coopheal
03-13 10:12 AM
Thanks. It is employer decision.
I know of cases where, H1b was not cancelled.
Can you please give link to USCIS site stating the rule ?
ALL: Please share your experience in this area.
I know from my company lawyers that if employee leaves the company they have to inform USCIS about the leaving by requesting to cancel the H1B.
I am not sure why you company would like you to move from H1B to EAD?
I know of cases where, H1b was not cancelled.
Can you please give link to USCIS site stating the rule ?
ALL: Please share your experience in this area.
I know from my company lawyers that if employee leaves the company they have to inform USCIS about the leaving by requesting to cancel the H1B.
I am not sure why you company would like you to move from H1B to EAD?
wallpaper Put on the full armor of God
alterego
09-14 06:06 PM
People need to understand that there are some legislators who might want to push legislation favorable to us. They can only do it if they can convince other legislators who are on the fence that:
1) A lot of good people are affected by this. (legal,peaceful,high skilled etc) The crowd there(YOU) on Tuesday will speak to this.
2) They mean business, if we do not act they might leave and we need to act NOW to keep them here.(if many thousands of them can come from all parts of the country, they must be serious)
3) These guys have the support of their employers.(they got/took/were allowed time off from work)
Now in these points, can you see how a friendly lawmaker can use a big successful march to convince his colleagues? This will be like a massive tonic to all the lobbying IV has been doing behind the scenes.
Last year when hundreds of thousands of illegal immigrants took to the streets did you see the impact on legislators? One big difference here is we are legal. That will leave a more powerful impact if it is big.
This is a small price to pay, and it will help you tremendously to speed up the green card process. Lets show solidarity. Every one of us who goes to this will feel proud of the change we manage to bring. If this makes the national media in a big way, I am virtually certain we will get a favorable resolution to our issues. A lot of forces are with us here. Just look at the 13 governor signed letter. Just look at how hard the big high tech. companies are pushing this.
1) A lot of good people are affected by this. (legal,peaceful,high skilled etc) The crowd there(YOU) on Tuesday will speak to this.
2) They mean business, if we do not act they might leave and we need to act NOW to keep them here.(if many thousands of them can come from all parts of the country, they must be serious)
3) These guys have the support of their employers.(they got/took/were allowed time off from work)
Now in these points, can you see how a friendly lawmaker can use a big successful march to convince his colleagues? This will be like a massive tonic to all the lobbying IV has been doing behind the scenes.
Last year when hundreds of thousands of illegal immigrants took to the streets did you see the impact on legislators? One big difference here is we are legal. That will leave a more powerful impact if it is big.
This is a small price to pay, and it will help you tremendously to speed up the green card process. Lets show solidarity. Every one of us who goes to this will feel proud of the change we manage to bring. If this makes the national media in a big way, I am virtually certain we will get a favorable resolution to our issues. A lot of forces are with us here. Just look at the 13 governor signed letter. Just look at how hard the big high tech. companies are pushing this.
garybanz
10-27 01:04 PM
Hi All,
7 years of stay in the US and 3 green card applications later, I finally got the 485 approval e-mail.....aaahhha......there is light at the end of this long long tunnel after all.
However I did not get any FP notice yet! Do you know if Biometrics is a requirement for issuing the physical green card and also any idea how long it takes to get the card from this point of time.
following is the current status in the online status of my 485:
Post Decision Activity
On October 26, 2010, we mailed you a notice that we have approved this I485 APPLICATION TO REGISTER PERMANENT RESIDENCE OR TO ADJUST STATUS. Please follow any instructions on the notice. If you move before you receive the notice, call customer service at 1-800-375-5283.
For approved applications/petitions, post-decision activity may include USCIS sending notification of the approved application/petition to the National Visa Center or the Department of State. For denied applications/petitions, post-decision activity may include the processing of an appeal and/or motions to reopen or reconsider and revocations.
7 years of stay in the US and 3 green card applications later, I finally got the 485 approval e-mail.....aaahhha......there is light at the end of this long long tunnel after all.
However I did not get any FP notice yet! Do you know if Biometrics is a requirement for issuing the physical green card and also any idea how long it takes to get the card from this point of time.
following is the current status in the online status of my 485:
Post Decision Activity
On October 26, 2010, we mailed you a notice that we have approved this I485 APPLICATION TO REGISTER PERMANENT RESIDENCE OR TO ADJUST STATUS. Please follow any instructions on the notice. If you move before you receive the notice, call customer service at 1-800-375-5283.
For approved applications/petitions, post-decision activity may include USCIS sending notification of the approved application/petition to the National Visa Center or the Department of State. For denied applications/petitions, post-decision activity may include the processing of an appeal and/or motions to reopen or reconsider and revocations.
2011 armor of god image. armor of
tnite
09-12 01:26 PM
I called the USCIS customer service and was given the receipt numbers for 485,EAD and AP.The application was put in the system on Sep 8th, Saturday. Checks havent been cashed yet.
Check my signature for the details. USCIS seems to be working overtime.
Check my signature for the details. USCIS seems to be working overtime.
more...
h1b_professional
08-17 09:17 AM
Its Aug 17! even though most of us do not have receipt yet, we can forget about refiling
bp333
07-02 11:58 AM
Per the updated bulletin. Can we apply or not apply 485.
Also, how come they didn't know on May 15th when the moved the dates to 2003..
All of us care is EAD/AP, they can approve the GC when the visa's become available.. why cannot they just take 485s and start processing and then keep it a side until visas are available.
Also, how come they didn't know on May 15th when the moved the dates to 2003..
All of us care is EAD/AP, they can approve the GC when the visa's become available.. why cannot they just take 485s and start processing and then keep it a side until visas are available.
more...
Blog Feeds
10-30 12:30 PM
https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgrttXMYndmwytVYZnMpRlLjkBmF8zwqljrJQGqM7VPrhxokDsH5K5PqHpj3M3uwUn0o6qtt3yW1ZLLo-aqPoVQW6kCQ-eJXu-cwQFvhh6f165RDgFFWbSmGm4LEvxVETR9CEC1gyYUoDkW/s320/uscisLogo.gif (https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgrttXMYndmwytVYZnMpRlLjkBmF8zwqljrJQGqM7VPrhxokDsH5K5PqHpj3M3uwUn0o6qtt3yW1ZLLo-aqPoVQW6kCQ-eJXu-cwQFvhh6f165RDgFFWbSmGm4LEvxVETR9CEC1gyYUoDkW/s1600-h/uscisLogo.gif)
USCIS has issued a Fact Sheet (http://www.uscis.gov/USCIS/New%20Structure/Press%20Releases/2009%20Press%20Releases/Oct%202009/public_charge_fact_sheet.pdf) explaining what renders a person a "public charge" and therefore inadmissible to the US and ineligible to become a permanent resident. This inadmissibility applies to anyone who "at the time of application for admission or adjustment of status, is likely at any time to become a public charge."
The Fact Sheet explains that "public charge" means
an individual who is likely to become �primarily dependent on the government for subsistence, as demonstrated by either the receipt of public cash assistance for income maintenance, or institutionalization for long-term care at government expense.....In determining whether an alien meets this definition for public charge inadmissibility, a number of factors must be considered, including age, health, family status, assets, resources, financial status, education, and skills. No single factor - other than the lack of an affidavit of support, if required - will determine whether an individual is a public charge.
The following are not considered for "public charge" purposes because they are "non-cash benefits or special-purpose cash benefits that are not intended for income maintenance":
Medicaid and other health insurance and health services (including public assistance for immunizations and for testing and treatment of symptoms of communicable diseases, use of health clinics, short-term rehabilitation services, prenatal care, and emergency medical services) other than support for long-term institutional care
Children's Health Insurance Program (CHIP)
Nutrition programs, including Food Stamps, the Special Supplemental Nutrition Program for Women, Infants and Children (WIC), the National School Lunch and School Breakfast Program, and other supplementary and emergency food assistance programs
Housing benefits
Child care services
Energy assistance, such as the Low Income Home Energy Assistance Program (LIHEAP)
Emergency disaster relief
Foster care and adoption assistance
Educational assistance (such as attending public school), including benefits under the Head Start Act and aid for elementary, secondary, or higher education
Job training programs
In-kind, community-based programs, services, or assistance (such as soup kitchens, crisis counseling and intervention, and short-term shelter)
Non cash benefits under TANF such as subsidized child care or transit subsidies
Cash payments that have been earned, such as Title II Social Security benefits, government pensions, and veterans' benefits, among other forms of earned benefits, do not support a public charge determination.
Unemployment compensation is also not considered for public charge purposes.
https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/tracker/2893395975825897727-8502419783903578432?l=martinvisalaw.blogspot.com
More... (http://martinvisalaw.blogspot.com/2009/10/cis-issues-public-charge-fact-sheet.html)
USCIS has issued a Fact Sheet (http://www.uscis.gov/USCIS/New%20Structure/Press%20Releases/2009%20Press%20Releases/Oct%202009/public_charge_fact_sheet.pdf) explaining what renders a person a "public charge" and therefore inadmissible to the US and ineligible to become a permanent resident. This inadmissibility applies to anyone who "at the time of application for admission or adjustment of status, is likely at any time to become a public charge."
The Fact Sheet explains that "public charge" means
an individual who is likely to become �primarily dependent on the government for subsistence, as demonstrated by either the receipt of public cash assistance for income maintenance, or institutionalization for long-term care at government expense.....In determining whether an alien meets this definition for public charge inadmissibility, a number of factors must be considered, including age, health, family status, assets, resources, financial status, education, and skills. No single factor - other than the lack of an affidavit of support, if required - will determine whether an individual is a public charge.
The following are not considered for "public charge" purposes because they are "non-cash benefits or special-purpose cash benefits that are not intended for income maintenance":
Medicaid and other health insurance and health services (including public assistance for immunizations and for testing and treatment of symptoms of communicable diseases, use of health clinics, short-term rehabilitation services, prenatal care, and emergency medical services) other than support for long-term institutional care
Children's Health Insurance Program (CHIP)
Nutrition programs, including Food Stamps, the Special Supplemental Nutrition Program for Women, Infants and Children (WIC), the National School Lunch and School Breakfast Program, and other supplementary and emergency food assistance programs
Housing benefits
Child care services
Energy assistance, such as the Low Income Home Energy Assistance Program (LIHEAP)
Emergency disaster relief
Foster care and adoption assistance
Educational assistance (such as attending public school), including benefits under the Head Start Act and aid for elementary, secondary, or higher education
Job training programs
In-kind, community-based programs, services, or assistance (such as soup kitchens, crisis counseling and intervention, and short-term shelter)
Non cash benefits under TANF such as subsidized child care or transit subsidies
Cash payments that have been earned, such as Title II Social Security benefits, government pensions, and veterans' benefits, among other forms of earned benefits, do not support a public charge determination.
Unemployment compensation is also not considered for public charge purposes.
https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/tracker/2893395975825897727-8502419783903578432?l=martinvisalaw.blogspot.com
More... (http://martinvisalaw.blogspot.com/2009/10/cis-issues-public-charge-fact-sheet.html)
2010 Armor of God (pat. pending)
rkp27
07-11 01:03 PM
Your case is just like many others here. Does that worth you own thread?
Spend some time to read thru some posts. You will know there are many people who are with 2002 PD have not been approved yet. If there's a definitely answer for your question, why will they be frustrate.
My friend,
I dont know what tends to write the answer you replied.. but i am not here to find out why anybody frustrate or what any anybody is doing etc.. Its not my business as well..
I ask question because it just came in my mind.. i dont bothers about others at all..
God bless everyone..
Spend some time to read thru some posts. You will know there are many people who are with 2002 PD have not been approved yet. If there's a definitely answer for your question, why will they be frustrate.
My friend,
I dont know what tends to write the answer you replied.. but i am not here to find out why anybody frustrate or what any anybody is doing etc.. Its not my business as well..
I ask question because it just came in my mind.. i dont bothers about others at all..
God bless everyone..
more...
mambarg
07-26 02:52 PM
Good that we see more proof of Apps received on Jun 29 getting receipted.
I am sure Aug 1st , NSC will become compaint to their receipting release and start receipting everyone who had applied till July 10th.
I am sure Aug 1st , NSC will become compaint to their receipting release and start receipting everyone who had applied till July 10th.
hair armor koi. armor of god image
gjoe
01-04 09:24 AM
I guess they still send a request to DOS for visa number for that case and they would turn it back saying no visa available. From this point on it is a grey area, it goes into the storage at USCIS. The next attempt for a visa number for your application happens only when USICS visits all the files in their storage again.
All that I have mentioned above are just my guess based on the trends I see at various forums.
hi gjoe,
thanks for your reply. now EB3 Priority dates are gone back to 2001. say there is no visa numbers available after the 485 applications processed which are submitted in july and aug 2007. then waht they do? they have to keep the processed applications aside untill the visa numbers available right? so at that time which one become priority is Labour filing date or 485 RD?
All that I have mentioned above are just my guess based on the trends I see at various forums.
hi gjoe,
thanks for your reply. now EB3 Priority dates are gone back to 2001. say there is no visa numbers available after the 485 applications processed which are submitted in july and aug 2007. then waht they do? they have to keep the processed applications aside untill the visa numbers available right? so at that time which one become priority is Labour filing date or 485 RD?
more...
neerajkandhari
10-24 09:32 PM
The date in 'Receipt Date' field on your 485 form is the start date of your 90 days calculation.
WHEN I CALLED USCIS THEY TOLD ME THE NOTICE DATE IS WHERE THEY START THEIR CALCULATION
I AM IN THE SAME BOAT
WAITING FOR AP
TICKS TO INDIA ALREADY ISSUED FOR DEC
I HOPE I GET MY AP BY THEN
WHEN I CALLED USCIS THEY TOLD ME THE NOTICE DATE IS WHERE THEY START THEIR CALCULATION
I AM IN THE SAME BOAT
WAITING FOR AP
TICKS TO INDIA ALREADY ISSUED FOR DEC
I HOPE I GET MY AP BY THEN
hot Armor of God US Army Coin
lkrastogi
07-16 11:08 PM
My 140 was filed last week and I don't have the receipt number. Can I file 485 without I140 receipt number?
more...
house Screenshots Armor Of God
meridiani.planum
07-11 04:05 AM
In case his I-140 was approved then there are no problems for this scenario right?
yes if I-140 is approved it makes a world of difference:
- keeps his GC process alive even if he changes employers since he is past the 180 day mark of 485 filing.
- he gets a 3 year H1 extension/transfer if his PD is not current.
thats the reason I advise him to hang on until the I-140 comes through; esp since he has a 2004 PD and its an utter waste of four-five years if that goes.
Even if employer is not treating you well, hang in there and smile; your turn to get even-steven will come soon enough.
yes if I-140 is approved it makes a world of difference:
- keeps his GC process alive even if he changes employers since he is past the 180 day mark of 485 filing.
- he gets a 3 year H1 extension/transfer if his PD is not current.
thats the reason I advise him to hang on until the I-140 comes through; esp since he has a 2004 PD and its an utter waste of four-five years if that goes.
Even if employer is not treating you well, hang in there and smile; your turn to get even-steven will come soon enough.
tattoo the armor of god
SAPGURU
01-05 08:21 AM
Well, I won't blame you guys for your decision if things do not work out. I know that it is very difficult to predict , I am going to go with EB2 06 .Just wanted to know what you would do if you were in my shoes.
more...
pictures Put on the whole armor of God,
knowDOL
08-15 11:34 AM
Any PERM case filed before July 25th 2005 was taking long time because of system problems. But this long is a news to me. I wish you good luck and hope that it will get cleared soon.
dresses Armor of God
purgan
12-18 06:40 PM
Immigrantion Restrictionist/Racists have been calling Congresional offices and pounding the privelege of their One vote each, so they can be spared of foreign competition even though US competitiveness goes down the drain. I guess each one to himself. Here are some of the more interesting conversations...
==
Senator Kyl:
Q. What is Senator Kyl's position to be on Cornyn's "dark of the night"
attempt to ramrod an H-1B increase?
A. Are you calling on behalf of any organization?
A. Yes, the org's name is Sandra. I only have one vote and no campaign
donations.
"Very low likelihood of this passing, and in the future Senator Kyl will
take into careful consideration such meansures."
A. You haven't answered my question. Kyl has been a consistent supporter
of H-1Bs
A. Senator hasn't made a decision and is still considering.
Q. How did the Senator vote on the H1-C two days ago?
A. I'm not finding a record.
Q. It was HR1285--on December 5.
A. Oh, that was a unanimous voice vote.
Q. So does that mean Senator Kyl voted for it?
A. I can check, just a moment........it was a unanimous voice vote
================================================== ========
Senator McCain:
Q What is McCain's position on Cornyn's "dark of the night" attempt to
ramrod an H-1B increase?
A. He hasn't yet taken a position.
================================================== ========
Senator Grassley (Casey Mills)
Asked for Casey but aide couldn't find him
Q. Does Grassley support H1-B increases?
A He doesn't know.
I gave him a rundown as if I were Debbie--nursing shortage is artificially
created. Grassley probably voted for H1-C, etc.
I retrained for a job after 20 years to go into nursing, and now find wages
are kept low by foreign nurses.
A. He'll pass concerns along.
================================================== ==============
Senator Dorgan
Express thanks to Senator Dorgan for opposing H1-Bs.
================================================== =================
Sandra
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ +
I called Cornyn's office just now - male staffer got really annoyed when I
asked him if Senator Coryn supports displacing well-educated American
workers with Foreign H-1B Visa holders. He immediately passed me off to a
voice mail box of a staffer who handles immigration matters. (Yes, I know
H-1B's are so-called "non-immigrant Visas" but we all know most of these
people end up staying here -)
Of course the staffer did not pick up his phone - but the staffer's name is
Landon Bell. Why not ring up Senator Corn-Hole's office and ask for Landon
Bell, and ring Landon's bell a bit?
Gerard
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ +
I called Cornyn's office just now - stated my opposition of course. The
person I spoke with said that Cornyn was trying to get his bill introduced
today, and he was not sure if it would be voted on today.
Hopefully Cornyn fails. I think he is getting our message, but I also
think he does not care.
Roy
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ +
Maybe you all have different information that I just obtained from both
Senator Pete Domenici's office (Republican) and Senator Jeff Bingaman's
office (Democrat) -- both of New Mexico. But both of their offices claim
that Skil Bill "Access to High Skilled Foreign Workers" S 2691 has NOT left
committee yet and thus cannot be voted on yet. (It is certainly possible
that you all have different or better information than was conveyed to me
but this is what I obtained.)
Domenici's office staff person couldn't tell me which side of the fence he
was on as he hasn't "made a press release" yet. And, as long as it is in
committee he apparently doesn't voice an opinion.
Senator Bingaman's office staff also told me that he had not expressed an
opinion to him on his position on the bill. The young, female staff woman
who answered the DC phone seemed STUNNED when she pulled up the bill and
started to read parts of it. She thought they'd have to take some kind of
special test to get into the USA for these jobs -- no. I only wish she
were casting a vote as I know how she'd vote! Again, she told me that
the bill was not out of committee YET and the Senators are going home
tomorrow afternoon. They are doing "yesterday morning's" work tonight or
some such backward thinking. There has been no floor debate on the bill so
the staff claimed would mean there will NOT be a vote on the bill tonight.
No one would guarantee me that NO voting would take place tomorrow but did
say it was UNlikely.
Finally, when I got to the staff woman in DC she was a bit surprised
because someone had called her on the bill from one of the Senator's New
Mexico offices. (A bit strange unless it was my calling the Senator's 800
number which connected me some place in New Mexico and they called the DC
office for information regarding my inquiry.)
(BE careful when you call, however, one Bingaman's staff males that I
spoke with tried to give me the WRONG Senate Bill number reference. He
asked "This is Senate Bill 2626?" I said "The one I am calling on is
"Senate Bill 2691 "Access to High Skilled Foreign Workers" so unless the
bill has been reassigned a number that I don't know about -- I am calling
on the Skil Bill "Access to High Skilled Foreign Workers.")
Oh, yeah! the woman from Bingaman's office said "Oh, THAT's a
Republican sponsored bill!"
Cynthia
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ +
I, too, phoned Cornyn's office and the person I spoke with kept insisting
that the H-1B's had to be paid the same as Americans and then he said the
senator wants to make America more competitive by bringing in skilled
workers. I directed him to Norm's article in the San Francisco paper and to
the Programmers Guild. I asked him how it would make our nation more
competetive to bring in a worldwide supply of cheaper labor to take our
jobs. Silence.
LC Evans
http://lcevans.com
Jobless Recovery
A satirical novel about American job losses
==
Senator Kyl:
Q. What is Senator Kyl's position to be on Cornyn's "dark of the night"
attempt to ramrod an H-1B increase?
A. Are you calling on behalf of any organization?
A. Yes, the org's name is Sandra. I only have one vote and no campaign
donations.
"Very low likelihood of this passing, and in the future Senator Kyl will
take into careful consideration such meansures."
A. You haven't answered my question. Kyl has been a consistent supporter
of H-1Bs
A. Senator hasn't made a decision and is still considering.
Q. How did the Senator vote on the H1-C two days ago?
A. I'm not finding a record.
Q. It was HR1285--on December 5.
A. Oh, that was a unanimous voice vote.
Q. So does that mean Senator Kyl voted for it?
A. I can check, just a moment........it was a unanimous voice vote
================================================== ========
Senator McCain:
Q What is McCain's position on Cornyn's "dark of the night" attempt to
ramrod an H-1B increase?
A. He hasn't yet taken a position.
================================================== ========
Senator Grassley (Casey Mills)
Asked for Casey but aide couldn't find him
Q. Does Grassley support H1-B increases?
A He doesn't know.
I gave him a rundown as if I were Debbie--nursing shortage is artificially
created. Grassley probably voted for H1-C, etc.
I retrained for a job after 20 years to go into nursing, and now find wages
are kept low by foreign nurses.
A. He'll pass concerns along.
================================================== ==============
Senator Dorgan
Express thanks to Senator Dorgan for opposing H1-Bs.
================================================== =================
Sandra
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ +
I called Cornyn's office just now - male staffer got really annoyed when I
asked him if Senator Coryn supports displacing well-educated American
workers with Foreign H-1B Visa holders. He immediately passed me off to a
voice mail box of a staffer who handles immigration matters. (Yes, I know
H-1B's are so-called "non-immigrant Visas" but we all know most of these
people end up staying here -)
Of course the staffer did not pick up his phone - but the staffer's name is
Landon Bell. Why not ring up Senator Corn-Hole's office and ask for Landon
Bell, and ring Landon's bell a bit?
Gerard
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ +
I called Cornyn's office just now - stated my opposition of course. The
person I spoke with said that Cornyn was trying to get his bill introduced
today, and he was not sure if it would be voted on today.
Hopefully Cornyn fails. I think he is getting our message, but I also
think he does not care.
Roy
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ +
Maybe you all have different information that I just obtained from both
Senator Pete Domenici's office (Republican) and Senator Jeff Bingaman's
office (Democrat) -- both of New Mexico. But both of their offices claim
that Skil Bill "Access to High Skilled Foreign Workers" S 2691 has NOT left
committee yet and thus cannot be voted on yet. (It is certainly possible
that you all have different or better information than was conveyed to me
but this is what I obtained.)
Domenici's office staff person couldn't tell me which side of the fence he
was on as he hasn't "made a press release" yet. And, as long as it is in
committee he apparently doesn't voice an opinion.
Senator Bingaman's office staff also told me that he had not expressed an
opinion to him on his position on the bill. The young, female staff woman
who answered the DC phone seemed STUNNED when she pulled up the bill and
started to read parts of it. She thought they'd have to take some kind of
special test to get into the USA for these jobs -- no. I only wish she
were casting a vote as I know how she'd vote! Again, she told me that
the bill was not out of committee YET and the Senators are going home
tomorrow afternoon. They are doing "yesterday morning's" work tonight or
some such backward thinking. There has been no floor debate on the bill so
the staff claimed would mean there will NOT be a vote on the bill tonight.
No one would guarantee me that NO voting would take place tomorrow but did
say it was UNlikely.
Finally, when I got to the staff woman in DC she was a bit surprised
because someone had called her on the bill from one of the Senator's New
Mexico offices. (A bit strange unless it was my calling the Senator's 800
number which connected me some place in New Mexico and they called the DC
office for information regarding my inquiry.)
(BE careful when you call, however, one Bingaman's staff males that I
spoke with tried to give me the WRONG Senate Bill number reference. He
asked "This is Senate Bill 2626?" I said "The one I am calling on is
"Senate Bill 2691 "Access to High Skilled Foreign Workers" so unless the
bill has been reassigned a number that I don't know about -- I am calling
on the Skil Bill "Access to High Skilled Foreign Workers.")
Oh, yeah! the woman from Bingaman's office said "Oh, THAT's a
Republican sponsored bill!"
Cynthia
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ +
I, too, phoned Cornyn's office and the person I spoke with kept insisting
that the H-1B's had to be paid the same as Americans and then he said the
senator wants to make America more competitive by bringing in skilled
workers. I directed him to Norm's article in the San Francisco paper and to
the Programmers Guild. I asked him how it would make our nation more
competetive to bring in a worldwide supply of cheaper labor to take our
jobs. Silence.
LC Evans
http://lcevans.com
Jobless Recovery
A satirical novel about American job losses
more...
makeup Wholesale Armor of God
paitel
08-14 08:21 PM
My wife completed her BS while on H4.
In Florida person on H4 is regarded as US resident for tuition purposes so, if you attend state university, you will pay (much) lower tuition. I don't know if this applies to other states.
In Florida person on H4 is regarded as US resident for tuition purposes so, if you attend state university, you will pay (much) lower tuition. I don't know if this applies to other states.
girlfriend on the whole armor of god
Macaca
04-22 09:07 AM
Passing On H-1b Costs to the Employee? (http://www.hammondlawfirm.com/FeesArticle07.18.2006.pdf) -- Smart Business Practice or DOL Violation?, by Michael F. Hammond and Damaris Del Valle
After all the costs associated with an H-1B petition are totaled, the sum can be alarming. In order to offset this cost, some employers ask that the beneficiary, the employee who is being hired, reimburse the company in whole or in part. Which costs may and may not be paid by the beneficiary can be a tricky matter. What follows is an analysis of H-1B costs and who may pay what.
All deductions from an H-1B worker’s pay fall into three categories: authorized, unauthorized, or prohibited. Authorized deductions can be taken without worry of whether or not such a deduction will lower the employee’s rate of pay below the required wage rate. Unauthorized deductions, counter to what the term may connote, can be taken from an employee’s wage but are considered non-payment and are only allowed if the beneficiary’s wage rate, after the deduction(s), is greater than the required amount listed on the Labor Condition Application (LCA). Unauthorized deductions cannot push the employee’s wage below either the prevailing wage rate or the actual wage rate, i.e. salaries of those similarly employed and qualified at the work site. Prohibited deductions may not be taken from the employee’s pay regardless of the effect they would have on the required wage rate.
The most straightforward of the deductions is the prohibited deduction. The Training Fee associated with the H-1B petition is the only prohibited deduction associated with the cost of filing an H-1B petition. Rajan v. International Business Solutions, Ltd. and the language in the relevant regulation make it very clear that the Training Fee is to be paid by the employer or a third party; it is not to be reimbursed in part or whole by the employee. This fee must be completely shouldered by the employer or a party who is not the employee.
Deductions are considered by the Department of Labor (DOL) to be authorized if:
The deduction is reported as such on the employer’s payroll records,
The employee has voluntarily agreed to the deduction and such agreement is documented in writing (a job offer which carries a deduction as a condition of employment does not meet this requirement),
The deduction is for a matter that is principally for the benefit of the employee,
The deduction is not a recoupment of the employer’s business expenses,
The amount deducted does not exceed the fair market value or the actual cost (whichever is lower) of the matter covered, and
The amount deducted is not more than 25% of the employee’s disposable earning.
An Education Evaluation arguably qualifies as an authorized deduction. Similar to a translation fee, which is payable by the employee, the employee is benefiting from the evaluation and will be able to use it in the future in his/her private capacity if s/he so wishes. Of course, if the employee is paying for the evaluation, then s/he must be able to acquire a copy of the evaluation so that the future benefit upon which his/her payment is presumed is a real possibility.
Attorney’s fees associated with obtaining H-4 status for family members accompanying the Beneficiary may qualify as authorized deductions since the Beneficiary is the party who primarily benefits from such fees. In addition, attorney fees associated with visa issuance, assuming that international travel is not a requirement for the position, could be properly considered as authorized deductions. In order to properly deduct the attorney fees associated with these processes, it is important that the attorney break down the specifics of how much is being charged for each element of the H-1B process- this will allow the employer to deduct those fees associated with the retention of the visas for the accompanying family members without concerning itself with the deduction requirements necessary for unauthorized deductions.
The circumstances surrounding the Premium Processing Fee determine if deduction of the fee is to qualify as authorized or unauthorized. While the speedy decision that the Premium Processing Fee guarantees often benefits both the employer and the employee, it is important to take notice of which party requests and benefits most from premium processing. If the employee has decided to utilize premium processing for his/her own personal benefit, then the employer may be reimbursed by the employee in accordance with the requirements established by the DOL for authorized deductions. If the employer is the party desiring premium process and who will benefit from such processing, then any deductions from the employee’s pay are unauthorized and, as such Deduction of attorney’s fees associated with the filing of the LCA or H-1B and the Base Fee (or I-129 Fee) are considered to be unauthorized. These fees are considered to be the employer’s business expenses and, for this reason, are not authorized deductions. These fees may be deducted from the employee’s pay so long as they do not drop the rate of pay below the required wage rate.
It is not clear whether or not the Fraud Fee which was implemented in March 2005 is unauthorized or prohibited. The language of the act regarding the Fraud Fee states that “the Secretary of Homeland Security shall impose a fraud prevention and detection fee on an employer filing a petition.”10 Almost identical language is used in the Act to refer to the Training Fee.11 Such similarity could be read to mean that the restrictions of the Training Fee also apply to the Fraud Fee. However, 20 C.F.R. 655 is explicit in saying that the employee cannot pay the Training Fee; no such statement is made regarding the Fraud Fee. The regulation regarding the Training Fee, 20 C.F.R. 655, predates the creation of the Fraud Fee, which may explain this discrepancy. Nonetheless, the language referring to the Fraud Fee is not explicitly prohibitive and an employer may decide to be reimbursed by the employee. If an employer chooses to do so, any deductions from the employee’s salary to pay for this fee must meet the DOL requirements for unauthorized deductions. 12
Before any payments are made by the employee or deductions are taken from his/her pay to reimburse the employer, it must be determined if such deduction is permitted and if so, whether or not it is authorized or unauthorized. Once these preliminary determinations are made, appropriate steps must be taken to ensure that the DOL’s requirements are met. As a practical matter, there are very few circumstances in which the prospective employee could legally be made to pay for the costs associated with the H-1b process without an employer risking non-compliance and causing significant record keeping.
After all the costs associated with an H-1B petition are totaled, the sum can be alarming. In order to offset this cost, some employers ask that the beneficiary, the employee who is being hired, reimburse the company in whole or in part. Which costs may and may not be paid by the beneficiary can be a tricky matter. What follows is an analysis of H-1B costs and who may pay what.
All deductions from an H-1B worker’s pay fall into three categories: authorized, unauthorized, or prohibited. Authorized deductions can be taken without worry of whether or not such a deduction will lower the employee’s rate of pay below the required wage rate. Unauthorized deductions, counter to what the term may connote, can be taken from an employee’s wage but are considered non-payment and are only allowed if the beneficiary’s wage rate, after the deduction(s), is greater than the required amount listed on the Labor Condition Application (LCA). Unauthorized deductions cannot push the employee’s wage below either the prevailing wage rate or the actual wage rate, i.e. salaries of those similarly employed and qualified at the work site. Prohibited deductions may not be taken from the employee’s pay regardless of the effect they would have on the required wage rate.
The most straightforward of the deductions is the prohibited deduction. The Training Fee associated with the H-1B petition is the only prohibited deduction associated with the cost of filing an H-1B petition. Rajan v. International Business Solutions, Ltd. and the language in the relevant regulation make it very clear that the Training Fee is to be paid by the employer or a third party; it is not to be reimbursed in part or whole by the employee. This fee must be completely shouldered by the employer or a party who is not the employee.
Deductions are considered by the Department of Labor (DOL) to be authorized if:
The deduction is reported as such on the employer’s payroll records,
The employee has voluntarily agreed to the deduction and such agreement is documented in writing (a job offer which carries a deduction as a condition of employment does not meet this requirement),
The deduction is for a matter that is principally for the benefit of the employee,
The deduction is not a recoupment of the employer’s business expenses,
The amount deducted does not exceed the fair market value or the actual cost (whichever is lower) of the matter covered, and
The amount deducted is not more than 25% of the employee’s disposable earning.
An Education Evaluation arguably qualifies as an authorized deduction. Similar to a translation fee, which is payable by the employee, the employee is benefiting from the evaluation and will be able to use it in the future in his/her private capacity if s/he so wishes. Of course, if the employee is paying for the evaluation, then s/he must be able to acquire a copy of the evaluation so that the future benefit upon which his/her payment is presumed is a real possibility.
Attorney’s fees associated with obtaining H-4 status for family members accompanying the Beneficiary may qualify as authorized deductions since the Beneficiary is the party who primarily benefits from such fees. In addition, attorney fees associated with visa issuance, assuming that international travel is not a requirement for the position, could be properly considered as authorized deductions. In order to properly deduct the attorney fees associated with these processes, it is important that the attorney break down the specifics of how much is being charged for each element of the H-1B process- this will allow the employer to deduct those fees associated with the retention of the visas for the accompanying family members without concerning itself with the deduction requirements necessary for unauthorized deductions.
The circumstances surrounding the Premium Processing Fee determine if deduction of the fee is to qualify as authorized or unauthorized. While the speedy decision that the Premium Processing Fee guarantees often benefits both the employer and the employee, it is important to take notice of which party requests and benefits most from premium processing. If the employee has decided to utilize premium processing for his/her own personal benefit, then the employer may be reimbursed by the employee in accordance with the requirements established by the DOL for authorized deductions. If the employer is the party desiring premium process and who will benefit from such processing, then any deductions from the employee’s pay are unauthorized and, as such Deduction of attorney’s fees associated with the filing of the LCA or H-1B and the Base Fee (or I-129 Fee) are considered to be unauthorized. These fees are considered to be the employer’s business expenses and, for this reason, are not authorized deductions. These fees may be deducted from the employee’s pay so long as they do not drop the rate of pay below the required wage rate.
It is not clear whether or not the Fraud Fee which was implemented in March 2005 is unauthorized or prohibited. The language of the act regarding the Fraud Fee states that “the Secretary of Homeland Security shall impose a fraud prevention and detection fee on an employer filing a petition.”10 Almost identical language is used in the Act to refer to the Training Fee.11 Such similarity could be read to mean that the restrictions of the Training Fee also apply to the Fraud Fee. However, 20 C.F.R. 655 is explicit in saying that the employee cannot pay the Training Fee; no such statement is made regarding the Fraud Fee. The regulation regarding the Training Fee, 20 C.F.R. 655, predates the creation of the Fraud Fee, which may explain this discrepancy. Nonetheless, the language referring to the Fraud Fee is not explicitly prohibitive and an employer may decide to be reimbursed by the employee. If an employer chooses to do so, any deductions from the employee’s salary to pay for this fee must meet the DOL requirements for unauthorized deductions. 12
Before any payments are made by the employee or deductions are taken from his/her pay to reimburse the employer, it must be determined if such deduction is permitted and if so, whether or not it is authorized or unauthorized. Once these preliminary determinations are made, appropriate steps must be taken to ensure that the DOL’s requirements are met. As a practical matter, there are very few circumstances in which the prospective employee could legally be made to pay for the costs associated with the H-1b process without an employer risking non-compliance and causing significant record keeping.
hairstyles armor of God is offensive;
MetteBB
05-11 01:39 PM
im redoing some of them.... Think the blackberry one is ok tho... no? =)
/mette
/mette
rheoretro
11-07 03:23 PM
Gcneeded,
Lots of people seem to be giving advice, gratis, and pretending as if they were lawyers. I would suggest you consult a lawyer and get information about the exact documents that your parents would need. While even I, as a layman, know that the B-1/B-2 visa is not tied to a sponsor, I also know that mere possession of a valid visa is not sufficient grounds for the entry of a foreigner into the US. A lot rests at the discretion of the USCIS Immigration Officer at the port of entry.
If I were you, I would err on the side of caution. Please consult a lawyer - you can get these questions answered for free by asking the attorney Sonal Mehta Verma, who periodically gives gratis legal advice to IV members. Good luck!
RR
Lots of people seem to be giving advice, gratis, and pretending as if they were lawyers. I would suggest you consult a lawyer and get information about the exact documents that your parents would need. While even I, as a layman, know that the B-1/B-2 visa is not tied to a sponsor, I also know that mere possession of a valid visa is not sufficient grounds for the entry of a foreigner into the US. A lot rests at the discretion of the USCIS Immigration Officer at the port of entry.
If I were you, I would err on the side of caution. Please consult a lawyer - you can get these questions answered for free by asking the attorney Sonal Mehta Verma, who periodically gives gratis legal advice to IV members. Good luck!
RR
nozerd
01-20 12:16 PM
I have already contributed $ 200 in the past. I prefer to make one time contributions instead of recurring.
0 comments:
Post a Comment