rex
04-25 03:06 PM
Thank you all for a bunch of good answers.
I will do the electronic address change and send a letter to uscis to represent myself and wait a month before sending in the AC21 letter.
seems to be the best option here.
Pappu. i have updated my profile. I am not a power user of this site because of some restrictions at work, but do appreciate what all of you are doing for the community.
Thank you
Rex
I will do the electronic address change and send a letter to uscis to represent myself and wait a month before sending in the AC21 letter.
seems to be the best option here.
Pappu. i have updated my profile. I am not a power user of this site because of some restrictions at work, but do appreciate what all of you are doing for the community.
Thank you
Rex
wallpaper how to draw anime eyes male.
Joozz
09-19 04:45 PM
Hi guys,
Is there anyway somebody can give me an advice what to do?
My first H1B was issued in December 2000, then I changed employer 2 times and joined my current company in January of 2005. My current employer got my visa transferred and new visa was issued till April 2006. In March my employer sent another petition for H1B extension and this petition was approved in June 2006 and it says its valid till October 2008. It means totally I can stay on H1B almost 8 years? It seems to me its some sort of clerical mistake and I am not sure that I do not violate any immigration law staying here.
Here is another thing that confuses me even more. My current employer started my GC on EB3 though. In January 2006 the employer filed I140 that has been approved May 15 2006. Even though, we did not file any additional requests (I heard I can extend H1B for 3 years with approved 140) I am wondering if USCIS figured it by themselves when they were approving my H1B petition.
Recently I have got decent job offer from another employer that willing to transfer my H1B and start my GC from the beginning. Will it be a huge risk to accept this job offer?
I am sorry for asking it here. We do not have a layer for GC procedure. I was trying to find one that can clarify my situation but layers who I found did not want to give me a legal advice even I was ready to pay for it. They were demanding $1000 retainer prior any work done.
Thanks in advance.
Is there anyway somebody can give me an advice what to do?
My first H1B was issued in December 2000, then I changed employer 2 times and joined my current company in January of 2005. My current employer got my visa transferred and new visa was issued till April 2006. In March my employer sent another petition for H1B extension and this petition was approved in June 2006 and it says its valid till October 2008. It means totally I can stay on H1B almost 8 years? It seems to me its some sort of clerical mistake and I am not sure that I do not violate any immigration law staying here.
Here is another thing that confuses me even more. My current employer started my GC on EB3 though. In January 2006 the employer filed I140 that has been approved May 15 2006. Even though, we did not file any additional requests (I heard I can extend H1B for 3 years with approved 140) I am wondering if USCIS figured it by themselves when they were approving my H1B petition.
Recently I have got decent job offer from another employer that willing to transfer my H1B and start my GC from the beginning. Will it be a huge risk to accept this job offer?
I am sorry for asking it here. We do not have a layer for GC procedure. I was trying to find one that can clarify my situation but layers who I found did not want to give me a legal advice even I was ready to pay for it. They were demanding $1000 retainer prior any work done.
Thanks in advance.
whitecollarslave
08-04 04:02 PM
I have a copy of the I-140 Approval Notice. It does not have A# nor any field for A#. What am I missing? Guys, please clarify.
2011 Anime Eyes Brushes PS by
BharatPremi
07-11 11:18 PM
Thanks to the person who posted the link to the Ombundsman report earlier - this is beginning to make sense now.
USCIS Ombundsman report from JUNE 2007 says:
"For example, when employment-based visas are not used during the year they are authorized, they are lost and are not available for future use without special legislation. In FY 06, over 10,000 employment-based visas were lost, even though USCIS had an estimated 100,000 to 150,000 pending applications for employment-based green cards.36 - Based on USCIS use of visa numbers as of May 2007, at present consumption rates approximately 40,000 visas will be lost in FY 07 without a dramatic increase in USCIS requests of visa numbers.37
- As illustrated below, since 1994 there have been over 218,000 un-recaptured employment-based visas lost due to underutilization of the employment-based visas."
Dept of State: Sees visa numbers not being used, chances of visas going unutilized/unused/wasted/lost again this year. Makes July visa bulletin CURRENT for all countries & categories.
USCIS: Scrambles to approve as many visas as possible to 1) Prove they're working hard, in light of the Ombundsman Report from June 2) Save themselves from the avalanche of I-485s, EADs and AP filings in June, knowing 3) Filing fees go up like crazy on 30th July.
End Result: More visa numbers requested (but they didn't complete issuing all of them, even over the weekend).
As things stand, if they approved stuff on 1st July, it means visa numbers were in fact available on 1st July.
If they approved without completing FBI check - that's going to raise a stink and isn't entirely legal anyways.
If they *still had visa numbers available on July 2* - request from DoS but not approved, they're in bigger trouble, imho.
Anybody thinks the above makes sense?
jazz
When you were Jazzing, everybody already spent time to know this...a month ago.. Anyway welcome to the party... "Der se aye Durast Aye... welcome :) :)
USCIS Ombundsman report from JUNE 2007 says:
"For example, when employment-based visas are not used during the year they are authorized, they are lost and are not available for future use without special legislation. In FY 06, over 10,000 employment-based visas were lost, even though USCIS had an estimated 100,000 to 150,000 pending applications for employment-based green cards.36 - Based on USCIS use of visa numbers as of May 2007, at present consumption rates approximately 40,000 visas will be lost in FY 07 without a dramatic increase in USCIS requests of visa numbers.37
- As illustrated below, since 1994 there have been over 218,000 un-recaptured employment-based visas lost due to underutilization of the employment-based visas."
Dept of State: Sees visa numbers not being used, chances of visas going unutilized/unused/wasted/lost again this year. Makes July visa bulletin CURRENT for all countries & categories.
USCIS: Scrambles to approve as many visas as possible to 1) Prove they're working hard, in light of the Ombundsman Report from June 2) Save themselves from the avalanche of I-485s, EADs and AP filings in June, knowing 3) Filing fees go up like crazy on 30th July.
End Result: More visa numbers requested (but they didn't complete issuing all of them, even over the weekend).
As things stand, if they approved stuff on 1st July, it means visa numbers were in fact available on 1st July.
If they approved without completing FBI check - that's going to raise a stink and isn't entirely legal anyways.
If they *still had visa numbers available on July 2* - request from DoS but not approved, they're in bigger trouble, imho.
Anybody thinks the above makes sense?
jazz
When you were Jazzing, everybody already spent time to know this...a month ago.. Anyway welcome to the party... "Der se aye Durast Aye... welcome :) :)
more...
canmt
10-19 01:25 PM
The guideline issued by the Director of USCIS to field officers to interpret AC 21 does not take into consideration the geographic location of the new employer.
I cannot say how USCIS will interpret AC 21 cases where the salary is more or less than prevailing wages specified in labor certification but USCIS will issue a request for evidence to get a letter from your new employer to state that your terms and conditions of approved labor certification continue to exist.
This could mean the new employer has no obligation to pay you as per your labor certification but once the green card is approved he would pay the money mentioned in the labor certification. No one can enforce this since both you and employer will look for bottom line profits.
If you have an offer with same or more money than the privileging wage determination in your approved labor certification you should be good but I don’t know how USCIS will interpret the AC 21 where geographic location of the employer is different. For example if the labor is certified in NYC with 120k and I take up 100k job at Raleigh more than prevailing wage for that location and currently i'm paid 75k till I get my green card as employer is not obligated to pay the salary as per wage determination in NYC.
I hope this helps and good luck on your green card chase.
I cannot say how USCIS will interpret AC 21 cases where the salary is more or less than prevailing wages specified in labor certification but USCIS will issue a request for evidence to get a letter from your new employer to state that your terms and conditions of approved labor certification continue to exist.
This could mean the new employer has no obligation to pay you as per your labor certification but once the green card is approved he would pay the money mentioned in the labor certification. No one can enforce this since both you and employer will look for bottom line profits.
If you have an offer with same or more money than the privileging wage determination in your approved labor certification you should be good but I don’t know how USCIS will interpret the AC 21 where geographic location of the employer is different. For example if the labor is certified in NYC with 120k and I take up 100k job at Raleigh more than prevailing wage for that location and currently i'm paid 75k till I get my green card as employer is not obligated to pay the salary as per wage determination in NYC.
I hope this helps and good luck on your green card chase.
rjgleason
May 23rd, 2005, 06:11 AM
Gary, I like all three but the first shot is my favorite.....DOF (on the first) is good, (the shrubs midway in the photo could be sharper) not great but quite acceptable and the polarizer makes the shot shine. Good work (on all three)
Just noticed the first shot you had the AV at f/10.....I would have shut it down more.
Just noticed the first shot you had the AV at f/10.....I would have shut it down more.
more...
sammyb
03-24 01:51 PM
is there any recording/archive available of the program .... all online radio sites are blocked in the office firewall :o
2010 Best Anime Eyes Ever
Friend
02-19 09:17 AM
USCIS people rejected the Application. Now the application is with my Attorney. So which option I need to select the for the taking the Info Pass appointment. My Attorney is telling if they accept the application and they put any RFE so that we can take the Info Pass appointment is it correct?
Can you suggest which option i need to select for info pass appointment for my case?
Thanks for your valuable response.
Thanks.
Can you suggest which option i need to select for info pass appointment for my case?
Thanks for your valuable response.
Thanks.
more...
![anime eyes pictures. anime eyes pictures. [link]](https://lh3.googleusercontent.com/blogger_img_proxy/AEn0k_s2S0WuuQf-8U18lZiG5efW2dmzVy4C7m6_pNV80BfmIfCUPmH3fiUVbcF3PQANoC33xSCnfNf84tr9m1g8PHKBuwQUNPrZ92iW9XvjwbZdWzehHxv7dpgtCBhCLDSUI2IE5RDe6CCl5U5RnncxQuYGKp9s7M4-NB89G0y4wQ=s0-d "anime eyes pictures. [link]")
ruchigup
08-22 03:52 PM
Were you kidding or serious? You just quoted the very same name that guy is to avoid.
Fragomen is the only part missing in the name you mentioned. I hope the other three didn't ditch Fragomen to start DBL..
Iskreddy, you r rightt.... "Fragomen, Del Rey, Bernsen and Loewy, LLP" is the complete name :-)
Fragomen is the only part missing in the name you mentioned. I hope the other three didn't ditch Fragomen to start DBL..
Iskreddy, you r rightt.... "Fragomen, Del Rey, Bernsen and Loewy, LLP" is the complete name :-)
hair Anime Eyes
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...
leo2606
09-24 03:42 PM
My wife is on H1-B valid till May-2010 and she got EAD for 2 years as well.
She is planning to take up permanent job at the client place she is currently working as a consultant.
What is the best? tranfering the H1-B or using EAD. Does she need to invok e AC-21 in bothe the cases?
She is planning to take up permanent job at the client place she is currently working as a consultant.
What is the best? tranfering the H1-B or using EAD. Does she need to invok e AC-21 in bothe the cases?
hot Anime Eyes by *Silvercresent11
manish1905
10-07 12:07 PM
Unless you fill your profile, nobody will trust you. Anti's are trying to get some negative comments and feed their agenda
I have filled all my details now.
I have filled all my details now.
more...
house Anime Eyes Examples by
pappu
04-15 05:34 PM
All members are requested to be careful what you post on the forum. Senior members are requested to be vigilant and inform the moderators if you find any post that maybe offensive or from anti immigrants.
This member is not a genuine IV member. No profile information has been given and a fake email id is given.
We will check such members with incomplete profile and point them out on the forum. To avoid such embarresment, please update your profiles with full information.
Bye Bye abby17 and abby from our forums.
This member is not a genuine IV member. No profile information has been given and a fake email id is given.
We will check such members with incomplete profile and point them out on the forum. To avoid such embarresment, please update your profiles with full information.
Bye Bye abby17 and abby from our forums.
tattoo Eyes in anime drawing
alterego
10-27 12:15 PM
It is precisely this type of ignorance and reluctance to address the real issues by both sides of the issue that makes our predicament so difficult to fix(as with many other policy issues that need fixing in this country). It is an almost insurmountable feat to get the policy makers and even the debaters on this issue to distinguish between the issues of illegal immigration and legal immigration in this country. This obfuscation is not by accident but by clear intent to serve each their specific interests.
Were that not the case, why don't these "we need to stand by the rule of law" enforcement types, call for an improvement in the situation for those "who have followed the law", simply put, it is only convenient for them to say that when they are speaking about the illegals, but alas they are against us legals as well................. so how can they ask anyone to believe that they are anything but anti immigrant period.
The pro immigrant guys blur the distinction specifically because they consider us a sweetener in the deal no less and no more they really don't consider the way we came any better or worse than the way others arrived, it is simply either all or none for them.
A rational policy that the American people can be asked to accept IMHO would involve, strict enforcement both at the border and interior at multiple sites including workplace, policies to alleviate the plight of the legals to demonstrate that way is rewarded and finally a strict case by case evaluation of illegals where some are given amnesty(if they have US children, spouse, lived here over X number of years and can prove it etc) Some will have to be made to have to leave to demonstrate that illegal behavior is not condoned or rewarded, be they Mexicans, Indians or Irish.
Alas, this cannot and will not be done due to the cowardice OF BOTH SIDES of this debate. Cowardice is sadly now changing to outright disdain for immigrants and that is sad in this great country of immigrants. Now the obfuscation will see a backlash emerging against us legals as well.
Were that not the case, why don't these "we need to stand by the rule of law" enforcement types, call for an improvement in the situation for those "who have followed the law", simply put, it is only convenient for them to say that when they are speaking about the illegals, but alas they are against us legals as well................. so how can they ask anyone to believe that they are anything but anti immigrant period.
The pro immigrant guys blur the distinction specifically because they consider us a sweetener in the deal no less and no more they really don't consider the way we came any better or worse than the way others arrived, it is simply either all or none for them.
A rational policy that the American people can be asked to accept IMHO would involve, strict enforcement both at the border and interior at multiple sites including workplace, policies to alleviate the plight of the legals to demonstrate that way is rewarded and finally a strict case by case evaluation of illegals where some are given amnesty(if they have US children, spouse, lived here over X number of years and can prove it etc) Some will have to be made to have to leave to demonstrate that illegal behavior is not condoned or rewarded, be they Mexicans, Indians or Irish.
Alas, this cannot and will not be done due to the cowardice OF BOTH SIDES of this debate. Cowardice is sadly now changing to outright disdain for immigrants and that is sad in this great country of immigrants. Now the obfuscation will see a backlash emerging against us legals as well.
more...
pictures 9/29/2010 ANIME EYES
xgoogle
11-12 05:34 PM
Even if you are not paid, working for a for-profit organization implies taking away job from a legal resident/citizen who could otherwise have been paid. If its a non-profit org, its a different matter.
dresses Set of cartoon anime eyes
Blog Feeds
01-27 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 anime eyes pictures. [link]
gcseeker2002
01-20 05:00 PM
I have observed that typically after becoming great, have a tendency to hide his/her EB3 roots. I mean, who'll hire you as a CEO or rocket scientist if they knew you used to be an EB3.
Obama's father was a Kenyan EB3, but Obama insists his father was an EB2. The labor certification that the white house has put out for Barack Obama is clearly a fake.
It's sad but true, America still judges you not by the content of your character but the color of your labor certification.
I propose that EB3s append "EB3" to their name (like Ganesh Teesravarg ME(Comp Sci.), EB3) so that they get more visibility, and ppl realize they live among us, and with some help can actually be productive members of society.
There are hundreds of eb3s including me, waiting for last several years, to do the work that all the other waiting eb3s would be proud of, but sadly enough, we have not yet got the greeeeeeeeeeeeeen caard :D
Obama's father was a Kenyan EB3, but Obama insists his father was an EB2. The labor certification that the white house has put out for Barack Obama is clearly a fake.
It's sad but true, America still judges you not by the content of your character but the color of your labor certification.
I propose that EB3s append "EB3" to their name (like Ganesh Teesravarg ME(Comp Sci.), EB3) so that they get more visibility, and ppl realize they live among us, and with some help can actually be productive members of society.
There are hundreds of eb3s including me, waiting for last several years, to do the work that all the other waiting eb3s would be proud of, but sadly enough, we have not yet got the greeeeeeeeeeeeeen caard :D
girlfriend Male Anime Eyes Brushes
HumHongeKamiyab
11-15 12:46 PM
You dont have to go for stamping. While crossing the border tell the US officer that you are going to use "Automatic Visa revalidation", and hence dont want to submit your I 94. When you come back to USA just have your I 797 (Notice of approval) ready. I have been to canada in feb this year and came back with the expired visa on my passport.
You might want to call the US airport where you are first landing after returning back from canada, and talk to the immigration officer there..
I got canadian greencard and running out of time to land there before my medical examination expires.
On top of this I don't have any visa left on my h-1b and there are no dates available at American embasies in Canada during Nov and Dec to get h-1b visa stamped.
Can I land in Canada and expect to return safe with no h-1b visa left. I am worried that my I-94 will be snatched at the border and not allowed to enter back into US.
Please share your experiences and suggest me the safe thing to do.
You might want to call the US airport where you are first landing after returning back from canada, and talk to the immigration officer there..
I got canadian greencard and running out of time to land there before my medical examination expires.
On top of this I don't have any visa left on my h-1b and there are no dates available at American embasies in Canada during Nov and Dec to get h-1b visa stamped.
Can I land in Canada and expect to return safe with no h-1b visa left. I am worried that my I-94 will be snatched at the border and not allowed to enter back into US.
Please share your experiences and suggest me the safe thing to do.
hairstyles anime things
Berkeleybee
02-14 01:21 PM
Thanks for that Iptel.
Will include it in our lawmaker materials list right away and incorporate it into our presentation as soon as I can.
best,
Berkeleybee
Will include it in our lawmaker materials list right away and incorporate it into our presentation as soon as I can.
best,
Berkeleybee
bidhanc
07-23 08:32 AM
Hi,
Would like to throw some more ideas;
You should keep in mind that with this economy there is no guarantee of your job (my personal experience).
If you want to stay in this country and that is one of your foremost desires/aim
then in my opinion it is always better to aim for the GC and then do whatever you have to do.
If you have option of going back to your home country and do not mind (due to job loss or other situation) then by all means go for career.
Good Luck.
Would like to throw some more ideas;
You should keep in mind that with this economy there is no guarantee of your job (my personal experience).
If you want to stay in this country and that is one of your foremost desires/aim
then in my opinion it is always better to aim for the GC and then do whatever you have to do.
If you have option of going back to your home country and do not mind (due to job loss or other situation) then by all means go for career.
Good Luck.
eastindia
09-23 10:59 AM
This is a good bill for people who are already on H1 and EAD ...what's wrong that in bringing the jobs back home ?
You are an anti-immigrant.
You are an anti-immigrant.
0 comments:
Post a Comment