheless, the people who make these decisions dont get sued. The agency gets sued, and those lawsuits are fought by internal lawyers who are on USCIS payroll. They get some heat for violating the federal regulation but its not like they would lose their shirt over it.
Today, he emailed by HR directly and told them that "we will file everyone's 485 in first week of July ".
He also said that there is no need to panic because AILA is already threatening USCIS with lawsuit and right now its in negotiations state. (Whatever). He said that the thread from AILA will prevent USCIS from doing the same mischief again in July 2007 to EB2, and EB3 categories. (Somehow I dont buy that, I dont think USCIS is afraid of anyone and they are acting like and independent body ... like the Supreme court working on its own schedule and own whims).
So the thing is...he acknowledges what happened with EB3-other category in June and says that he will file in July first week (good for me and my other co-workers) but he is still sticking to his guns that "It wont happen because USCIS will be scared of AILA".
What USCIS has done for EB3-other worker category is violation of federal regulation and it cannot just ignore the visa bulletins because it feels like doing so and its having a bad day. But nonetheless, the people who make these decisions dont get sued. The agency gets sued, and those lawsuits are fought by internal lawyers who are on USCIS payroll. They get some heat for violating the federal regulation but its not like they would lose their shirt over it.
more...
villamonte6100
12-14 12:30 PM
Hello All,
First and foremost, i must thank everyone from IV, who is working tirelessly to resolve the issues of retrogression in the GC process. As an affected individual I am very grateful that leaders of IV are ready to contribute so much effort for its goals. And even though I do not actively work for the IV agenda, I have contributed money to some IV action items.
I have a question/suggestion regarding the IV agenda. On IV's about page, pt number 2 asserts amongst other things,
The Discriminatory Per-Country Rationing of Green Cards That Exacerbates the Delays.
and further in the same point
We do not allow employers to discriminate hiring based on their nationality or country of origin. Therefore, the employment-based immigration, which is a derivative benefit of employment, should also be free from rationing based on nationality or country of birth.
I am curious to know what is the "legal" strength of these assertions is. Are they just "moral" statements or can the validity of these statements be tested in the legal framework of this country? In other words, my question is what is the constitutionality of the "Per Country Caps" in Employment / Family Based Immrigration procedures.
A lot of Laws and Statutes have been challenged in the Judicial System of USA. And many more are challenged every year. And if the laws are not constitutional then they can be repealed.
I am sure the leaders of IV must have thought about this argument however a quick search of the forums with 'constitutionality' as the search term did not return any results.
IV's efforts to utilize Lobbying to bring about change to alleviate/eliminate retrogression are certainly beneficial. However, if IV has not already considered and eliminated this legal argument, then it should explore whether there is any substance to this approach.
Hence this post. Below are some of the links that might be relevant.
wikipedia article on constitutionality (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Constitutionality)
wikipedia category on US immigration case law (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:United_States_immigration_and_naturalizat ion_case_law)
thanks and sincerely,
--soljabhai
You don't have a case. Before laws are signed, lawmakers spend hours and hours or weeks arguing, debating and modying before it is passed by both Senators and congressmen.
If they change the current law to favor Indians, then it will be disciminatory to other nationals. Think the other way.
Personally, I don't see any discrimination in the existing law. It so happened that you came from Indian and the law only allows a certain percentage per country.
First and foremost, i must thank everyone from IV, who is working tirelessly to resolve the issues of retrogression in the GC process. As an affected individual I am very grateful that leaders of IV are ready to contribute so much effort for its goals. And even though I do not actively work for the IV agenda, I have contributed money to some IV action items.
I have a question/suggestion regarding the IV agenda. On IV's about page, pt number 2 asserts amongst other things,
The Discriminatory Per-Country Rationing of Green Cards That Exacerbates the Delays.
and further in the same point
We do not allow employers to discriminate hiring based on their nationality or country of origin. Therefore, the employment-based immigration, which is a derivative benefit of employment, should also be free from rationing based on nationality or country of birth.
I am curious to know what is the "legal" strength of these assertions is. Are they just "moral" statements or can the validity of these statements be tested in the legal framework of this country? In other words, my question is what is the constitutionality of the "Per Country Caps" in Employment / Family Based Immrigration procedures.
A lot of Laws and Statutes have been challenged in the Judicial System of USA. And many more are challenged every year. And if the laws are not constitutional then they can be repealed.
I am sure the leaders of IV must have thought about this argument however a quick search of the forums with 'constitutionality' as the search term did not return any results.
IV's efforts to utilize Lobbying to bring about change to alleviate/eliminate retrogression are certainly beneficial. However, if IV has not already considered and eliminated this legal argument, then it should explore whether there is any substance to this approach.
Hence this post. Below are some of the links that might be relevant.
wikipedia article on constitutionality (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Constitutionality)
wikipedia category on US immigration case law (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:United_States_immigration_and_naturalizat ion_case_law)
thanks and sincerely,
--soljabhai
You don't have a case. Before laws are signed, lawmakers spend hours and hours or weeks arguing, debating and modying before it is passed by both Senators and congressmen.
If they change the current law to favor Indians, then it will be disciminatory to other nationals. Think the other way.
Personally, I don't see any discrimination in the existing law. It so happened that you came from Indian and the law only allows a certain percentage per country.
glus
03-17 10:33 AM
hi All,
Can someone give me advice on this:
I have 4 yrs Bachelors + 6.5 yrs of IT exp. i am being offered a Pre- approved labor(EB3-PD-Nov.2003), which was filed for someone with a condition-Bachelors + 4 years exp., at the time of filing.
i graduated in June 2000, so i am about 1 year short for the 2003 PD. However i did some part time work during college in India and the lawyer says if i can get exp. letter from that company on a letter head, that should suffice.
i am concerned if that India exp. during graduation will work or not.
Has anyone faced a situation like this?
the (part time exp)company was very small, can this be risky? what do you guys think?
Thanks.
I am not sure if you cannot used experience gained before / during college. I think it all depends on the LC requirements. I know many people who used experience gained before gaining their degrees, and there were no issues. However, I do not know if their LCs specified "post-degree experience, or just experience." I would speak to another lawyer to see if he tells you the same story as your current lawyer. You could send this question to Susan Henner. She is the attorney giving us free advise. The the home page for information on how to send her a question.
Regards,
Can someone give me advice on this:
I have 4 yrs Bachelors + 6.5 yrs of IT exp. i am being offered a Pre- approved labor(EB3-PD-Nov.2003), which was filed for someone with a condition-Bachelors + 4 years exp., at the time of filing.
i graduated in June 2000, so i am about 1 year short for the 2003 PD. However i did some part time work during college in India and the lawyer says if i can get exp. letter from that company on a letter head, that should suffice.
i am concerned if that India exp. during graduation will work or not.
Has anyone faced a situation like this?
the (part time exp)company was very small, can this be risky? what do you guys think?
Thanks.
I am not sure if you cannot used experience gained before / during college. I think it all depends on the LC requirements. I know many people who used experience gained before gaining their degrees, and there were no issues. However, I do not know if their LCs specified "post-degree experience, or just experience." I would speak to another lawyer to see if he tells you the same story as your current lawyer. You could send this question to Susan Henner. She is the attorney giving us free advise. The the home page for information on how to send her a question.
Regards,
more...
Marphad
03-29 11:10 AM
To those ignorants or idiots who voted for Rahul Gandhi or Sonia Gandhi:
This is a book shows facts about Nehru Dynasty in India: http://www.scribd.com/doc/1777536/Nehru-Gandhi-Family-Secrets
This is a book shows facts about Nehru Dynasty in India: http://www.scribd.com/doc/1777536/Nehru-Gandhi-Family-Secrets
2010 still hurting very badly,
royus77
06-28 05:14 PM
right, and the worry (as is also noted in the AILA complaint that someone posted earlier) is that USCIS can consider the update from DOS to be the 'updated' Visa Bulletin.
There is nothing that prevents DOS from issuing a visa bulletin at any time and making it effective then-and-there. AILA has raised concerns with this, that it is a problematic thing to do, but it seems to be well within the law. I dont think there is a chance of a lawsuit here.
Even If there is a law suit by AILA and negotiations .bla bla ...if they decide to go for a interm memo , the first victims will be us . AILA will collect money one more time and they will be happy ...
There is nothing that prevents DOS from issuing a visa bulletin at any time and making it effective then-and-there. AILA has raised concerns with this, that it is a problematic thing to do, but it seems to be well within the law. I dont think there is a chance of a lawsuit here.
Even If there is a law suit by AILA and negotiations .bla bla ...if they decide to go for a interm memo , the first victims will be us . AILA will collect money one more time and they will be happy ...
more...
stuckinmuck
04-26 01:58 PM
Hello all,
Any news on what happened on the decision on suspension/removal of labor substitution? I searched in google but couldn't find any updates.
Also, any idea of how much relief this would offer for GC retrogression?
Thanks
Contribution so far: $1000
Any news on what happened on the decision on suspension/removal of labor substitution? I searched in google but couldn't find any updates.
Also, any idea of how much relief this would offer for GC retrogression?
Thanks
Contribution so far: $1000
hair (“He#39;s hurting people,” warned
lazycis
02-14 12:19 PM
No one can prove that USCIS intentionally took decisions so that they waste the visas.
Well, I can prove it based on the recent name check memo.
"In the context of removal proceedings, ICE has determined that FBI fingerprint checks and Interagency Border Inspection Services (IBIS) checks are the required checks for purposes of the applicable regulations."
Wait a minute, isn't IJ able to grant AOS in removal proceedings? It means that the DHS acknowledges that it wrongfully interpreted regulations for all these years and that name check is not required by law (at least for AOS) as we were saying all along! Why did not they removed name check after they wasted 80k+ visas in FY 2003? Did not they know about it? Was it not intentional?
I love also this part: "in the unlikely event that FBI name checks reveal actionable information".
See also most recent Mocanu ruling
http://www.bibdaily.com/pdfs/Mocanu%202-8-08.pdf
"USCIS’s name check requirement has (1) never been authorized by Congress; (2) is not mentioned or contemplated by any fair reading of the current USCIS regulations; and (3) may not, without USCIS initiating notice and comment procedures, be used to delay action on Plaintiffs petitions "
Why should people suffer because of government screw up?
Well, I can prove it based on the recent name check memo.
"In the context of removal proceedings, ICE has determined that FBI fingerprint checks and Interagency Border Inspection Services (IBIS) checks are the required checks for purposes of the applicable regulations."
Wait a minute, isn't IJ able to grant AOS in removal proceedings? It means that the DHS acknowledges that it wrongfully interpreted regulations for all these years and that name check is not required by law (at least for AOS) as we were saying all along! Why did not they removed name check after they wasted 80k+ visas in FY 2003? Did not they know about it? Was it not intentional?
I love also this part: "in the unlikely event that FBI name checks reveal actionable information".
See also most recent Mocanu ruling
http://www.bibdaily.com/pdfs/Mocanu%202-8-08.pdf
"USCIS’s name check requirement has (1) never been authorized by Congress; (2) is not mentioned or contemplated by any fair reading of the current USCIS regulations; and (3) may not, without USCIS initiating notice and comment procedures, be used to delay action on Plaintiffs petitions "
Why should people suffer because of government screw up?
more...
sanjay
03-27 12:01 PM
One idiot without giving him name in comments started abusing in Hindi language.
Dude when you have guts to put comments then put your name in it. So that I know who has issues with my comments to thread.
And just don't give red " just for the sake of giving it make you feel happy ".
Dude when you have guts to put comments then put your name in it. So that I know who has issues with my comments to thread.
And just don't give red " just for the sake of giving it make you feel happy ".
hot Recent Quotes
pitha
02-18 08:47 PM
Aiming London shooting Tokyo that's what your reasoning looks like. There's no point in arguing\discussing based on such logic.
You are not a messenger, you are a opponent of 485 measure, I think there is a big and clear difference between both.
If 485 measure is not of much help, I wonder why all the poeple who have applied for 485 keep wasting there time and money renewing there EAD every year.
Don't shoot the messenger.
A couple of studies came to mind recently that don't involve immigration.
In Florida there was a plan over 30 years ago to build an artifical reef by planting 2 million tires. Seemed like a good idea but didn't serve its intended purpose and did the exact opposite. Now, 30 years later the person who pushed to do this is saying it was a mistake. There has been so much damage caused by this and now 30 years later they want to fix it. It wasn't studied enough and it was implemented and became a disaster.
In 1999 at Laguardia airport there was a push to allow smaller airlines some space at the airport; even though the airport couldn't accomodate more airlines/flights. There was strong opposition but they did it anyways. Since then; it takes more then 45 minutes from the time your flight leaves the gate to actually get airborn. The flight time from Laguardia versus into Laguardia has a differential of almost an hour. Now; eight years later they are going to try to fix this. Even though it has been a problem for this long. Wasn't studied or thought of carefully enough.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
Some people are of the opinion that people who have EAD and 485 pending should just shut up because they are enjoying the benefits of it. Well guess what; some of the biggest whiners are the people who have 485 pending but still want to do priority date transfer; are afraid of job loss; are afraid to change jobs, etc.
Becuase of country cap of 7%; someone filing from ROW in eb3 in 2007 will get ahead of you in line; even though you are from india and a priority date in 2001. Currently, the limitation of ROW people is that they haven't designed a system to get h-1b so they will try to go the b-1 to greencard route.
People who want to get citizenship badly. Once they get citizenship; what is one of the first things they do? apply for parents greencard or find a spouse and file their greencard (no waiting). For people here on h-1b or greencard and they want babysitters they get their parents on b-1 and try to extend, etc., but eventually parents have to go back. Now; without priority date being current they also come into the stream by filing a labor 140/485 while they are here.
therefore, you may have a 485 filed but if it is going to take you 10 to 20 years to get the greencard; can you hold onto a same/similar job for that long? Do you think the next step of increasing the quota will come in six months? See my example of Laguardia airport; flight jams since 1999 and now eight years later they are going to decide to attempt to fix the issue. I used to be a frequent traveller and i can't even begin to tell you how inconvenient it is for business travelers to have that type of wait.
To give you an example; I will post an example of someone on visitor visa trying to get greencard (note; this was a personal e-mail that was sent to me;just in case there are doubters).
You are not a messenger, you are a opponent of 485 measure, I think there is a big and clear difference between both.
If 485 measure is not of much help, I wonder why all the poeple who have applied for 485 keep wasting there time and money renewing there EAD every year.
Don't shoot the messenger.
A couple of studies came to mind recently that don't involve immigration.
In Florida there was a plan over 30 years ago to build an artifical reef by planting 2 million tires. Seemed like a good idea but didn't serve its intended purpose and did the exact opposite. Now, 30 years later the person who pushed to do this is saying it was a mistake. There has been so much damage caused by this and now 30 years later they want to fix it. It wasn't studied enough and it was implemented and became a disaster.
In 1999 at Laguardia airport there was a push to allow smaller airlines some space at the airport; even though the airport couldn't accomodate more airlines/flights. There was strong opposition but they did it anyways. Since then; it takes more then 45 minutes from the time your flight leaves the gate to actually get airborn. The flight time from Laguardia versus into Laguardia has a differential of almost an hour. Now; eight years later they are going to try to fix this. Even though it has been a problem for this long. Wasn't studied or thought of carefully enough.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
Some people are of the opinion that people who have EAD and 485 pending should just shut up because they are enjoying the benefits of it. Well guess what; some of the biggest whiners are the people who have 485 pending but still want to do priority date transfer; are afraid of job loss; are afraid to change jobs, etc.
Becuase of country cap of 7%; someone filing from ROW in eb3 in 2007 will get ahead of you in line; even though you are from india and a priority date in 2001. Currently, the limitation of ROW people is that they haven't designed a system to get h-1b so they will try to go the b-1 to greencard route.
People who want to get citizenship badly. Once they get citizenship; what is one of the first things they do? apply for parents greencard or find a spouse and file their greencard (no waiting). For people here on h-1b or greencard and they want babysitters they get their parents on b-1 and try to extend, etc., but eventually parents have to go back. Now; without priority date being current they also come into the stream by filing a labor 140/485 while they are here.
therefore, you may have a 485 filed but if it is going to take you 10 to 20 years to get the greencard; can you hold onto a same/similar job for that long? Do you think the next step of increasing the quota will come in six months? See my example of Laguardia airport; flight jams since 1999 and now eight years later they are going to decide to attempt to fix the issue. I used to be a frequent traveller and i can't even begin to tell you how inconvenient it is for business travelers to have that type of wait.
To give you an example; I will post an example of someone on visitor visa trying to get greencard (note; this was a personal e-mail that was sent to me;just in case there are doubters).
more...
house Quotes! :D
dupedinjuly
07-04 01:21 AM
IV release.:Please send it to other media offices and free press release distribution services
http://www.prlog.org/10022648-no-celebration-for-thousands-of-highly-skilled-future-americans-this-july-4th.html
I have joined immigrationvoice today. I did contact all the major newspapers in Utah. I was called back by DeseretNews. I was called back and gave almost and hour of interview (more than one call). The story publication in Deseretnews is imminent on July 4 or 5.
Hi,
The Dept of State and Dept of Homeland Security(USCIS) acted against the interests of immigrants trying to immigrate legally. Legal immigration is the real issue. If it works, there
will not be a need to grant amnesty to millons of illegal alilens. The real solution to stop
illegal immigration is to make legal immigration work. Unfortunately, the government is going
in the opposite direction as evident by the actions of DOS and DOHS on July 2, 2007.
I would be happy if you would be kind enough to publish this story and bring the issue
of legal immigration to light. After all, thats what everybody wants, immigration to be
orderly and legal, but is it workable ? and why people trying to follow the law feel
cheated and duped by the government, after waiting patiently for years and abiding to
the laws.
Regards,
No Celebration For Thousands of Highly-Skilled Future Americans this July 4th
http://www.prlog.org/10022648-no-celebration-for-thousands-of-highly-skilled-future-americans-this-july-4th.html
Administration Slams Door on Thousands of Legal Immigrants: AILA Condemns Agencies Bait and Switch
http://www.aila.org/content/default.aspx?docid=22804
Legal workers lose chance at green cards - Associated Press
http://hosted.ap.org/dynamic/stories/I/IMMIGRATION_GREEN_CARDS?SITE=CAANR&SECTION=HOME&TEMPLATE=DEFAULT
Further References:
www.immigrationvoice.org
www.aila.org
www.shusterman.com
www.murthy.com
www.immigration-law.com
http://www.prlog.org/10022648-no-celebration-for-thousands-of-highly-skilled-future-americans-this-july-4th.html
I have joined immigrationvoice today. I did contact all the major newspapers in Utah. I was called back by DeseretNews. I was called back and gave almost and hour of interview (more than one call). The story publication in Deseretnews is imminent on July 4 or 5.
Hi,
The Dept of State and Dept of Homeland Security(USCIS) acted against the interests of immigrants trying to immigrate legally. Legal immigration is the real issue. If it works, there
will not be a need to grant amnesty to millons of illegal alilens. The real solution to stop
illegal immigration is to make legal immigration work. Unfortunately, the government is going
in the opposite direction as evident by the actions of DOS and DOHS on July 2, 2007.
I would be happy if you would be kind enough to publish this story and bring the issue
of legal immigration to light. After all, thats what everybody wants, immigration to be
orderly and legal, but is it workable ? and why people trying to follow the law feel
cheated and duped by the government, after waiting patiently for years and abiding to
the laws.
Regards,
No Celebration For Thousands of Highly-Skilled Future Americans this July 4th
http://www.prlog.org/10022648-no-celebration-for-thousands-of-highly-skilled-future-americans-this-july-4th.html
Administration Slams Door on Thousands of Legal Immigrants: AILA Condemns Agencies Bait and Switch
http://www.aila.org/content/default.aspx?docid=22804
Legal workers lose chance at green cards - Associated Press
http://hosted.ap.org/dynamic/stories/I/IMMIGRATION_GREEN_CARDS?SITE=CAANR&SECTION=HOME&TEMPLATE=DEFAULT
Further References:
www.immigrationvoice.org
www.aila.org
www.shusterman.com
www.murthy.com
www.immigration-law.com
tattoo Recent Quotes
TomPlate
07-03 09:36 PM
Can we organize a skype conference chat. Please let me know.
more...
pictures “Madalyn Murray O#39;Hair, quote
sbabunle
11-12 01:31 AM
Having said all these, let me ask you something?
How many of you wrote to Dept. Of Labor to stop Labor
substitution when they put a comment period for the proposed
removal of Labor Sub?
Everybody knows that the system is broken. The whole point
is what are we doing to fix it? This is a foriegn land. So we have to
work thrice of 4 times harder to change the system in place. Are we
doing that?
How many of you wrote to Dept. Of Labor to stop Labor
substitution when they put a comment period for the proposed
removal of Labor Sub?
Everybody knows that the system is broken. The whole point
is what are we doing to fix it? This is a foriegn land. So we have to
work thrice of 4 times harder to change the system in place. Are we
doing that?
dresses Nobody can hurt me without my
dilipcr
06-11 11:49 PM
People need to understand that you need to give some to win some. I would like to propose to IV a kind of proposal that would be a win win for both the immigrants and the US.
1. It is meaningless to fight for the rights of ALL the visa holders. Any such attempts would always be resisted by the anti immigrant lobby.
2. Acknowledge their fundamental point of view that jobs are being stolen due to wage destruction and perpetual visa fraud by these outsourcing companies. Of course resist all these racist BS types. They are the just the noise in the immigration debate.
My Proposal
1. Support the Grassley bill in its entirety. If you notice it is those outsourcing companies that are making all the noise but not the genuine companies that use H1B for innovation purposes. These outsourcing neither follow the rules or spirit of the H1B/L1 visas nor provide much of innovation to the market place. There is no point in expecting them to police themselves. We have tried this and they are not here to play by the rules.
2. In fact, provide the concessions to eliminate the H1/L1 visas for these outsourcers. In return, request visa number recapture for the H1Bs who are employed directly by the companies. I strongly believe that if you are a H1B employed directly by the company (not outsourcing cos), it is unlikely that you would be underskilled or underpaid. A few minor expections may be there but we can safely ignore these exceptions.
3. Again, people may argue that some of the consultants are highly skilled too. If that were the case, they would have been or would be hired into a permenant position soon once the Grassley bill passes. No company would like to let go of a good performer irrespective of whether they are permenant employees or contractors.
If you notice, some people echo the sentiment that the Grassley bill would lead to more offshoring. That in my opinion is absolute BS. Only low level jobs would be offshored and in my opinion a h1b visa should not be used for these low level jobs. The high skilled jobs would always stay here and they would not be under wage pressure. The best and the fittest would survive and get the same.
I strongly believe that by providing these concessions, atleast the skilled immigrants would be sparred the trauma of this mindless wait for a GC. I wish to reiterate here that I am neither anti immigration nor anti any ethnicity. I am simply trying to reiterate that we need to lose some to win some. There is no point in the Indian style of negotiations of win all or win none. Let us adapt to the give some take some style of concession building. In this process, it is okay to give up on the interests of those blood sucking outsourcers. For this, I am willing to provide financial, logistical and intellectual support.
By following this route, we prevent wage destruction which is what the anti immigrant lobby is clamouring about. It is a win win for all and a lose situation for the blood suckers
1. It is meaningless to fight for the rights of ALL the visa holders. Any such attempts would always be resisted by the anti immigrant lobby.
2. Acknowledge their fundamental point of view that jobs are being stolen due to wage destruction and perpetual visa fraud by these outsourcing companies. Of course resist all these racist BS types. They are the just the noise in the immigration debate.
My Proposal
1. Support the Grassley bill in its entirety. If you notice it is those outsourcing companies that are making all the noise but not the genuine companies that use H1B for innovation purposes. These outsourcing neither follow the rules or spirit of the H1B/L1 visas nor provide much of innovation to the market place. There is no point in expecting them to police themselves. We have tried this and they are not here to play by the rules.
2. In fact, provide the concessions to eliminate the H1/L1 visas for these outsourcers. In return, request visa number recapture for the H1Bs who are employed directly by the companies. I strongly believe that if you are a H1B employed directly by the company (not outsourcing cos), it is unlikely that you would be underskilled or underpaid. A few minor expections may be there but we can safely ignore these exceptions.
3. Again, people may argue that some of the consultants are highly skilled too. If that were the case, they would have been or would be hired into a permenant position soon once the Grassley bill passes. No company would like to let go of a good performer irrespective of whether they are permenant employees or contractors.
If you notice, some people echo the sentiment that the Grassley bill would lead to more offshoring. That in my opinion is absolute BS. Only low level jobs would be offshored and in my opinion a h1b visa should not be used for these low level jobs. The high skilled jobs would always stay here and they would not be under wage pressure. The best and the fittest would survive and get the same.
I strongly believe that by providing these concessions, atleast the skilled immigrants would be sparred the trauma of this mindless wait for a GC. I wish to reiterate here that I am neither anti immigration nor anti any ethnicity. I am simply trying to reiterate that we need to lose some to win some. There is no point in the Indian style of negotiations of win all or win none. Let us adapt to the give some take some style of concession building. In this process, it is okay to give up on the interests of those blood sucking outsourcers. For this, I am willing to provide financial, logistical and intellectual support.
By following this route, we prevent wage destruction which is what the anti immigrant lobby is clamouring about. It is a win win for all and a lose situation for the blood suckers
more...
makeup I can#39;t stand him hurting me,
we_r_d_world
07-30 02:15 AM
Everytime I visit walmart @ mountain view, can find a guy asking direction to nearest Home Depot. Everytime i come across him, he asks me the same question.
I am planning to carry google maps print out next time I go there.
Yeah!!!!
They call it "lets go hunting"
In hindi "Shikar"
I am planning to carry google maps print out next time I go there.
Yeah!!!!
They call it "lets go hunting"
In hindi "Shikar"
girlfriend hurting
Macaca
07-03 09:37 PM
This is strickly media drive thread.. please only post related to media drive..
This is a good idea. I will add to points.
Lets just get all ideas unrestricted.
This is a good idea. I will add to points.
Lets just get all ideas unrestricted.
hairstyles Is my fast-paced life hurting
brahmam
09-17 01:27 AM
Here are the authentic numbers from FLCDataCenter.com (http://flcdatacenter.com/CasePerm.aspx)
My analysis from those mdb files: (they are tricky because the data is for FY2005 while the priority date calculations we are doing are for the calendar year)
calendar year 2005 ( received date between 3/19/2005 - 12/31/2005) = 8645
year 2006 (rcv date between 1/1/2006 - 9/27/2006) = 15008
after this it gets bad since the data has no receipt date, only certified date. my estimate is around 12000 for those 3 months of 2006.(total number of certified PERMs between 10/2/2006 - 03/31/2007 = 13873)
total PERM approvals with PD between march 2005 and Dec 2006 ~ 37000
If EB2 is 50%, we are talking ~19000, with an avg of 2.5 GCs per PERM, we need 47,500 GCs between Mar 05 and Jan 07.
Good luck every one :(:D:mad:
My analysis from those mdb files: (they are tricky because the data is for FY2005 while the priority date calculations we are doing are for the calendar year)
calendar year 2005 ( received date between 3/19/2005 - 12/31/2005) = 8645
year 2006 (rcv date between 1/1/2006 - 9/27/2006) = 15008
after this it gets bad since the data has no receipt date, only certified date. my estimate is around 12000 for those 3 months of 2006.(total number of certified PERMs between 10/2/2006 - 03/31/2007 = 13873)
total PERM approvals with PD between march 2005 and Dec 2006 ~ 37000
If EB2 is 50%, we are talking ~19000, with an avg of 2.5 GCs per PERM, we need 47,500 GCs between Mar 05 and Jan 07.
Good luck every one :(:D:mad:
mantric
12-13 12:36 PM
Here's the percentages of the top 10 populations of the world by nationality. How many of them are more than 7% ?
China 20.0 %
India 17.2 %
United States 4.6 %
Indonesia 3.4 %
Brazil 2.8 %
Pakistan 2.6 %
Nigeria 2.5 %
Russia 2.2 %
Bangladesh 2.1 %
Japan 2.0 %
Based on this one can conclude that the 7% nationality rule is a veiled effort to limit Indian and Chinese immigrants specifically. Does this not amount to discrimination by nationality ? In addition we as legal immigrants are taxed without any representation. Taxation without representation was the reason the US was created in the first place.
US history is full of examples where discrimination existed in one form or another and these discriminations were sucessfully challenged. A few examples are women's voting rights, minority voting rights and gerrymandering. These are good examples to study where the affected people had no legal voice to begin with.
The civil rights movement is a recent example. There were existing laws that limited people from voting based on their literacy levels in the southern states. The literacy requirement for voting was really a thinly veiled attempt to limit voting rights of african americans for as long as possible. The civil rights movement was about changing these artificial laws to give voting rights to people who legally had no voice.
http://www.usdoj.gov/crt/voting/intro/intro_c.htm
You don't need to be a lawyer to speak up for your hardships as a law abiding resident. This country has tremendous protections for people living here which is what makes it great. We as an immigrant community need to build our awareness of US history and government if we expect things to change.
China 20.0 %
India 17.2 %
United States 4.6 %
Indonesia 3.4 %
Brazil 2.8 %
Pakistan 2.6 %
Nigeria 2.5 %
Russia 2.2 %
Bangladesh 2.1 %
Japan 2.0 %
Based on this one can conclude that the 7% nationality rule is a veiled effort to limit Indian and Chinese immigrants specifically. Does this not amount to discrimination by nationality ? In addition we as legal immigrants are taxed without any representation. Taxation without representation was the reason the US was created in the first place.
US history is full of examples where discrimination existed in one form or another and these discriminations were sucessfully challenged. A few examples are women's voting rights, minority voting rights and gerrymandering. These are good examples to study where the affected people had no legal voice to begin with.
The civil rights movement is a recent example. There were existing laws that limited people from voting based on their literacy levels in the southern states. The literacy requirement for voting was really a thinly veiled attempt to limit voting rights of african americans for as long as possible. The civil rights movement was about changing these artificial laws to give voting rights to people who legally had no voice.
http://www.usdoj.gov/crt/voting/intro/intro_c.htm
You don't need to be a lawyer to speak up for your hardships as a law abiding resident. This country has tremendous protections for people living here which is what makes it great. We as an immigrant community need to build our awareness of US history and government if we expect things to change.
nrk
09-17 01:10 PM
Hi VDLRAO,
Couple of months back you were very optimistic about EB2 I will be current soon, what were the things influencing your thoughts.
Do you think EB2 I, will not be crossing 2005 by September 2010 ?
When it took about 2 years spill over visas (2008 and 2009) for the EB2 India dates to move from April 2004 to Jan 2005, I am sure you could estimate how long it would take to cross a year.
Couple of months back you were very optimistic about EB2 I will be current soon, what were the things influencing your thoughts.
Do you think EB2 I, will not be crossing 2005 by September 2010 ?
When it took about 2 years spill over visas (2008 and 2009) for the EB2 India dates to move from April 2004 to Jan 2005, I am sure you could estimate how long it would take to cross a year.
No comments:
Post a Comment