helpmeExperts
01-13 10:29 PM
bhanupriya, thanx for the valuable information.!!
vikramy
08-17 10:16 AM
I recently transferred my license week back. I just showed my EAD. He cheked online and gave license based on that. At the end he took 485 photo copy.
This is at Dublin DMV.
Hi Guys,
I am on H1B and my wife is working using her EAD. Like most people on here we applied in the July 2007 rush.
Now her licence in PA was expiring and we went to renew it and provided ALL necessary documents such as Passport, I-94, current and future EADs. However at the very end after about half an hour of providing documents, the DMV guy said that the system needed "more info" and that he would have to fax everything to Harrisburg who would then contact the INS for the missing info and we would get some "letter" from the DMV.
Has anyone faced a similar issue in PA before? If so how soon after did they receive this letter? Is there anything I can do to expedite the process such as contacting my local Sentator/Congressman's office? We have a small baby and my wife needs to drive to go to work.
Thanks.
This is at Dublin DMV.
Hi Guys,
I am on H1B and my wife is working using her EAD. Like most people on here we applied in the July 2007 rush.
Now her licence in PA was expiring and we went to renew it and provided ALL necessary documents such as Passport, I-94, current and future EADs. However at the very end after about half an hour of providing documents, the DMV guy said that the system needed "more info" and that he would have to fax everything to Harrisburg who would then contact the INS for the missing info and we would get some "letter" from the DMV.
Has anyone faced a similar issue in PA before? If so how soon after did they receive this letter? Is there anything I can do to expedite the process such as contacting my local Sentator/Congressman's office? We have a small baby and my wife needs to drive to go to work.
Thanks.
tinamatthew
07-22 11:03 PM
A1: Receipt date is assigned by USCIS when they re-enter or mark your case as PP. This is different from when FedEx delivered the PP request. In my friend's case, the difference in these two dates was 10 business days. This was in early June and his I-140 was approved in 3 business days. He stated "Applied for i140 premium processing on June 22nd, 2007" From what I understand, this new i-140 application was PPS and not an upgrade. The receipt date is the date USCIS date stamps the application. I think he will get his money returned as they have passed the 14 day deadline.
A2: Most probably, that is what has happened.
A3: In Rajiv Khanna's conference call (you can download them from his Web site), he suggested the concurrent filing option when someone asked him a similar question.
Good luck!
Thanks,
Jayant
Thanks
A2: Most probably, that is what has happened.
A3: In Rajiv Khanna's conference call (you can download them from his Web site), he suggested the concurrent filing option when someone asked him a similar question.
Good luck!
Thanks,
Jayant
Thanks
mpadapa
10-10 06:40 AM
H1 extensions are never subjected to cap. But if U start using EAD (by filing I-9) then U loose H1 status and hence U break the continuity of H1, so in future if U decide to go back to H1B (for reason like 485 rejected), then U have to apply a NEW H1 which is subjected to cap (not applicable for cap-exempt employment).
H4 is not lost when U use EAD, it is just that U R in AOS status on H4. It is similar to F1, F1 status doesn't allow ppl to work outside campus, but after U graduate, U can work anywhere on EAD (for 1yr) and still be on F1 status and travel using F1. The same Q is answered by susan henner on the IV free conf on Sep 30, the recording of that can be found at http://immigrationvoice.blogspot.com/
augustus U'r lawyer is absolutely correct. Come on folks don't scare people..
Afaik, you can file for an H1 extension without being subject to caps as long as an AOS pending. For instance, you can take a break and go to school, and then file for another H1 extension - it won't be subject to the caps. Confirm it with your lawyer.
jazz
H4 is not lost when U use EAD, it is just that U R in AOS status on H4. It is similar to F1, F1 status doesn't allow ppl to work outside campus, but after U graduate, U can work anywhere on EAD (for 1yr) and still be on F1 status and travel using F1. The same Q is answered by susan henner on the IV free conf on Sep 30, the recording of that can be found at http://immigrationvoice.blogspot.com/
augustus U'r lawyer is absolutely correct. Come on folks don't scare people..
Afaik, you can file for an H1 extension without being subject to caps as long as an AOS pending. For instance, you can take a break and go to school, and then file for another H1 extension - it won't be subject to the caps. Confirm it with your lawyer.
jazz
more...
snathan
08-30 10:25 PM
Can somebody tell me what are the chances of getting audited if PERM is applied in the next week or so? My lawyer is not Fragoman.
Nobody knows... Keep your fingers crossed and pray your luck.
Nobody knows... Keep your fingers crossed and pray your luck.
JunRN
11-09 12:00 AM
That same link you gave tells us that 655k is pending/back-log for AOS....
more...
maddipati1
12-03 03:24 PM
there are lot of threads abt this topic. search it.
read form I-131 instructions, where it clearly says, AP appl. is considered abandoned if you leave US before its approval. this is for sure.
My wife is not H4, she is working on EAD and we applied her I-485 last July. She has to travel to India for an emegency. We applied for AP last month, have the receipt but it is not approved. Is it okay if she travels to India without AP approval? I will be here and I can take her approved AP when I go there after two months.
I heard that if she travels without AP, her I-485 is considered abonded. Is this true? Can we apply for her H4 (as I am still on H1). Any advice on how to get her back?
Thanks!
read form I-131 instructions, where it clearly says, AP appl. is considered abandoned if you leave US before its approval. this is for sure.
My wife is not H4, she is working on EAD and we applied her I-485 last July. She has to travel to India for an emegency. We applied for AP last month, have the receipt but it is not approved. Is it okay if she travels to India without AP approval? I will be here and I can take her approved AP when I go there after two months.
I heard that if she travels without AP, her I-485 is considered abonded. Is this true? Can we apply for her H4 (as I am still on H1). Any advice on how to get her back?
Thanks!
vxb2004
12-25 01:42 PM
Very happy for you. Have a great new year!...finally free..;)
more...
LostInGCProcess
09-18 04:25 PM
If I work little less than 40 hrs will it be considered as part time? Can I use EAD at that time ?
NO. Once you start using your EAD, whether part-time of full-time, it take precedence and your H1 becomes invalid.
NO. Once you start using your EAD, whether part-time of full-time, it take precedence and your H1 becomes invalid.
onemorecame
07-25 11:45 AM
Here is the calculation I came up with USCIS processing of our I-485 applications.
USCIS should allocate 140,000 applications in a fiscal year. So, in a month they need to process, at least, 140,000/ 12 = 11,667 applications.
Assuming that they have, at least, 20 working days in a month, they need to process 11,667/ 20 = 584 applications.
So, now the question is, how many employees does USCIS have and are dedicated to the I-485 processing? We don�t know the exact number. Considering that USCIS is getting lot of revenue, they should have, at least, 50 employees doing this work.
So, 584/50 = 12(Approx) applications they need to process in a day, per person.
So, do you think it is viable? Of course, it is�
What they need to process the I-485 application? They are not doing any FBI names check, or background check (Assuming that everything is done by other organization). So, how long does it take to review the I-485 application? Well, when I filled the application, it took me about 1 hour. So, to review it, let�s us say, it takes about 1/2 the time fill the application; that�s about half an hour. Considering the calculation that we made, it takes an about 6 hours to process 12 candidates. With this assumption, they still have 2 hours left to do miscellaneous tasks. Now the question is what the heck they are doing all the time? Why did they process only 80,000 applications in about 8 months? Are they lazy? Don�t they have enough employees (This shouldn�t be; an average Indian consultant company will have at least 20 employees!!). This is really a mystery. Anyways, if the USCIS really and whole heartedly wants to process the applications, they can; but they really don�t care about immigrants or their plights. :rolleyes:
Good Calculation
USCIS should allocate 140,000 applications in a fiscal year. So, in a month they need to process, at least, 140,000/ 12 = 11,667 applications.
Assuming that they have, at least, 20 working days in a month, they need to process 11,667/ 20 = 584 applications.
So, now the question is, how many employees does USCIS have and are dedicated to the I-485 processing? We don�t know the exact number. Considering that USCIS is getting lot of revenue, they should have, at least, 50 employees doing this work.
So, 584/50 = 12(Approx) applications they need to process in a day, per person.
So, do you think it is viable? Of course, it is�
What they need to process the I-485 application? They are not doing any FBI names check, or background check (Assuming that everything is done by other organization). So, how long does it take to review the I-485 application? Well, when I filled the application, it took me about 1 hour. So, to review it, let�s us say, it takes about 1/2 the time fill the application; that�s about half an hour. Considering the calculation that we made, it takes an about 6 hours to process 12 candidates. With this assumption, they still have 2 hours left to do miscellaneous tasks. Now the question is what the heck they are doing all the time? Why did they process only 80,000 applications in about 8 months? Are they lazy? Don�t they have enough employees (This shouldn�t be; an average Indian consultant company will have at least 20 employees!!). This is really a mystery. Anyways, if the USCIS really and whole heartedly wants to process the applications, they can; but they really don�t care about immigrants or their plights. :rolleyes:
Good Calculation
more...
newuser
05-14 07:48 PM
There is a live debate going on CIR
Currently Rep. Charles Gonzalez ( D-Texas, 20th District, San Antonia) supporting the CIR.
Currently Rep. Charles Gonzalez ( D-Texas, 20th District, San Antonia) supporting the CIR.
talash
07-19 05:03 PM
Positive PPD just means u are exposed to TB is the past ans CXR confirms that u dont have active disease .Treatment in this case is only optional and patient has to decide if he or she wants to be treated for that .Only people with HIV of other immune def dieases must be treated for pos PPD.
they should not ask any further qquestions if CXR ws negative .
they should not ask any further qquestions if CXR ws negative .
more...
redgreen
12-07 08:33 PM
actually you don't need even a degree to get EB1. if you have a nobel prize or pulitzer prize or olympics medal or equivalent you can apply and get eb1. (details are there in uscis website). phd and several published papers and patents are not sufficient for eb1.
Hi!
I have a question about wether a person with US Masters can qualify for EB1 category? Please comment.
I know generally people with such qualification fall into EB2 category. However, does years of expereience and say Patents qualify you to be considered as EB1?
Thanks for reading this thread and commenting.
Hi!
I have a question about wether a person with US Masters can qualify for EB1 category? Please comment.
I know generally people with such qualification fall into EB2 category. However, does years of expereience and say Patents qualify you to be considered as EB1?
Thanks for reading this thread and commenting.
santb1975
03-24 12:49 PM
I wish I did one of these in So.Cal
more...
srarao
07-19 02:30 PM
Hi All,
My skin test was positive, where as my x-ray was normal.Incase I get an RFE , Can I go to my PCP or need to go only to local health dept.
Can some body guide me
-Srarao
$100-so far
My skin test was positive, where as my x-ray was normal.Incase I get an RFE , Can I go to my PCP or need to go only to local health dept.
Can some body guide me
-Srarao
$100-so far
srkamath
07-16 10:47 PM
^^
immi_seeker, you applied for an EAD extension in a normal time frame, he/she didn't apply too early.
We know for a fact that they give 1 year EAD the first time round, we are not sure if they also give renewals i exactly one year increments.
Assuming that an adjudicating officer approved your EAD, I still believe that they did so because they expect to decide on your case by the end of this year, which is good news for all of us.
I'm not trying to falsely raise your hopes here, but i'm just drawing optimistic conclusions.
immi_seeker, you applied for an EAD extension in a normal time frame, he/she didn't apply too early.
We know for a fact that they give 1 year EAD the first time round, we are not sure if they also give renewals i exactly one year increments.
Assuming that an adjudicating officer approved your EAD, I still believe that they did so because they expect to decide on your case by the end of this year, which is good news for all of us.
I'm not trying to falsely raise your hopes here, but i'm just drawing optimistic conclusions.
more...
Blog Feeds
01-26 08:40 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)
hpandey
06-02 04:17 PM
can i get a h1 done from a desi employer just to protect the h4 status and join the other company thats offering me a job with my ead.
the h1 from the desi employer will not be having pay stubs but thats only to get h1 status.
As Kaiserose pointed out the H1 quota is done for the year and will not open till April next year and start in Oct 2009 . Considering that you do get an H1 for your wife next year , make sure that she is working coz while applying for her I-485 they might ask for W2's and paystubs for her ( an H1 person cannot be without pay for such an extended period of time ).
Going on F1 is a good idea but I think for that you have to go back to your home country and get it stamped and come back ( can someone confirm this ?? ). This new regulation was put in place due to the security measures after 2001 . But best confirm with your lawyer.
the h1 from the desi employer will not be having pay stubs but thats only to get h1 status.
As Kaiserose pointed out the H1 quota is done for the year and will not open till April next year and start in Oct 2009 . Considering that you do get an H1 for your wife next year , make sure that she is working coz while applying for her I-485 they might ask for W2's and paystubs for her ( an H1 person cannot be without pay for such an extended period of time ).
Going on F1 is a good idea but I think for that you have to go back to your home country and get it stamped and come back ( can someone confirm this ?? ). This new regulation was put in place due to the security measures after 2001 . But best confirm with your lawyer.
Suva
08-14 11:14 AM
Why are you taking all the H1s into the calculation? This only applies to companies which has more than 50% H1 employees. So it does not apply to all the companies.
I dont agree with the laws passed, but here is the math to come up with the $600 million figure they are quoting.
# of possible H1Bs = 85k (65k + 20k)
Fees (additional) = $2000
Total Fees = $170 million ($2k x 85k)
The fee increase is for 4 years = (2010-2014)
GRAND Total = $680 million ($170 million x 4)
I dont agree with the laws passed, but here is the math to come up with the $600 million figure they are quoting.
# of possible H1Bs = 85k (65k + 20k)
Fees (additional) = $2000
Total Fees = $170 million ($2k x 85k)
The fee increase is for 4 years = (2010-2014)
GRAND Total = $680 million ($170 million x 4)
priti8888
10-01 01:03 PM
This is how PD and RD work.
ASSUME ALL ARE EB3
Mr. A PD JULY 2004 RD MARCH 2005(1)
Mr B PD FEB 2004 RD DECEMBER 2005 (2)
MR C PD JAN 2003 RD JANAURY 2006 (3)
USCIS Processes applications based on RD. After they are processed they are in the "staging area" (pre-adjudicated)
IF ALL visa bulletin DATES ARE "CURRENT" MR A would get GC first
If visa bulletin date has a PD of "May 2003" Mr. C would get GC first
If visa bulletin date has a PD of "MAY 2004 "MR B would get GC first
If visa bulletin date is August 2004 "Mr A would get GC first"
In a summary, when PD is current, people with the earliest RD would get GC first. Your PD HAS to be CURRENT to be eligible for a visa number.
ASSUME ALL ARE EB3
Mr. A PD JULY 2004 RD MARCH 2005(1)
Mr B PD FEB 2004 RD DECEMBER 2005 (2)
MR C PD JAN 2003 RD JANAURY 2006 (3)
USCIS Processes applications based on RD. After they are processed they are in the "staging area" (pre-adjudicated)
IF ALL visa bulletin DATES ARE "CURRENT" MR A would get GC first
If visa bulletin date has a PD of "May 2003" Mr. C would get GC first
If visa bulletin date has a PD of "MAY 2004 "MR B would get GC first
If visa bulletin date is August 2004 "Mr A would get GC first"
In a summary, when PD is current, people with the earliest RD would get GC first. Your PD HAS to be CURRENT to be eligible for a visa number.
eyeopeners05@yahoo.com
06-02 01:36 PM
you are right, but isnt that found only when you are travelling outside of the USA? If I am in USA till i get a gc and then add my wife, how will anyone know if she is out of status ?
No comments:
Post a Comment