ksircar
01-28 08:43 AM
We should not discuss this type of advertisements in this forum, we are giving them indirect publicity.
wallpaper 【英語】【Carrie Underwood
mchundi
01-09 02:11 PM
I just got to this site via from immigration portal.
I have been reading a lot in the other forum and here about the ways to cure retrogression. Lobbying for more Visa's and other things that were part of the S.1932 bill are fine, however these things are not going to solve the retrogression problem even if such a bill gets passed.
No one seems to be talking about the real problem that is Labor Substitution. Abolishing Labor Substitution will itself take care of every retrogression problem.
The INS does not have the right tools to police the misue of this rule. This is resutling in a lot of problems for even those employees whose Labor's get substituted even if they are still working in the same company.
Any effort to reform immigration should start with first reforming the Labor Substitution rule (if not completely abolish).
I know that all the companies/employers and the lawyers community are against removing the Labor substitution, therefore it will never be removed, but atleast it should be reformed so that it can be better policed so that no one is able to misuse it and play with peoples lives. And in turn add to retregression.
Following reforms are needed in Labor Substitution.
- First thing in the Labor Substitution reform is related to the Priority date. The Priority Date for a substituted Labor should the date when the Labor is substituted (or the I-140 filing date). It should not be be the date when the Labor was originally filed. This in itself will solve 90% of the problems related to retrogression.
- When a Labor is substituted it should be verified immediately to find if there is any I-140 or I-485 that is pending based on this Labor. If so then the Labor should be rejected immediately. Currently this is not done at the time the Labor is substituted, therefore the resulting 485 filing just amounts to add up into the backlog of Visa Number requirement, until the priority date becomes current for this 485.
- If an employee invokes the AC21 then that Labor should not be allowed to be substituted.
- There should be a limit to the time until which a Labor can be substituted. This could be debatable and could have other consequences, as the INS could invalidate any GC application that is been pending for more than the this duration.
In short the Labour substitution rule is in a mess and is getting miused a lot. People are getting fooled by the employers, and ultimately its making the retrogression more worse.
neocor
Probably true,
I think the DOL/USCIS(I dont know who) is moving in this direction.
The real problem is the 7% limit per country and the time it takes for one to go thru the 3 steps.
There r several people who have started G.C process several times for different reasons. This slows them (DOL/USCIS) down and remember this is like a chain reaction until u stop applying for a G.C or AC21 kicks in.
Bill Clinton signed some immigration relief for the illegal immigrants just before he left without allocating any resources to process them. Close to 300,000 illegal immigrants filed their labor before Apr 2001. This brought the DOL to a halt and it couldnot recover for 2 years. Finally the BEC's were created to resolve the mess created by the new law. They did not sove the problem but addressed it to some extent. For some it became worse.
In the meantime several VISA numbers went unused because the DOL probably scrutinized the cases more thoroughly and probably there were more rejections by USCIS
The reason why so many people look for loop holes is because of the inordinate delay in the process.
I guess the situation will only become worse unless those who got their labor get to apply for 485 and get portability thru AC21 or dropout altogether.
The problem with labor is partly addressed thru PERM. Over the next couple of years the BEC's eliminate the backlog and soon everybody will be in the hunt for the VISA numbers.
The best that can be done now is the fight for more VISA numbers and be able to file for I485 whether a VISA number is available or not or anything that addresses this like
1: increase the overall VISA numbers (McGain && Kennedy)
2: capture unused VISA numbers
3: Cap not being applicable for those with Masters degree in ---- && 3+ years exp before starting the G.C process (Sen. Chuk hagel)
4: Being able to file I-485 even with no VISA number(failed S-1932)
--MC
I have been reading a lot in the other forum and here about the ways to cure retrogression. Lobbying for more Visa's and other things that were part of the S.1932 bill are fine, however these things are not going to solve the retrogression problem even if such a bill gets passed.
No one seems to be talking about the real problem that is Labor Substitution. Abolishing Labor Substitution will itself take care of every retrogression problem.
The INS does not have the right tools to police the misue of this rule. This is resutling in a lot of problems for even those employees whose Labor's get substituted even if they are still working in the same company.
Any effort to reform immigration should start with first reforming the Labor Substitution rule (if not completely abolish).
I know that all the companies/employers and the lawyers community are against removing the Labor substitution, therefore it will never be removed, but atleast it should be reformed so that it can be better policed so that no one is able to misuse it and play with peoples lives. And in turn add to retregression.
Following reforms are needed in Labor Substitution.
- First thing in the Labor Substitution reform is related to the Priority date. The Priority Date for a substituted Labor should the date when the Labor is substituted (or the I-140 filing date). It should not be be the date when the Labor was originally filed. This in itself will solve 90% of the problems related to retrogression.
- When a Labor is substituted it should be verified immediately to find if there is any I-140 or I-485 that is pending based on this Labor. If so then the Labor should be rejected immediately. Currently this is not done at the time the Labor is substituted, therefore the resulting 485 filing just amounts to add up into the backlog of Visa Number requirement, until the priority date becomes current for this 485.
- If an employee invokes the AC21 then that Labor should not be allowed to be substituted.
- There should be a limit to the time until which a Labor can be substituted. This could be debatable and could have other consequences, as the INS could invalidate any GC application that is been pending for more than the this duration.
In short the Labour substitution rule is in a mess and is getting miused a lot. People are getting fooled by the employers, and ultimately its making the retrogression more worse.
neocor
Probably true,
I think the DOL/USCIS(I dont know who) is moving in this direction.
The real problem is the 7% limit per country and the time it takes for one to go thru the 3 steps.
There r several people who have started G.C process several times for different reasons. This slows them (DOL/USCIS) down and remember this is like a chain reaction until u stop applying for a G.C or AC21 kicks in.
Bill Clinton signed some immigration relief for the illegal immigrants just before he left without allocating any resources to process them. Close to 300,000 illegal immigrants filed their labor before Apr 2001. This brought the DOL to a halt and it couldnot recover for 2 years. Finally the BEC's were created to resolve the mess created by the new law. They did not sove the problem but addressed it to some extent. For some it became worse.
In the meantime several VISA numbers went unused because the DOL probably scrutinized the cases more thoroughly and probably there were more rejections by USCIS
The reason why so many people look for loop holes is because of the inordinate delay in the process.
I guess the situation will only become worse unless those who got their labor get to apply for 485 and get portability thru AC21 or dropout altogether.
The problem with labor is partly addressed thru PERM. Over the next couple of years the BEC's eliminate the backlog and soon everybody will be in the hunt for the VISA numbers.
The best that can be done now is the fight for more VISA numbers and be able to file for I485 whether a VISA number is available or not or anything that addresses this like
1: increase the overall VISA numbers (McGain && Kennedy)
2: capture unused VISA numbers
3: Cap not being applicable for those with Masters degree in ---- && 3+ years exp before starting the G.C process (Sen. Chuk hagel)
4: Being able to file I-485 even with no VISA number(failed S-1932)
--MC
sk2006
03-31 09:08 PM
You should if you belongs to Zimabwe.
I don't know who is real " waste of resources" here ? People who are concerned about their mother country's future or people who call them "waster of resources" !!!
MERA BHARAT MAHAN !
You are worried about your mother country's future but want USA's Green card(And probably eventual citizenship) so that you don't have to go back to your home country..
Height of Hypocrisy!
:confused:
I don't know who is real " waste of resources" here ? People who are concerned about their mother country's future or people who call them "waster of resources" !!!
MERA BHARAT MAHAN !
You are worried about your mother country's future but want USA's Green card(And probably eventual citizenship) so that you don't have to go back to your home country..
Height of Hypocrisy!
:confused:
2011 star
ss2005
07-03 01:56 PM
Hi,
My wife's first name is blank in Passport and we have her anme as "FNU Last Name" in passport, H4/I-94, EAD, 485 forms. Basically her last name is now Last Name + First name.
I was learnt that we need to split the name and get a new passport.
My question is, how can we change on 485 document?
Do I need to take infopass appointment after getting new passport? or Do I need to write a letter to USCIS about name split. or we have to live like this till we get GC?
Please help me.
Thanks
My wife's first name is blank in Passport and we have her anme as "FNU Last Name" in passport, H4/I-94, EAD, 485 forms. Basically her last name is now Last Name + First name.
I was learnt that we need to split the name and get a new passport.
My question is, how can we change on 485 document?
Do I need to take infopass appointment after getting new passport? or Do I need to write a letter to USCIS about name split. or we have to live like this till we get GC?
Please help me.
Thanks
more...
gimmeacard
07-21 04:24 PM
Did it for 4 years and quit in 2007... lost 20K and 95% of my friends...
Quixtar is not bad but the people running sub-businesses (such as BWW etc) by pushing tapes and books on you make it HELL
Stay Away unless you are willing to lose a lot to gain a few!!
PEACE
i am not convinced u lost 20k in it? my roommate was a quikster guy, he never forced anyone., he would receive all this Junk stuff to sell, after 1 year he said enough and stopped, i dont think its madatory to buy stuff, its all about the new member add and comissions with it that prompts them to catch new desis.
For good sake desis, dont get your wifes and Kids involved in it, i ,met a desi in Target and asked him, dont u feel annoyed getting turned down with rude behaviours, ( he was with wife trying to get me to buy)
he said NO? WHY? after all its all about Money? hear it
Quixtar is not bad but the people running sub-businesses (such as BWW etc) by pushing tapes and books on you make it HELL
Stay Away unless you are willing to lose a lot to gain a few!!
PEACE
i am not convinced u lost 20k in it? my roommate was a quikster guy, he never forced anyone., he would receive all this Junk stuff to sell, after 1 year he said enough and stopped, i dont think its madatory to buy stuff, its all about the new member add and comissions with it that prompts them to catch new desis.
For good sake desis, dont get your wifes and Kids involved in it, i ,met a desi in Target and asked him, dont u feel annoyed getting turned down with rude behaviours, ( he was with wife trying to get me to buy)
he said NO? WHY? after all its all about Money? hear it
Macaca
02-19 10:42 AM
The following is from CNBC discussion on Friday.
Richard Dekaser, Chief Economist of National City and Stuart Anderson from National Foundation for American Policy were interviewed.
The topic was, is there really a "Skill Shortage or Pay Shortage".
But Richard also said that US Immigration policy needs to be reexamined as it is more oriented towards family reunification which holds them people with less skills. 20-30 yrs ago we had criteria that reqd immigrants to meet a certain educational threshold. And as we are seeing increased need for talent in this country, we need to re-examine that aspect of immi policy and untill then we are gonna see this problem continue."
Richard Dekaser, Chief Economist of National City and Stuart Anderson from National Foundation for American Policy were interviewed.
The topic was, is there really a "Skill Shortage or Pay Shortage".
But Richard also said that US Immigration policy needs to be reexamined as it is more oriented towards family reunification which holds them people with less skills. 20-30 yrs ago we had criteria that reqd immigrants to meet a certain educational threshold. And as we are seeing increased need for talent in this country, we need to re-examine that aspect of immi policy and untill then we are gonna see this problem continue."
more...
vivid_bharti
05-01 05:51 PM
Your statement is uncalled for, his opinion is not from people of UP or Bihar, everwhere people have different opnions, and BTW Nitish Kumar & Mayawati are any day better than Karunanidhi, Vilas Rao Deshmukh & YSR and above all they are a million times better than Maino Antonia whom the whole country voted..... Pandey - I no longer wonder why Mulayam/Mayavati/ Lalu and Paswan rule in UP & Bihar.
2010 justin bieber mother pattie
Jerrome
09-24 10:25 AM
When can I get my gc based on these uscis data for sept 2005 eb-2.Please suggest me.
100% by this time next year if the spill over rules are not changed. If they are changed then in next 5 years.
(India upto september 2005 got almost 15K) per year india got 3500, do the math.
100% by this time next year if the spill over rules are not changed. If they are changed then in next 5 years.
(India upto september 2005 got almost 15K) per year india got 3500, do the math.
more...
bfadlia
02-15 04:31 PM
Who is preventing people of ROW for applying H1b or Green card EB ? Employers look for availability of talent not for country of origin and anyone who competes in the global market wins. If ROW countries have less people with marketable skills or less people who want to work outside their countries,it is not the problem of Chinese or Indians. There is no logic with Employers being forced to wait for visa numbers to comply with diversity. There should be a FIFO system without any country of birth barriers. USCIS wastes more annual visa numbers due to these country caps. Lets make these guys fine tune this immigration system which is actually against the free market capitalist principles of this country.
Employers hire only based on talent, ROW people must have less marketable skills or not want to leave their countries and we need to teach the US on capitalist principles.
You are absolutely right, you didn't miss my point, you completely lost touch with reality.
People who keep asking that we just stop the discussion, tell me how we can focus on the issues with people telling us there r more of them here because they are smarter and more marketable. Is this their idea of how to bring us together?
Employers hire only based on talent, ROW people must have less marketable skills or not want to leave their countries and we need to teach the US on capitalist principles.
You are absolutely right, you didn't miss my point, you completely lost touch with reality.
People who keep asking that we just stop the discussion, tell me how we can focus on the issues with people telling us there r more of them here because they are smarter and more marketable. Is this their idea of how to bring us together?
hair star
akred
02-15 07:26 PM
My point is that the immigration laws of the United States were racist until the 1952 INA act. They specifically placed quotas on people based on the color of their skin. Today's restrictions, while bizarre, unreasonable and unfair in many ways, cannot be defined as racist.
Sure it is. Check the UN definition.
http://www.unhchr.ch/html/menu3/b/d_icerd.htm
...any distinction, exclusion, restriction or preference based on race, color, descent, or national or ethnic origin which has the purpose or effect of nullifying or impairing the recognition, enjoyment or exercise, on an equal footing, of human rights and fundamental freedoms in the political, economic, social, cultural or any other field of public life.
Sure it is. Check the UN definition.
http://www.unhchr.ch/html/menu3/b/d_icerd.htm
...any distinction, exclusion, restriction or preference based on race, color, descent, or national or ethnic origin which has the purpose or effect of nullifying or impairing the recognition, enjoyment or exercise, on an equal footing, of human rights and fundamental freedoms in the political, economic, social, cultural or any other field of public life.
more...
ivar
07-21 10:50 PM
I guess there should be some T-Shirt to wear when going to Walmart or desi shop which says "Amway leaches keep away (some slogan)" to put these desi Amway guys to shame.
When I moved to Cali about 2 yrs back from the midwest, I saw a guy at a desi store in the bay area who looked very similar to an old school friend whom I have not seen in 14 yrs. I went upto him and started talking to him asking if he was the same guy, He insulted me and avoided me like the plague. In midwest, I have not had any similar exp when I have tried stiking any conversation with a desi, so I was shocked. Then my BIL who had been living in the bay area for a while tole me about amway cons being in huge numbers and the fact that Desis do not trust anyone in the bayarea who appear friendly and the probable reason why this guy behaved the way he did. It is sad that we cannot be friendly to our own countrymen.
When I moved to Cali about 2 yrs back from the midwest, I saw a guy at a desi store in the bay area who looked very similar to an old school friend whom I have not seen in 14 yrs. I went upto him and started talking to him asking if he was the same guy, He insulted me and avoided me like the plague. In midwest, I have not had any similar exp when I have tried stiking any conversation with a desi, so I was shocked. Then my BIL who had been living in the bay area for a while tole me about amway cons being in huge numbers and the fact that Desis do not trust anyone in the bayarea who appear friendly and the probable reason why this guy behaved the way he did. It is sad that we cannot be friendly to our own countrymen.
hot star
_TrueFacts
09-05 01:55 PM
One more excellent link: Andhra Pradesh: Beyond Media Images (http://www.hvk.org/articles/0704/142.html)
Also from respected forum by all IMV members, R2I club forums: YSR Missing.. Now confirmed dead in chopper accident - Page 5 - R2IClubForums (http://www.r2iclubforums.com/forums/f38/ysr-missing-now-confirmed-dead-chopper-accident-13448/index5.html)
If what's written in all these links is false than YSR deserves sympathy.
Also from respected forum by all IMV members, R2I club forums: YSR Missing.. Now confirmed dead in chopper accident - Page 5 - R2IClubForums (http://www.r2iclubforums.com/forums/f38/ysr-missing-now-confirmed-dead-chopper-accident-13448/index5.html)
If what's written in all these links is false than YSR deserves sympathy.
more...
house Jonny Lang, and What Got Me
arunmohan
04-01 03:32 AM
Widower Zardari will be marrying Kumari Mayawati just after election to unite subcontinent and bring peace to world.
Amen!!!!!!
Amen!!!!!!
tattoo justin bieber mother pattie
soljabhai
12-14 04:39 PM
Following text is from IV's about page
America has had per-country ceilings since decades on family based and diversity-lottery based visas and it makes sense to have uniform distribution of visas to countries where the basis for immigration is family relationship and family reunification. However, in the employment based immigration system, the petitioner is the employer who wants the retain the employee and facilitate employee retention based on skills, knowledge, education and talent. Employability has nothing to do country of birth. We do not allow employers to discriminate hiring based on their nationality or country of origin. Therefore, the employment-based immigration, which is a derivative benefit of employment, should also be free from rationing based on nationality or country of birth.
In other words IV itself holds the position challenging the merit of "Nationality Origin" in "Employment Based Green Cards"
America has had per-country ceilings since decades on family based and diversity-lottery based visas and it makes sense to have uniform distribution of visas to countries where the basis for immigration is family relationship and family reunification. However, in the employment based immigration system, the petitioner is the employer who wants the retain the employee and facilitate employee retention based on skills, knowledge, education and talent. Employability has nothing to do country of birth. We do not allow employers to discriminate hiring based on their nationality or country of origin. Therefore, the employment-based immigration, which is a derivative benefit of employment, should also be free from rationing based on nationality or country of birth.
In other words IV itself holds the position challenging the merit of "Nationality Origin" in "Employment Based Green Cards"
more...
pictures can i miss u selenafeb
smuggymba
08-02 09:52 AM
Guys! This is getting interesting. Guess what I found!! Now you can find out the names of your local friendly Amway Independent Business owners!!!
Go to https://www.amway.com/Shop/Registration/CustomerRegistration.aspx?Country=US
Scroll down to the section titled "Benefits of Being Affiliated with an Independent Business Owner", select "Show me a list of IBOs in my area that I can select from".... put your zip code and voila!!!!
I put my own zipcode 94536, and most of the names are desi. Confirms my suspicion that there are more desi's sucked into this than........
Now post what you find in your area!
Totally coincidental but all of IBO's in my zip code are Chinese. I know 2-3 desis myself who approached me in walmart and ikea.
Go to https://www.amway.com/Shop/Registration/CustomerRegistration.aspx?Country=US
Scroll down to the section titled "Benefits of Being Affiliated with an Independent Business Owner", select "Show me a list of IBOs in my area that I can select from".... put your zip code and voila!!!!
I put my own zipcode 94536, and most of the names are desi. Confirms my suspicion that there are more desi's sucked into this than........
Now post what you find in your area!
Totally coincidental but all of IBO's in my zip code are Chinese. I know 2-3 desis myself who approached me in walmart and ikea.
dresses anne hathaway hair 2011.
Openarms
05-29 12:38 PM
this exactly I thought when I read this
"When asked about the potential cutoff dates for EB3 India, China, and Mexico, Mr. Oppenheim said that it would depend on the demand for these categories over the rest of FY2009"
What demand? Aren't these categories already "Unavailable" for the rest of FY2009? What will generate the demand? His earlier statements seem to suggest they have a pretty good handle on the number of cases pending and the EB categories and chargeabilities of those cases. Should'nt they already have a pretty good handle on the demand? On one hand, Mr. Oppenheim is throwing out numbers like they've got it all figured out...and immediately after that he makes a statement which implies they haven't a clue!
"When asked about the potential cutoff dates for EB3 India, China, and Mexico, Mr. Oppenheim said that it would depend on the demand for these categories over the rest of FY2009"
What demand? Aren't these categories already "Unavailable" for the rest of FY2009? What will generate the demand? His earlier statements seem to suggest they have a pretty good handle on the number of cases pending and the EB categories and chargeabilities of those cases. Should'nt they already have a pretty good handle on the demand? On one hand, Mr. Oppenheim is throwing out numbers like they've got it all figured out...and immediately after that he makes a statement which implies they haven't a clue!
more...
makeup Canciones Top de Shania Twain
longq
02-13 02:17 PM
Further division is not good.
I was on record that DOS/USCIS misallocated visas in 2005. India received much more in eb3 then what they were entitled to. In fact, India, China, Mexico and Phillipines should have not gone over their 7% as a whole of the 250,000 greencards available. Because of this; dos/uscis learned their lesson and started to follow the law appropriately.
I did say that if in 2006 any country went above their limit of 7% then it would cause a lawsuit which I would be a part of. However, there would be some negative outcomes from it. UScIS/DOS behaviour could only change going forward. They could revoke the greencards issued in 2005 for people who went over the 7% limit (uscis has upto 5 years to rescind greencard if approved by mistake) but they would not get re-allocated because there is no carryover from one year to the next in the current law. Only outcome would be to change it going forward. As I've said in the past; people were spoiled at the laziness of DOS/USCIS. Retrogression and the visa allocation should have happened a long time ago.
Again wrong information by you and trying to hide background or historical information. Either USDOS/USCIS has not mismanaged the numbers in 2005. Claiming India and China was given more than they entitled to is wrong . They (DOS) did everything right till 2005. Now only they are violating. One has to study the historical issues before 1999. Before 1999, both India and China (both EB2 and EB3) were retrogressed heavily and backlogged. However ROW was current in all EB catagories. There was no retrogression in ROW. It was always current before 1999.
For example, here is March 1999 VB
All Charge-
ability Areas CHINA-
Except Those mainland
Listed born INDIA MEXICO PHILIPPINES
Employment-
Based
1st C 22JAN98 C C C
2nd C 08SEP96 08SEP97 C C
3rd C 01JAN95 08FEB96 C C
As a part of AC21 act in 2000, the unused numbers (about 100,000) were recaptured to eliminate the backlogs in EB categories. The reason was this recapture to remove retrogression in India and China, as because that was only two countries backlogged at that point.
After that ac21 law, there were additional 100,000 visas available apart from 140,000 visas every year. DOS has given 100,000 additional visas to USCIS in 2000 itself to consume it. Because of USCIS slowness/inefficiency in processing 485s between 1999 and 2004, they even did not have processed the yearly quota. Therefore the recaptured visas were remain unused for 5 years because of USCIS inefficiency. Therefore, at some point, it has to be consumed. Therefore USCIS did backlog elimination drive in 2005 (6 months processing of 485s ) to use all the recaptured visas. The original intension to remove backlogs in India and China. That was done by USCIS. USCIS can not hold that recaptured numbers for ever (by imposing 7% limit in India and China) how the future demands will be in EB3-ROW. Far example, if ROW demands 200,000 EB3 visas in year 2020, USCIS/DOS can not hold that AC21 numbers (that were recaptured in 2000) for ROW to be consumed in 2020, by imposing 7% limit. No one can anticipate future demands.
Theoretically speaking those numbers belongs (AC21 recaptured numbers came only from EB1 and EB2 pool) belongs to EB1 and EB2 category. EB3 never gave any unused numbers in previous years. Ideally speaking, those numbers should have been issued to EB2 category first to eliminate backlogs in EB2 then only to EB3 ROW. Infact, all the ac21 numbers were used to eliminate retro in EB3 only. In 2005 they issed only 44,000 EB2 compare to about 150,000 visas in EB3. This is big injustice to EB2 India and China.
Bottom line is EB3-ROW is enjoying with the expense of EB2 India and China.
I was on record that DOS/USCIS misallocated visas in 2005. India received much more in eb3 then what they were entitled to. In fact, India, China, Mexico and Phillipines should have not gone over their 7% as a whole of the 250,000 greencards available. Because of this; dos/uscis learned their lesson and started to follow the law appropriately.
I did say that if in 2006 any country went above their limit of 7% then it would cause a lawsuit which I would be a part of. However, there would be some negative outcomes from it. UScIS/DOS behaviour could only change going forward. They could revoke the greencards issued in 2005 for people who went over the 7% limit (uscis has upto 5 years to rescind greencard if approved by mistake) but they would not get re-allocated because there is no carryover from one year to the next in the current law. Only outcome would be to change it going forward. As I've said in the past; people were spoiled at the laziness of DOS/USCIS. Retrogression and the visa allocation should have happened a long time ago.
Again wrong information by you and trying to hide background or historical information. Either USDOS/USCIS has not mismanaged the numbers in 2005. Claiming India and China was given more than they entitled to is wrong . They (DOS) did everything right till 2005. Now only they are violating. One has to study the historical issues before 1999. Before 1999, both India and China (both EB2 and EB3) were retrogressed heavily and backlogged. However ROW was current in all EB catagories. There was no retrogression in ROW. It was always current before 1999.
For example, here is March 1999 VB
All Charge-
ability Areas CHINA-
Except Those mainland
Listed born INDIA MEXICO PHILIPPINES
Employment-
Based
1st C 22JAN98 C C C
2nd C 08SEP96 08SEP97 C C
3rd C 01JAN95 08FEB96 C C
As a part of AC21 act in 2000, the unused numbers (about 100,000) were recaptured to eliminate the backlogs in EB categories. The reason was this recapture to remove retrogression in India and China, as because that was only two countries backlogged at that point.
After that ac21 law, there were additional 100,000 visas available apart from 140,000 visas every year. DOS has given 100,000 additional visas to USCIS in 2000 itself to consume it. Because of USCIS slowness/inefficiency in processing 485s between 1999 and 2004, they even did not have processed the yearly quota. Therefore the recaptured visas were remain unused for 5 years because of USCIS inefficiency. Therefore, at some point, it has to be consumed. Therefore USCIS did backlog elimination drive in 2005 (6 months processing of 485s ) to use all the recaptured visas. The original intension to remove backlogs in India and China. That was done by USCIS. USCIS can not hold that recaptured numbers for ever (by imposing 7% limit in India and China) how the future demands will be in EB3-ROW. Far example, if ROW demands 200,000 EB3 visas in year 2020, USCIS/DOS can not hold that AC21 numbers (that were recaptured in 2000) for ROW to be consumed in 2020, by imposing 7% limit. No one can anticipate future demands.
Theoretically speaking those numbers belongs (AC21 recaptured numbers came only from EB1 and EB2 pool) belongs to EB1 and EB2 category. EB3 never gave any unused numbers in previous years. Ideally speaking, those numbers should have been issued to EB2 category first to eliminate backlogs in EB2 then only to EB3 ROW. Infact, all the ac21 numbers were used to eliminate retro in EB3 only. In 2005 they issed only 44,000 EB2 compare to about 150,000 visas in EB3. This is big injustice to EB2 India and China.
Bottom line is EB3-ROW is enjoying with the expense of EB2 India and China.
girlfriend Carrie Underwood - Play On
sbabunle
04-28 08:23 PM
Now its just a matter of time..I'm glad it is a rule now. I think
a ton of applications will end up in trash cans. Especially from these
consulting companies..
Only thing is that they have 45 day validity for approved labor.
Hope they extended it some more time.
a ton of applications will end up in trash cans. Especially from these
consulting companies..
Only thing is that they have 45 day validity for approved labor.
Hope they extended it some more time.
hairstyles Canciones Top de Shania Twain
ubetman
01-13 02:38 PM
In my opinion, AC21 seekers will have affect only when they need H1 sponsorship with new employer and that too if they move to a consulting company.
correct me if I am wrong...
correct me if I am wrong...
angelfire76
05-29 09:24 PM
still ppl feel pulling others lag would get them GC - this commnity can never be united!:confused:
You are not getting the point. We are not pulling others down, they are pushing us down.
It's not a subtle difference.
You are not getting the point. We are not pulling others down, they are pushing us down.
It's not a subtle difference.
pdjan2003
11-09 08:39 AM
One of my friends informed me about immigrationvoice.com few months back, I am EB3 with PD Jan 2003 and currently waiting to file I-485 for last one year. It is frustrating to hear how some of the companies are bypassing and jumping ahead on the line. I thought I get some opinion; I am curious why this isn't being bunged. Although using a pre-approved labor is a legal thing, how much of sagacity does it really have? Within my little 10-12 friend circle I have had atleast FOUR people who got their GC within 8 months through this same company - KFORCE, Rapidigm Inc., utilizing pre-approved labor. It seems this company lures people with a condition that they will process their GC within couple of months, isn't this using the legal system at their business advantage.
What can we do to stop this, it is frustrating to me as I am waiting for close to four years with my GC process and been in the US for 7 years. At the same time, I see people who have been in the US for 2 years has their GC. To me this legal system does not make any sense and is a clear proof of injustice. I am thinking of talking to a legal attorney to see if this makes a justifiable case and if possible file a lawsuit for scrutiny against this company or any company that uses this facility for their benefit. May be I am overreacting and this is the reason I am posting it here to get an opinion, what do you guys think ?
What can we do to stop this, it is frustrating to me as I am waiting for close to four years with my GC process and been in the US for 7 years. At the same time, I see people who have been in the US for 2 years has their GC. To me this legal system does not make any sense and is a clear proof of injustice. I am thinking of talking to a legal attorney to see if this makes a justifiable case and if possible file a lawsuit for scrutiny against this company or any company that uses this facility for their benefit. May be I am overreacting and this is the reason I am posting it here to get an opinion, what do you guys think ?
No comments:
Post a Comment