kookoo
08-03 06:17 PM
What the chances are of an inquiry between the USCIS and my Previous Employer?
:confused:
:confused:
wallpaper funny friends forever quotes
pointlesswait
05-05 10:08 AM
absurd..!!
sabr
09-19 05:39 PM
meaning I can work for company B now and even though my h1b renewal approves with company A? then when I feel like I can go out and reenter before the h1b renewal period ends?
2011 awesome funny quotes. funny
mariusp
02-22 09:28 PM
https://egov.uscis.gov/cris/jsps/Processtimes.jsp?SeviceCenter=NSC
https://egov.uscis.gov/cris/jsps/Processtimes.jsp?SeviceCenter=TSC
TSC
485: went from May 24 to April 10, 2007 :(
140: June 23, 2007
NSC
485: July 30, 3007
140: Jan 22, 2007
https://egov.uscis.gov/cris/jsps/Processtimes.jsp?SeviceCenter=TSC
TSC
485: went from May 24 to April 10, 2007 :(
140: June 23, 2007
NSC
485: July 30, 3007
140: Jan 22, 2007
more...
Jen2010
12-06 04:55 PM
Dear BimmerFan,
Thank you very much for sharing your experience !!
I am in F-1 Visa and finishing my PhD and I have recently received a job offer to start next June.
The J1 waiver process is related to two visas J-1 that I had before I applied to the PhD program: I came to US in 2006 as exchange visitor scholar to do a research project for six months at X University with a J-1 visa, after this I came back to my country for 1 month and applied to another J-1 visa from August'06 through Dec'06 because I was invited again to continue doing research at this university (while applying to the PhD); after this I went my country and changed my visa to F-1 to start my PhD studies. I was aware that all J-1 visas have a restriction called two-year rule "INA 212(e)" but I did not have any problem to issue my F-1 visa in 12/2006.
Recently, I have found out that I need to issue a waiver for the two-year rule in order to be able to apply to a visa H-1B that my employer will sponsor after my OPT. I am preparing to apply now to the waiver, asking a No Objection Statement (NOS) from my embassy, I was planning to send the application next week to so that it doesn't delay my H-1 visa application next year and I don't have money to pay an attorney so I wanted to send it myself.
I am not sure if I should mention or not my offer of employment as one of the reasons of requesting the waiver ? Do you think it could be good or bad ??
Do you think I should pay an attorney ? of it is okay to do it independently ?
I do not have any commitment with my home country and I have not received any sponsorship from my country or US government during these programs. This rule applied to me because my profession is written in the Exchange Visitor Skill List of the US. Department of State.
Please advise,
Thanks !!!
Thank you very much for sharing your experience !!
I am in F-1 Visa and finishing my PhD and I have recently received a job offer to start next June.
The J1 waiver process is related to two visas J-1 that I had before I applied to the PhD program: I came to US in 2006 as exchange visitor scholar to do a research project for six months at X University with a J-1 visa, after this I came back to my country for 1 month and applied to another J-1 visa from August'06 through Dec'06 because I was invited again to continue doing research at this university (while applying to the PhD); after this I went my country and changed my visa to F-1 to start my PhD studies. I was aware that all J-1 visas have a restriction called two-year rule "INA 212(e)" but I did not have any problem to issue my F-1 visa in 12/2006.
Recently, I have found out that I need to issue a waiver for the two-year rule in order to be able to apply to a visa H-1B that my employer will sponsor after my OPT. I am preparing to apply now to the waiver, asking a No Objection Statement (NOS) from my embassy, I was planning to send the application next week to so that it doesn't delay my H-1 visa application next year and I don't have money to pay an attorney so I wanted to send it myself.
I am not sure if I should mention or not my offer of employment as one of the reasons of requesting the waiver ? Do you think it could be good or bad ??
Do you think I should pay an attorney ? of it is okay to do it independently ?
I do not have any commitment with my home country and I have not received any sponsorship from my country or US government during these programs. This rule applied to me because my profession is written in the Exchange Visitor Skill List of the US. Department of State.
Please advise,
Thanks !!!
ashkam
04-04 02:05 PM
I filed my 485 in August and got married later and my wife is on H4 right now. I'm on H1 as of now. I'm not using my EAD right now, so that my wife can maintain her H4 status. I'm planning her F1 processing from H4, so that once she is on F1 officially, I want to use EAD to change employers.
Is there any risk involved here and if so, please let me know
Thanks in Advance
Why do you have to wait for your wife to be on F1 before changing to EAD? Even if you use your EAD now, she will still be in valid AOS status.
Is there any risk involved here and if so, please let me know
Thanks in Advance
Why do you have to wait for your wife to be on F1 before changing to EAD? Even if you use your EAD now, she will still be in valid AOS status.
more...
GCKarma
04-19 10:25 PM
Go to http://www.shusterman.com/
Got some updates as to whats going on behind the curtains ..
Gear up & give sometime to fight against the anti-immg groups who have already started contacting the law makers & congressmen ......
What does he mean by lengthy phase-in period?
Got some updates as to whats going on behind the curtains ..
Gear up & give sometime to fight against the anti-immg groups who have already started contacting the law makers & congressmen ......
What does he mean by lengthy phase-in period?
2010 Funny friendship quotes are a
gdr_09
04-19 10:54 PM
How did it get approved? Did u transfer u'r H1B to another company, after it gets denied?
Please share u'r experience.
Please share u'r experience.
more...
zico123
06-14 07:49 PM
Share experiences of good and bad consulting companies here. Help someone avoid the trap of fraud consulting firms which ruin peoples careers.
|
http://h1b.wikidot.com/h1b-companies
|
Share this site with others and lets put an end to the consulting trauma.
|
http://h1b.wikidot.com/h1b-companies
|
Share this site with others and lets put an end to the consulting trauma.
hair funny friend quotes. funny
ujjwal_p
06-10 02:19 AM
Received RFE for primary applicant (myself) and spouse.
Please submit evidence of lawful presence from October 1998 until August 17, 2007.
The documents may include the following:
A) a photo copy of form I-797 for all extensions and change of status
B) photo copy of form I-20 or IAP66 school records (front and back) including all school annotations
c) Photocopy (front and back) of applicant's Form I-94 Arrival/Departure Record
Below is my immigration timeline
CLASS ------ VALID FROM ------ VALID TO ------ Comments
H1-B -------- 5/16/1995 -------- 5/17/1998
H1-B -------- 5/17/1998 -------- 5/17/2001
H1-B -------- 12/23/1999 ------- 6/30/2001
H1-B -------- 7/1/2001 --------- 9/30/2001
0-1 --------- 10/3/2001 ------ 10/1/2004 ------ Stamped in Chennai
EAD --------- 8/4/2004 -------- 8/3/2005 ------- EB1 denied 1/15/2005
0-1 --------- 5/13/2005 ------- 5/12/2008 ------ Stamped in Chennai
0-1 --------- 4/3/2007 --------- 3/13/2010
0-1 ---------- 5/2/2207 --------- 5/12/2009
After 1/15/05 (EB-1 denial)
- Left the country on 6/15/05 (less than 6 months)
- During this time, applied for O-1 visa and got approved
- Got visa stamping in Chennai with O-1 visa
Do you see any issues with my response ?
Pretty long timeline and multiple visa types. Not sure how O-1 works and whether it is a dual intent visa. In any case, looks like the RFE is pretty straight forward and they only need the historical documents, possibly because the record is pretty long.
**- This is not legal advise.
Please submit evidence of lawful presence from October 1998 until August 17, 2007.
The documents may include the following:
A) a photo copy of form I-797 for all extensions and change of status
B) photo copy of form I-20 or IAP66 school records (front and back) including all school annotations
c) Photocopy (front and back) of applicant's Form I-94 Arrival/Departure Record
Below is my immigration timeline
CLASS ------ VALID FROM ------ VALID TO ------ Comments
H1-B -------- 5/16/1995 -------- 5/17/1998
H1-B -------- 5/17/1998 -------- 5/17/2001
H1-B -------- 12/23/1999 ------- 6/30/2001
H1-B -------- 7/1/2001 --------- 9/30/2001
0-1 --------- 10/3/2001 ------ 10/1/2004 ------ Stamped in Chennai
EAD --------- 8/4/2004 -------- 8/3/2005 ------- EB1 denied 1/15/2005
0-1 --------- 5/13/2005 ------- 5/12/2008 ------ Stamped in Chennai
0-1 --------- 4/3/2007 --------- 3/13/2010
0-1 ---------- 5/2/2207 --------- 5/12/2009
After 1/15/05 (EB-1 denial)
- Left the country on 6/15/05 (less than 6 months)
- During this time, applied for O-1 visa and got approved
- Got visa stamping in Chennai with O-1 visa
Do you see any issues with my response ?
Pretty long timeline and multiple visa types. Not sure how O-1 works and whether it is a dual intent visa. In any case, looks like the RFE is pretty straight forward and they only need the historical documents, possibly because the record is pretty long.
**- This is not legal advise.
more...
rolrblade
03-18 08:14 AM
Hi,
My wife, who is the primary green card applicant is planning to change job from desi consulting company to a fortune 500 company. The fortune 500 company wants to invoke AC21 as 180 days have passed from received date and I140 is approved.
Please let me know if someone has similar experience with the following:
1. Is there any salary restriction on increase from current salary percentage wise?
2. Has anyone used sucessfully AC21 in the past and had no issues with EAD renewals and Green card?
Thanks
Answers below:
1. Technically there is no Salary restriction. As stated above it is a grey area. But, if the job duties are the same and the salary difference is too big (no one knows how much is acceptable without raising questions), then it brings into question if you are still performing the same duties. But basically, you have to make equal to or more than the LC.
2. I have used AC21 before. Have not done EAD renewal yet.
My wife, who is the primary green card applicant is planning to change job from desi consulting company to a fortune 500 company. The fortune 500 company wants to invoke AC21 as 180 days have passed from received date and I140 is approved.
Please let me know if someone has similar experience with the following:
1. Is there any salary restriction on increase from current salary percentage wise?
2. Has anyone used sucessfully AC21 in the past and had no issues with EAD renewals and Green card?
Thanks
Answers below:
1. Technically there is no Salary restriction. As stated above it is a grey area. But, if the job duties are the same and the salary difference is too big (no one knows how much is acceptable without raising questions), then it brings into question if you are still performing the same duties. But basically, you have to make equal to or more than the LC.
2. I have used AC21 before. Have not done EAD renewal yet.
hot funny friendship quotes
GooblyWoobly
07-18 06:14 PM
I have couple of questions, couldn't find answers in other threads.
1. My I485 was filed on July 9th, 2007 (PD Oct, 2005) without EAD/AP (since my lawyer was expecting a rejection). Now, he will apply for EAD/AP, and cannot do it until we get a receipt for AOS, which will probably take more than a month. Given this, I'll be applying for EAD possibly in August end. Is this a blessing in disguise, as, I'll have to pay new fees for EAD, which would mean, I won't have to renew that EAD every year?? Am I correct in this assumption?
2. My spouse's AOS was filed with mine as dependent. She has a H1 of her own and is working. Now, after the I485 receipt comes back, if she leaves her job, will she be in status (or does she need to move to H4? I'll stay on H1 and won't invoke EAD unless necessary). My understanding is, with the receipt, she is in status no matter what (unless the I485 gets denied).
TIA.
1. My I485 was filed on July 9th, 2007 (PD Oct, 2005) without EAD/AP (since my lawyer was expecting a rejection). Now, he will apply for EAD/AP, and cannot do it until we get a receipt for AOS, which will probably take more than a month. Given this, I'll be applying for EAD possibly in August end. Is this a blessing in disguise, as, I'll have to pay new fees for EAD, which would mean, I won't have to renew that EAD every year?? Am I correct in this assumption?
2. My spouse's AOS was filed with mine as dependent. She has a H1 of her own and is working. Now, after the I485 receipt comes back, if she leaves her job, will she be in status (or does she need to move to H4? I'll stay on H1 and won't invoke EAD unless necessary). My understanding is, with the receipt, she is in status no matter what (unless the I485 gets denied).
TIA.
more...
house Prayer, Funny Friendship
saketkapur
09-16 05:25 PM
done
CNN=Corrupt Naitivist Network
CNN=Corrupt Naitivist Network
tattoo good quotes for friendship.
gconmymind
06-02 01:09 PM
If you use your EAD, your wife will need to maintain her own status like L1, H1, F1, etc. There is no dependent status on EAD (like H4 for H1).
more...
pictures friends quotes. funny
stealthgt
04-18 09:29 PM
I'm in Miami
dresses funny friends forever quotes.
Blog Feeds
02-01 08:30 AM
Summary
(LINK TO FULL REPORT BELOW)
Congress created the H-1B program in 1990 to enable U.S. employers to hire temporary, foreign workers in specialty occupations. The law capped the number of H-1B visas issued per fiscal year at 65,000. Since then, the cap has fluctuated with legislative changes. Congress asked GAO to assess the impact of the cap on the ability of domestic companies to innovate, while ensuring that U.S. workers are not disadvantaged. In response, GAO examined what is known about (1) employer demand for H-1B workers; (2) how the cap affects employer costs and decisions to move operations overseas; (3) H-1B worker characteristics and the potential impact of raising the cap; and (4) how well requirements of the H-1B program protect U.S. workers. GAO analyzed data from 4 federal agencies; interviewed agency officials, experts, and H-1B employers; and reviewed agency documents and literature.
In most years, demand for new H-1B workers exceeded the cap: From 2000 to 2009, demand for new H-1B workers tended to exceed the cap, as measured by the numbers of initial petitions submitted by employers who are subject to the cap. There is no way to precisely determine the level of any unmet demand among employers, since they tend to stop submitting (and the Department of Homeland Security stops tracking) petitions once the cap is reached each year. When we consider all initial petitions, including those from universities and research institutions that are not subject to the cap, we find that demand for new H-1B workers is largely driven by a small number of employers. Over the decade, over 14 percent of all initial petitions were submitted by cap-exempt employers, and only a few employers (fewer than 1 percent) garnered over one-quarter of all H-1B approvals. Most interviewed companies said the H-1B cap and program created costs, but were not factors in their decisions to move R&D overseas: The 34 H-1B employers GAO interviewed reported that the cap has created some additional costs, though the cap's impact depended on the size and maturity of the company. For example, in years when visas were denied by the cap, most large firms reported finding other (sometimes more costly) ways to hire their preferred job candidates. On the other hand, small firms were more likely to fill their positions with different candidates, which they said resulted in delays and sometimes economic losses, particularly for firms in rapidly changing technology fields. Limitations in agency data and systems hinder tracking the cap and H-1B workers over time: The total number of H-1B workers in the U.S. at any one time--and information about the length of their stay--is unknown, because (1) data systems among the various agencies that process such individuals are not linked so individuals cannot be readily tracked, and (2) H-1B workers are not assigned a unique identifier that would allow for tracking them over time--particularly if and when their visa status changes. Restricted agency oversight and statutory changes weaken protections for U.S. workers: Elements of the H-1B program that could serve as worker protections--such as the requirement to pay prevailing wages, the visa's temporary status, and the cap itself--are weakened by several factors. First, program oversight is fragmented and restricted. Second, the H-1B program lacks a legal provision for holding employers accountable to program requirements when they obtain H-1B workers through a staffing company. Third, statutory changes made to the H-1B program have, in combination and in effect, increased the pool of H-1B workers beyond the cap and lowered the bar for eligibility. Taken together, the multifaceted challenges identified in this report show that the H-1B program, as currently structured, may not be used to its full potential and may be detrimental in some cases. This report offers several matters for congressional consideration, including that Congress re-examine key H-1B program provisions and make appropriate changes as needed. GAO also recommends that the Departments of Homeland Security and Labor take steps to improve efficiency, flexibility, and monitoring of the H-1B program. Homeland Security disagreed with two recommendations and one matter, citing logistical and other challenges; however, we believe such challenges can be overcome. Labor did not respond to our recommendations.
Recommendations
Our recommendations from this work are listed below with a Contact for more information. Status will change from "In process" to "Open," "Closed - implemented," or "Closed - not implemented" based on our follow up work.
Director:Andrew SherrillTeam:Government Accountability Office: Education, Workforce, and Income SecurityPhone:(202) 512-7252
Matters for Congressional Consideration
Recommendation: To ensure that the H-1B program continues to meet the needs of businesses in a global economy while maintaining a balance of protections for U.S. workers, Congress may wish to consider reviewing the merits and shortcomings of key program provisions and making appropriate changes as needed. Such a review may include, but would not necessarily be limited to (1) the qualifications required for workers eligible under the H-1B program, (2) exemptions from the cap, (3) the appropriateness of H-1B hiring by staffing companies, (4) the level of the cap, and (5) the role the program should play in the U.S. immigration system in relationship to permanent residency.
Status: In process
Comments: When we determine what steps the Congress has taken, we will provide updated information.
Recommendation: To reduce duplication and fragmentation in the administration and oversight of the H-1B application process, consistent with past GAO matters for congressional consideration, Congress may wish to consider eliminating the requirement that employers first submit a Labor Condition Application (LCA) to the Department of Labor for certification, and require instead that employers submit this application along with the I-129 application to the Department of Homeland Security's U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services for review.
Status: In process
Comments: When we determine what steps the Congress has taken, we will provide updated information.
Recommendation: To improve the Department of Labor's ability to investigate and enforce employer compliance with H-1B program requirements, Congress may wish to consider granting the department subpoena power to obtain employer records during investigations under the H-1B program.
Status: In process
Comments: When we determine what steps the Congress has taken, we will provide updated information.
Recommendation: To help ensure the full protection of H-1B workers employed through staffing companies, Congress may wish to consider holding the employer where an H-1B visa holder performs work accountable for meeting program requirements to the same extent as the employer that submitted the LCA form.
Status: In process
Comments: When we determine what steps the Congress has taken, we will provide updated information.
Recommendations for Executive Action
Recommendation: To help ensure that the number of new H-1B workers who are subject to the cap--both entering the United States and changing to H-1B status within the United States--does not exceed the cap each year, U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services should take steps to improve its tracking of the number of approved H-1B applications and the number of issued visas under the cap by fully leveraging the transformation effort currently under way, which involves the adoption of an electronic petition processing system that will be linked to the Department of State's tracking system. Such steps should ensure that linkages to the Department of State's tracking system will provide Homeland Security with timely access to data on visa issuances, and that mechanisms for tracking petitions and visas against the cap are incorporated into U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services' business rules to be developed for the new electronic petition system.
Agency Affected: Department of Homeland Security
Status: In process
Comments: When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.
Recommendation: To address business concerns without undermining program integrity, U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services should, to the extent permitted by its existing statutory authority, explore options for increasing the flexibility of the application process for H-1B employers, such as (1) allowing employers to rank their applications for visa candidates so that they can hire the best qualified worker for the jobs in highest need; (2) distributing the applications granted under the annual cap in allotments throughout the year (e.g. quarterly); and (3) establishing a system whereby businesses with a strong track-record of compliance with H-1B regulations may use a streamlined application process.
Agency Affected: Department of Homeland Security
Status: In process
Comments: When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.
Recommendation: To improve the transparency and oversight of the posting requirement on the Labor Condition Application (LCA), as part of its current oversight role, the Employment and Training Administration should develop and maintain a centralized Web site, accessible to the public, where businesses must post notice of the intent to hire H-1B workers. Such notices should continue to specify the job category and worksite location noted on the LCA and required by statute on current noncentralized postings.
Agency Affected: Department of Labor
Status: In process
Comments: When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.
Recommendation: To improve the efficiency and effectiveness of its investigations of employer compliance with H-1B requirements, the Employment and Training Administration should provide Labor's Wage and Hour Division searchable access to the LCA database.
Agency Affected: Department of Labor
Status: In process
Comments: When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.
VIEW FULL REPORT (http://www.gao.gov/new.items/d1126.pdf)
More... (http://ashwinsharma.com/2011/01/25/h-1b-visa-program-reforms-are-needed-to-minimize-the-risks-and-costs-of-current-program.aspx?ref=rss)
(LINK TO FULL REPORT BELOW)
Congress created the H-1B program in 1990 to enable U.S. employers to hire temporary, foreign workers in specialty occupations. The law capped the number of H-1B visas issued per fiscal year at 65,000. Since then, the cap has fluctuated with legislative changes. Congress asked GAO to assess the impact of the cap on the ability of domestic companies to innovate, while ensuring that U.S. workers are not disadvantaged. In response, GAO examined what is known about (1) employer demand for H-1B workers; (2) how the cap affects employer costs and decisions to move operations overseas; (3) H-1B worker characteristics and the potential impact of raising the cap; and (4) how well requirements of the H-1B program protect U.S. workers. GAO analyzed data from 4 federal agencies; interviewed agency officials, experts, and H-1B employers; and reviewed agency documents and literature.
In most years, demand for new H-1B workers exceeded the cap: From 2000 to 2009, demand for new H-1B workers tended to exceed the cap, as measured by the numbers of initial petitions submitted by employers who are subject to the cap. There is no way to precisely determine the level of any unmet demand among employers, since they tend to stop submitting (and the Department of Homeland Security stops tracking) petitions once the cap is reached each year. When we consider all initial petitions, including those from universities and research institutions that are not subject to the cap, we find that demand for new H-1B workers is largely driven by a small number of employers. Over the decade, over 14 percent of all initial petitions were submitted by cap-exempt employers, and only a few employers (fewer than 1 percent) garnered over one-quarter of all H-1B approvals. Most interviewed companies said the H-1B cap and program created costs, but were not factors in their decisions to move R&D overseas: The 34 H-1B employers GAO interviewed reported that the cap has created some additional costs, though the cap's impact depended on the size and maturity of the company. For example, in years when visas were denied by the cap, most large firms reported finding other (sometimes more costly) ways to hire their preferred job candidates. On the other hand, small firms were more likely to fill their positions with different candidates, which they said resulted in delays and sometimes economic losses, particularly for firms in rapidly changing technology fields. Limitations in agency data and systems hinder tracking the cap and H-1B workers over time: The total number of H-1B workers in the U.S. at any one time--and information about the length of their stay--is unknown, because (1) data systems among the various agencies that process such individuals are not linked so individuals cannot be readily tracked, and (2) H-1B workers are not assigned a unique identifier that would allow for tracking them over time--particularly if and when their visa status changes. Restricted agency oversight and statutory changes weaken protections for U.S. workers: Elements of the H-1B program that could serve as worker protections--such as the requirement to pay prevailing wages, the visa's temporary status, and the cap itself--are weakened by several factors. First, program oversight is fragmented and restricted. Second, the H-1B program lacks a legal provision for holding employers accountable to program requirements when they obtain H-1B workers through a staffing company. Third, statutory changes made to the H-1B program have, in combination and in effect, increased the pool of H-1B workers beyond the cap and lowered the bar for eligibility. Taken together, the multifaceted challenges identified in this report show that the H-1B program, as currently structured, may not be used to its full potential and may be detrimental in some cases. This report offers several matters for congressional consideration, including that Congress re-examine key H-1B program provisions and make appropriate changes as needed. GAO also recommends that the Departments of Homeland Security and Labor take steps to improve efficiency, flexibility, and monitoring of the H-1B program. Homeland Security disagreed with two recommendations and one matter, citing logistical and other challenges; however, we believe such challenges can be overcome. Labor did not respond to our recommendations.
Recommendations
Our recommendations from this work are listed below with a Contact for more information. Status will change from "In process" to "Open," "Closed - implemented," or "Closed - not implemented" based on our follow up work.
Director:Andrew SherrillTeam:Government Accountability Office: Education, Workforce, and Income SecurityPhone:(202) 512-7252
Matters for Congressional Consideration
Recommendation: To ensure that the H-1B program continues to meet the needs of businesses in a global economy while maintaining a balance of protections for U.S. workers, Congress may wish to consider reviewing the merits and shortcomings of key program provisions and making appropriate changes as needed. Such a review may include, but would not necessarily be limited to (1) the qualifications required for workers eligible under the H-1B program, (2) exemptions from the cap, (3) the appropriateness of H-1B hiring by staffing companies, (4) the level of the cap, and (5) the role the program should play in the U.S. immigration system in relationship to permanent residency.
Status: In process
Comments: When we determine what steps the Congress has taken, we will provide updated information.
Recommendation: To reduce duplication and fragmentation in the administration and oversight of the H-1B application process, consistent with past GAO matters for congressional consideration, Congress may wish to consider eliminating the requirement that employers first submit a Labor Condition Application (LCA) to the Department of Labor for certification, and require instead that employers submit this application along with the I-129 application to the Department of Homeland Security's U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services for review.
Status: In process
Comments: When we determine what steps the Congress has taken, we will provide updated information.
Recommendation: To improve the Department of Labor's ability to investigate and enforce employer compliance with H-1B program requirements, Congress may wish to consider granting the department subpoena power to obtain employer records during investigations under the H-1B program.
Status: In process
Comments: When we determine what steps the Congress has taken, we will provide updated information.
Recommendation: To help ensure the full protection of H-1B workers employed through staffing companies, Congress may wish to consider holding the employer where an H-1B visa holder performs work accountable for meeting program requirements to the same extent as the employer that submitted the LCA form.
Status: In process
Comments: When we determine what steps the Congress has taken, we will provide updated information.
Recommendations for Executive Action
Recommendation: To help ensure that the number of new H-1B workers who are subject to the cap--both entering the United States and changing to H-1B status within the United States--does not exceed the cap each year, U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services should take steps to improve its tracking of the number of approved H-1B applications and the number of issued visas under the cap by fully leveraging the transformation effort currently under way, which involves the adoption of an electronic petition processing system that will be linked to the Department of State's tracking system. Such steps should ensure that linkages to the Department of State's tracking system will provide Homeland Security with timely access to data on visa issuances, and that mechanisms for tracking petitions and visas against the cap are incorporated into U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services' business rules to be developed for the new electronic petition system.
Agency Affected: Department of Homeland Security
Status: In process
Comments: When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.
Recommendation: To address business concerns without undermining program integrity, U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services should, to the extent permitted by its existing statutory authority, explore options for increasing the flexibility of the application process for H-1B employers, such as (1) allowing employers to rank their applications for visa candidates so that they can hire the best qualified worker for the jobs in highest need; (2) distributing the applications granted under the annual cap in allotments throughout the year (e.g. quarterly); and (3) establishing a system whereby businesses with a strong track-record of compliance with H-1B regulations may use a streamlined application process.
Agency Affected: Department of Homeland Security
Status: In process
Comments: When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.
Recommendation: To improve the transparency and oversight of the posting requirement on the Labor Condition Application (LCA), as part of its current oversight role, the Employment and Training Administration should develop and maintain a centralized Web site, accessible to the public, where businesses must post notice of the intent to hire H-1B workers. Such notices should continue to specify the job category and worksite location noted on the LCA and required by statute on current noncentralized postings.
Agency Affected: Department of Labor
Status: In process
Comments: When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.
Recommendation: To improve the efficiency and effectiveness of its investigations of employer compliance with H-1B requirements, the Employment and Training Administration should provide Labor's Wage and Hour Division searchable access to the LCA database.
Agency Affected: Department of Labor
Status: In process
Comments: When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.
VIEW FULL REPORT (http://www.gao.gov/new.items/d1126.pdf)
More... (http://ashwinsharma.com/2011/01/25/h-1b-visa-program-reforms-are-needed-to-minimize-the-risks-and-costs-of-current-program.aspx?ref=rss)
more...
makeup funny friendship quotes and
arihant
02-14 02:26 PM
Hi iptel,
Thanks for the find. I have provided the link to the 2005 report referred in the 2006 document.
http://a257.g.akamaitech.net/7/257/2422/17feb20051700/www.gpoaccess.gov/eop/2005/2005_erp.pdf
Look at Chapter 4 in the 2005 report. It does cover more about the TWP (temporary worker program). However, it does have some interesting statistics on the labor market and fiscal impact of immigrants, and other statistics.
Folks preparing material to present may find some useful statistics here.
Thanks for the find. I have provided the link to the 2005 report referred in the 2006 document.
http://a257.g.akamaitech.net/7/257/2422/17feb20051700/www.gpoaccess.gov/eop/2005/2005_erp.pdf
Look at Chapter 4 in the 2005 report. It does cover more about the TWP (temporary worker program). However, it does have some interesting statistics on the labor market and fiscal impact of immigrants, and other statistics.
Folks preparing material to present may find some useful statistics here.
girlfriend funny friend quotes. pishowda
theperm
05-07 01:11 PM
bumping up~
hairstyles funny quotes about friendship.
ujjvalkoul
01-18 12:29 PM
No
only the primary applicant needs to take the test
It is not clearly spelled out on cic.gc.ca.(or at least I couldnt find it)...so I was confused..
Even if the Spouse is included in the application and may work in canada...even then spouse does not have to appear for test....??
Can you point me to the website for confirmation of this??
only the primary applicant needs to take the test
It is not clearly spelled out on cic.gc.ca.(or at least I couldnt find it)...so I was confused..
Even if the Spouse is included in the application and may work in canada...even then spouse does not have to appear for test....??
Can you point me to the website for confirmation of this??
pointlesswait
04-20 09:03 AM
Dude,... Fasa is only for US citizens..
and even the banks will reject you if u dont have a GC..
You get only a personal loan....or personal line of credit..from MBNA...(best option)
Pvt. student loans ...from accessgroup.org..have stopped since nov. last year.
Google for FASA and try to fill in the application for federal aid online. It will most probably be rejected as federal government does not provide loans for foreign students. But you need to fill in this to apply for loan in any major banks like chase, bank of america or wells fargo, salli Mae etc.
After you get rejection from FASA call any of the major banks and try for a loan. If you have a guarantor in United States with good credit score the loan will easily get approved. Even if you dont have some guarantee, just call these banks and give it a try. Who knows, you may be lucky and you might get a loan.
and even the banks will reject you if u dont have a GC..
You get only a personal loan....or personal line of credit..from MBNA...(best option)
Pvt. student loans ...from accessgroup.org..have stopped since nov. last year.
Google for FASA and try to fill in the application for federal aid online. It will most probably be rejected as federal government does not provide loans for foreign students. But you need to fill in this to apply for loan in any major banks like chase, bank of america or wells fargo, salli Mae etc.
After you get rejection from FASA call any of the major banks and try for a loan. If you have a guarantor in United States with good credit score the loan will easily get approved. Even if you dont have some guarantee, just call these banks and give it a try. Who knows, you may be lucky and you might get a loan.
ak_2006
11-09 12:15 PM
I completed the form.
No comments:
Post a Comment