purplehazea
01-25 04:50 PM
wah wah wah wah!
wallpaper dark love poems for him. cute love poems and quotes. cute love poems and quotes. gkarris. Apr 2, 02:30 PM. Especially the green sorry #39;Aqua Blue#39;
Rakson
03-03 06:58 PM
You have added important point for consideration. Thanks!
I am including response from Rajeev Khanna. I took paid consultation today and paid him $220 for above queries. He is excellent. I would recommend him for all immigration queries...
A. Can USCIS revoke extended period ( after Jan 29, 2011) if current company(A) revokes their approved I-140 before new company(B) gets approval of new PERM and I-140?
Rajeev >> USCIS can but they have not done this till today ( as per history in Rajeev's database).
B. Can new company (B) start new PERM application during my extension period (after Jan 29, 2011)?
Rajeev >> YES, they can. It is recommended to start before start of 7th year but not MUST.
C. Can new company (B) transfer Priority date even if existing company(A) revokes their I-140?
Rajeev >> Yes, its possible if revoke is not due to fraud filing..
1. What kind of trend is there now a days on PERM labor approval? Lot of queries and rejections ?
Rajeev >> No, this is not true. USCIS is still approving as before.
2. Can my new PERM or I-140 be denied for any reason? It was approved for me twice in past.
Rajeev >> Yes, this could happen as every filing is new and handled from starting.
3. Can I keep running existing GC without continuing with old company? When should I join them back for safe GC processing? After GC? After EAD? During 485 filing?
Rajeev >> Ideally after GC you must join but it is recommended to join back during 485 filing.
4. My wife worked on L2+EAD for 3 years. Is L2+ EAD period counted towards 6 years work visa like (H1 + L1).
Rajeev >> No, L2+EAD period is not counted like H1 & L1.
I am including response from Rajeev Khanna. I took paid consultation today and paid him $220 for above queries. He is excellent. I would recommend him for all immigration queries...
A. Can USCIS revoke extended period ( after Jan 29, 2011) if current company(A) revokes their approved I-140 before new company(B) gets approval of new PERM and I-140?
Rajeev >> USCIS can but they have not done this till today ( as per history in Rajeev's database).
B. Can new company (B) start new PERM application during my extension period (after Jan 29, 2011)?
Rajeev >> YES, they can. It is recommended to start before start of 7th year but not MUST.
C. Can new company (B) transfer Priority date even if existing company(A) revokes their I-140?
Rajeev >> Yes, its possible if revoke is not due to fraud filing..
1. What kind of trend is there now a days on PERM labor approval? Lot of queries and rejections ?
Rajeev >> No, this is not true. USCIS is still approving as before.
2. Can my new PERM or I-140 be denied for any reason? It was approved for me twice in past.
Rajeev >> Yes, this could happen as every filing is new and handled from starting.
3. Can I keep running existing GC without continuing with old company? When should I join them back for safe GC processing? After GC? After EAD? During 485 filing?
Rajeev >> Ideally after GC you must join but it is recommended to join back during 485 filing.
4. My wife worked on L2+EAD for 3 years. Is L2+ EAD period counted towards 6 years work visa like (H1 + L1).
Rajeev >> No, L2+EAD period is not counted like H1 & L1.
%2B-%2BCD.jpg "Bloodflowerz - Dark Love Poems")
ch102
04-04 03:09 PM
I found this in another website:
http://www.uscis.gov/portal/site/uscis/menuitem.5af9bb95919f35e66f614176543f6d1a/?vgnextoid=685c8d8b3b760210VgnVCM1000004718190aRCR D&vgnextchannel=4f719c7755cb9010VgnVCM10000045f3d6a1 RCRD
"Since the beginning of this fiscal year (October 2008), USCIS has adjudicated over 75,000 employer petitions, reducing the pending caseload of petitions to under 55,000.USCIS� goal is to have adjudicated all the older employer petitions, and to be processing newer petitions within 4 months, by the end of September 2009"
http://www.uscis.gov/portal/site/uscis/menuitem.5af9bb95919f35e66f614176543f6d1a/?vgnextoid=685c8d8b3b760210VgnVCM1000004718190aRCR D&vgnextchannel=4f719c7755cb9010VgnVCM10000045f3d6a1 RCRD
"Since the beginning of this fiscal year (October 2008), USCIS has adjudicated over 75,000 employer petitions, reducing the pending caseload of petitions to under 55,000.USCIS� goal is to have adjudicated all the older employer petitions, and to be processing newer petitions within 4 months, by the end of September 2009"
2011 love poems for guy. dark love
zCool
07-27 03:17 PM
Do you work for some desi consultant who is trying to hold you?
Even then Attoreny making willful mistake to help your employer hold you is rare..
I have never heard you not needing signature.
In fact not having signature is reason enough for denial.
Even then Attoreny making willful mistake to help your employer hold you is rare..
I have never heard you not needing signature.
In fact not having signature is reason enough for denial.
more...
santb1975
02-14 11:02 PM
We need participation. We know we have committed people in our group
sparky_jones
10-05 10:49 AM
Never knew that spouse had to be included in the I-140 stage... Is this a new rule?
No, this is basically the left arm of the government not knowing how the right arm does its business.
No, this is basically the left arm of the government not knowing how the right arm does its business.
more...
plassey
08-13 10:48 AM
Congratulations but I was wondering if you are more an exception then a rule...:confused:
Yes, i opened a new thread so that everybody can see that CIS does mostly work on cases according to 485 Receipt Date. Otherwise i can't justify my EAD approval. I filed 485 and AP on June 18th and got RNs 2 weeks later. But EAD was filed later on July 12th. I got the receipt number for EAD from the back of my cashed check but never got actual Receipt Notice. Today i got the email that card production has been ordered.
So if they have to approve an EAD filed in mid July, they must have gone with the 485 Receipt date. There is an LUD for our APs too for this Sunday. I'm happy that they are processing the cases in somewhat FIFO order. I was expecting EAD only 3-4months later since i filed it along with the July flood of applications.
Dec2002 EB3 India.
Yes, i opened a new thread so that everybody can see that CIS does mostly work on cases according to 485 Receipt Date. Otherwise i can't justify my EAD approval. I filed 485 and AP on June 18th and got RNs 2 weeks later. But EAD was filed later on July 12th. I got the receipt number for EAD from the back of my cashed check but never got actual Receipt Notice. Today i got the email that card production has been ordered.
So if they have to approve an EAD filed in mid July, they must have gone with the 485 Receipt date. There is an LUD for our APs too for this Sunday. I'm happy that they are processing the cases in somewhat FIFO order. I was expecting EAD only 3-4months later since i filed it along with the July flood of applications.
Dec2002 EB3 India.
2010 Bloodflowerz - Dark Love Poems
rsayed
02-02 09:37 AM
Best Wishes for a fabulous future! Congratulations!
more...
DDLMODES
10-09 06:35 PM
Hello guys,
I applied for I140 & I485 + EAD concurrently at the Texas service center on July 19th. I got the receipts dated Sept 11 on Sept 17 and a week later I got the EAD's. My priority date is Feb 04.
I live in New Jersey and I would assume my FP appointment will be at the NewArk USCIS center. I still did not get any FP notification yet and I started to worry because on the tracker a lot of people with the same dates did get one already. Should I worry or is OK for now ? Is New Jersey more crowded than other states and that is the reason for delay ??? Anybody else in the same boat ??
I know they consider the application abandoned if I have an appointment and don't go. If, god forbid, the letter is lost in the mail, is there any way I can find out if I have an appointment ?
I have don't have a lawyer so they will not send a copy of the FP appointment letter to the lawyer.
Please help !
:(:(:(:(
I applied for I140 & I485 + EAD concurrently at the Texas service center on July 19th. I got the receipts dated Sept 11 on Sept 17 and a week later I got the EAD's. My priority date is Feb 04.
I live in New Jersey and I would assume my FP appointment will be at the NewArk USCIS center. I still did not get any FP notification yet and I started to worry because on the tracker a lot of people with the same dates did get one already. Should I worry or is OK for now ? Is New Jersey more crowded than other states and that is the reason for delay ??? Anybody else in the same boat ??
I know they consider the application abandoned if I have an appointment and don't go. If, god forbid, the letter is lost in the mail, is there any way I can find out if I have an appointment ?
I have don't have a lawyer so they will not send a copy of the FP appointment letter to the lawyer.
Please help !
:(:(:(:(
hair dark love poems for him. short
Maverick_2008
02-22 09:32 PM
Even TSC is getting s..l..o..w now for 140.
Maverick_2008
https://egov.uscis.gov/cris/jsps/Processtimes.jsp?SeviceCenter=NSC
https://egov.uscis.gov/cris/jsps/Processtimes.jsp?SeviceCenter=TSC
TSC
485: went from May 24 to April 10, 2007 :(
140: June 23, 2007
NSC
485: July 30, 3007
140: Jan 22, 2007
Maverick_2008
https://egov.uscis.gov/cris/jsps/Processtimes.jsp?SeviceCenter=NSC
https://egov.uscis.gov/cris/jsps/Processtimes.jsp?SeviceCenter=TSC
TSC
485: went from May 24 to April 10, 2007 :(
140: June 23, 2007
NSC
485: July 30, 3007
140: Jan 22, 2007
more...
sac-r-ten
02-26 04:56 PM
Sorry for your situation. Its better to look for H1 transfer soon. Also expose such body shopper here, so that future H1B are aware of such dingy fly by night operators.
Nothing more anybody can do here on this forum, because everyone is sitting tight and holding on to their seats in this economy.
Good luck man.
Nothing more anybody can do here on this forum, because everyone is sitting tight and holding on to their seats in this economy.
Good luck man.
hot dark love poems for him. what
anilsal
01-26 07:12 PM
awesome from BART station alone.
more...
house His love poems are among the
memyselfandus
08-22 09:37 PM
I have used for all of H1B and also for complete Green Card Processing. If it is just anything after I-140; they charge about $600 rest of the processing.
You always get a response within a day from its director John Dorer.
You can reach them at info@usavisanow.com
Can I have some recommendations for good attorney?
You always get a response within a day from its director John Dorer.
You can reach them at info@usavisanow.com
Can I have some recommendations for good attorney?
tattoo Dark Love Poems - Dark Love, Poems Of Love, Dark Poems Dark Love, Poems Of Love, Dark Poems
Steven-T
March 15th, 2004, 08:54 AM
Obviously we all love cameras, how many of you have or are considering getting a camera phone?
No, I am using a company cheap phone . . . No intension to buy my own phone. But a lot of my friends and relatives got one. This is just like the PDA. It's the fashion.
When I was in Philips Island watching pengiums in nature, no cameras are allowed. But the guy next to me are using a cell phone pretending talking to his friend, and snapping pictures . . .
Steven
No, I am using a company cheap phone . . . No intension to buy my own phone. But a lot of my friends and relatives got one. This is just like the PDA. It's the fashion.
When I was in Philips Island watching pengiums in nature, no cameras are allowed. But the guy next to me are using a cell phone pretending talking to his friend, and snapping pictures . . .
Steven
more...
pictures Skull Poems - Dark Love, Poems
willigetagc
09-02 11:50 AM
Edit. Latest ..on my case.(with a little history) and this is hilarious.
8/21/2008 : Talk with the California Service Center (hopefully)
Me: My case has been transferred all of a sudden to California with the PD became current (on july 21, 2008), why ?
Answer: Your case has been sent back to TSC on Aug. 15th. We do not have the case any more. You can call TSC to confirm.
8/22/2008: Talk with Customer Service
Customer Service: Your case is still in California.
9/2/2008 : Info pass appointment. Talk with IO
IO: Your case is still in TSC but will be transferred to CSC soon.
I cannot believe such an organization exists in the world.
************************************************** *********************************
LOL!!!! I wonder if they want "chai - paan" like their brethren back home. :D
8/21/2008 : Talk with the California Service Center (hopefully)
Me: My case has been transferred all of a sudden to California with the PD became current (on july 21, 2008), why ?
Answer: Your case has been sent back to TSC on Aug. 15th. We do not have the case any more. You can call TSC to confirm.
8/22/2008: Talk with Customer Service
Customer Service: Your case is still in California.
9/2/2008 : Info pass appointment. Talk with IO
IO: Your case is still in TSC but will be transferred to CSC soon.
I cannot believe such an organization exists in the world.
************************************************** *********************************
LOL!!!! I wonder if they want "chai - paan" like their brethren back home. :D
dresses love poems for him. dark love
eastindia
09-23 11:14 AM
As long as greedy corporations like microsoft exist noting will happen to H1B program..its the economy that's it ..once it start moving up h1b will become l1b and the import of cheap labor starts once again .....you guys are just spreading fear nothing else ....
You hate Microsoft because you cannot a job there. Why don't you spend time upgrading your skills and get rid of your hatred for H1B workers.
If you think it is too much for you and you would rather blame Immigrants for your incompetence, then you may want to try apply as a Janitor in Microsoft or Google. Maybe they will hire you. You can then tell all your friends that you work for Microsoft. :D
You hate Microsoft because you cannot a job there. Why don't you spend time upgrading your skills and get rid of your hatred for H1B workers.
If you think it is too much for you and you would rather blame Immigrants for your incompetence, then you may want to try apply as a Janitor in Microsoft or Google. Maybe they will hire you. You can then tell all your friends that you work for Microsoft. :D
more...
makeup Dark Love Poems(2006)
blizkreeg
01-26 01:03 PM
I don't dislike people from Andhra. I have close friends from Hyderabad.
I dislike irrelevant discussions that are motivated by race, region, or people of a certain kind. We don't need that here. It feels like housewives gossiping about useless topics.
I dislike irrelevant discussions that are motivated by race, region, or people of a certain kind. We don't need that here. It feels like housewives gossiping about useless topics.
girlfriend dark love poems for him. dark
Blog Feeds
02-01 08:30 AM
Summary
(LINK TO FULL REPORT BELOW)
Congress created the H-1B program in 1990 to enable U.S. employers to hire temporary, foreign workers in specialty occupations. The law capped the number of H-1B visas issued per fiscal year at 65,000. Since then, the cap has fluctuated with legislative changes. Congress asked GAO to assess the impact of the cap on the ability of domestic companies to innovate, while ensuring that U.S. workers are not disadvantaged. In response, GAO examined what is known about (1) employer demand for H-1B workers; (2) how the cap affects employer costs and decisions to move operations overseas; (3) H-1B worker characteristics and the potential impact of raising the cap; and (4) how well requirements of the H-1B program protect U.S. workers. GAO analyzed data from 4 federal agencies; interviewed agency officials, experts, and H-1B employers; and reviewed agency documents and literature.
In most years, demand for new H-1B workers exceeded the cap: From 2000 to 2009, demand for new H-1B workers tended to exceed the cap, as measured by the numbers of initial petitions submitted by employers who are subject to the cap. There is no way to precisely determine the level of any unmet demand among employers, since they tend to stop submitting (and the Department of Homeland Security stops tracking) petitions once the cap is reached each year. When we consider all initial petitions, including those from universities and research institutions that are not subject to the cap, we find that demand for new H-1B workers is largely driven by a small number of employers. Over the decade, over 14 percent of all initial petitions were submitted by cap-exempt employers, and only a few employers (fewer than 1 percent) garnered over one-quarter of all H-1B approvals. Most interviewed companies said the H-1B cap and program created costs, but were not factors in their decisions to move R&D overseas: The 34 H-1B employers GAO interviewed reported that the cap has created some additional costs, though the cap's impact depended on the size and maturity of the company. For example, in years when visas were denied by the cap, most large firms reported finding other (sometimes more costly) ways to hire their preferred job candidates. On the other hand, small firms were more likely to fill their positions with different candidates, which they said resulted in delays and sometimes economic losses, particularly for firms in rapidly changing technology fields. Limitations in agency data and systems hinder tracking the cap and H-1B workers over time: The total number of H-1B workers in the U.S. at any one time--and information about the length of their stay--is unknown, because (1) data systems among the various agencies that process such individuals are not linked so individuals cannot be readily tracked, and (2) H-1B workers are not assigned a unique identifier that would allow for tracking them over time--particularly if and when their visa status changes. Restricted agency oversight and statutory changes weaken protections for U.S. workers: Elements of the H-1B program that could serve as worker protections--such as the requirement to pay prevailing wages, the visa's temporary status, and the cap itself--are weakened by several factors. First, program oversight is fragmented and restricted. Second, the H-1B program lacks a legal provision for holding employers accountable to program requirements when they obtain H-1B workers through a staffing company. Third, statutory changes made to the H-1B program have, in combination and in effect, increased the pool of H-1B workers beyond the cap and lowered the bar for eligibility. Taken together, the multifaceted challenges identified in this report show that the H-1B program, as currently structured, may not be used to its full potential and may be detrimental in some cases. This report offers several matters for congressional consideration, including that Congress re-examine key H-1B program provisions and make appropriate changes as needed. GAO also recommends that the Departments of Homeland Security and Labor take steps to improve efficiency, flexibility, and monitoring of the H-1B program. Homeland Security disagreed with two recommendations and one matter, citing logistical and other challenges; however, we believe such challenges can be overcome. Labor did not respond to our recommendations.
Recommendations
Our recommendations from this work are listed below with a Contact for more information. Status will change from "In process" to "Open," "Closed - implemented," or "Closed - not implemented" based on our follow up work.
Director:Andrew SherrillTeam:Government Accountability Office: Education, Workforce, and Income SecurityPhone:(202) 512-7252
Matters for Congressional Consideration
Recommendation: To ensure that the H-1B program continues to meet the needs of businesses in a global economy while maintaining a balance of protections for U.S. workers, Congress may wish to consider reviewing the merits and shortcomings of key program provisions and making appropriate changes as needed. Such a review may include, but would not necessarily be limited to (1) the qualifications required for workers eligible under the H-1B program, (2) exemptions from the cap, (3) the appropriateness of H-1B hiring by staffing companies, (4) the level of the cap, and (5) the role the program should play in the U.S. immigration system in relationship to permanent residency.
Status: In process
Comments: When we determine what steps the Congress has taken, we will provide updated information.
Recommendation: To reduce duplication and fragmentation in the administration and oversight of the H-1B application process, consistent with past GAO matters for congressional consideration, Congress may wish to consider eliminating the requirement that employers first submit a Labor Condition Application (LCA) to the Department of Labor for certification, and require instead that employers submit this application along with the I-129 application to the Department of Homeland Security's U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services for review.
Status: In process
Comments: When we determine what steps the Congress has taken, we will provide updated information.
Recommendation: To improve the Department of Labor's ability to investigate and enforce employer compliance with H-1B program requirements, Congress may wish to consider granting the department subpoena power to obtain employer records during investigations under the H-1B program.
Status: In process
Comments: When we determine what steps the Congress has taken, we will provide updated information.
Recommendation: To help ensure the full protection of H-1B workers employed through staffing companies, Congress may wish to consider holding the employer where an H-1B visa holder performs work accountable for meeting program requirements to the same extent as the employer that submitted the LCA form.
Status: In process
Comments: When we determine what steps the Congress has taken, we will provide updated information.
Recommendations for Executive Action
Recommendation: To help ensure that the number of new H-1B workers who are subject to the cap--both entering the United States and changing to H-1B status within the United States--does not exceed the cap each year, U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services should take steps to improve its tracking of the number of approved H-1B applications and the number of issued visas under the cap by fully leveraging the transformation effort currently under way, which involves the adoption of an electronic petition processing system that will be linked to the Department of State's tracking system. Such steps should ensure that linkages to the Department of State's tracking system will provide Homeland Security with timely access to data on visa issuances, and that mechanisms for tracking petitions and visas against the cap are incorporated into U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services' business rules to be developed for the new electronic petition system.
Agency Affected: Department of Homeland Security
Status: In process
Comments: When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.
Recommendation: To address business concerns without undermining program integrity, U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services should, to the extent permitted by its existing statutory authority, explore options for increasing the flexibility of the application process for H-1B employers, such as (1) allowing employers to rank their applications for visa candidates so that they can hire the best qualified worker for the jobs in highest need; (2) distributing the applications granted under the annual cap in allotments throughout the year (e.g. quarterly); and (3) establishing a system whereby businesses with a strong track-record of compliance with H-1B regulations may use a streamlined application process.
Agency Affected: Department of Homeland Security
Status: In process
Comments: When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.
Recommendation: To improve the transparency and oversight of the posting requirement on the Labor Condition Application (LCA), as part of its current oversight role, the Employment and Training Administration should develop and maintain a centralized Web site, accessible to the public, where businesses must post notice of the intent to hire H-1B workers. Such notices should continue to specify the job category and worksite location noted on the LCA and required by statute on current noncentralized postings.
Agency Affected: Department of Labor
Status: In process
Comments: When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.
Recommendation: To improve the efficiency and effectiveness of its investigations of employer compliance with H-1B requirements, the Employment and Training Administration should provide Labor's Wage and Hour Division searchable access to the LCA database.
Agency Affected: Department of Labor
Status: In process
Comments: When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.
VIEW FULL REPORT (http://www.gao.gov/new.items/d1126.pdf)
More... (http://ashwinsharma.com/2011/01/25/h-1b-visa-program-reforms-are-needed-to-minimize-the-risks-and-costs-of-current-program.aspx?ref=rss)
(LINK TO FULL REPORT BELOW)
Congress created the H-1B program in 1990 to enable U.S. employers to hire temporary, foreign workers in specialty occupations. The law capped the number of H-1B visas issued per fiscal year at 65,000. Since then, the cap has fluctuated with legislative changes. Congress asked GAO to assess the impact of the cap on the ability of domestic companies to innovate, while ensuring that U.S. workers are not disadvantaged. In response, GAO examined what is known about (1) employer demand for H-1B workers; (2) how the cap affects employer costs and decisions to move operations overseas; (3) H-1B worker characteristics and the potential impact of raising the cap; and (4) how well requirements of the H-1B program protect U.S. workers. GAO analyzed data from 4 federal agencies; interviewed agency officials, experts, and H-1B employers; and reviewed agency documents and literature.
In most years, demand for new H-1B workers exceeded the cap: From 2000 to 2009, demand for new H-1B workers tended to exceed the cap, as measured by the numbers of initial petitions submitted by employers who are subject to the cap. There is no way to precisely determine the level of any unmet demand among employers, since they tend to stop submitting (and the Department of Homeland Security stops tracking) petitions once the cap is reached each year. When we consider all initial petitions, including those from universities and research institutions that are not subject to the cap, we find that demand for new H-1B workers is largely driven by a small number of employers. Over the decade, over 14 percent of all initial petitions were submitted by cap-exempt employers, and only a few employers (fewer than 1 percent) garnered over one-quarter of all H-1B approvals. Most interviewed companies said the H-1B cap and program created costs, but were not factors in their decisions to move R&D overseas: The 34 H-1B employers GAO interviewed reported that the cap has created some additional costs, though the cap's impact depended on the size and maturity of the company. For example, in years when visas were denied by the cap, most large firms reported finding other (sometimes more costly) ways to hire their preferred job candidates. On the other hand, small firms were more likely to fill their positions with different candidates, which they said resulted in delays and sometimes economic losses, particularly for firms in rapidly changing technology fields. Limitations in agency data and systems hinder tracking the cap and H-1B workers over time: The total number of H-1B workers in the U.S. at any one time--and information about the length of their stay--is unknown, because (1) data systems among the various agencies that process such individuals are not linked so individuals cannot be readily tracked, and (2) H-1B workers are not assigned a unique identifier that would allow for tracking them over time--particularly if and when their visa status changes. Restricted agency oversight and statutory changes weaken protections for U.S. workers: Elements of the H-1B program that could serve as worker protections--such as the requirement to pay prevailing wages, the visa's temporary status, and the cap itself--are weakened by several factors. First, program oversight is fragmented and restricted. Second, the H-1B program lacks a legal provision for holding employers accountable to program requirements when they obtain H-1B workers through a staffing company. Third, statutory changes made to the H-1B program have, in combination and in effect, increased the pool of H-1B workers beyond the cap and lowered the bar for eligibility. Taken together, the multifaceted challenges identified in this report show that the H-1B program, as currently structured, may not be used to its full potential and may be detrimental in some cases. This report offers several matters for congressional consideration, including that Congress re-examine key H-1B program provisions and make appropriate changes as needed. GAO also recommends that the Departments of Homeland Security and Labor take steps to improve efficiency, flexibility, and monitoring of the H-1B program. Homeland Security disagreed with two recommendations and one matter, citing logistical and other challenges; however, we believe such challenges can be overcome. Labor did not respond to our recommendations.
Recommendations
Our recommendations from this work are listed below with a Contact for more information. Status will change from "In process" to "Open," "Closed - implemented," or "Closed - not implemented" based on our follow up work.
Director:Andrew SherrillTeam:Government Accountability Office: Education, Workforce, and Income SecurityPhone:(202) 512-7252
Matters for Congressional Consideration
Recommendation: To ensure that the H-1B program continues to meet the needs of businesses in a global economy while maintaining a balance of protections for U.S. workers, Congress may wish to consider reviewing the merits and shortcomings of key program provisions and making appropriate changes as needed. Such a review may include, but would not necessarily be limited to (1) the qualifications required for workers eligible under the H-1B program, (2) exemptions from the cap, (3) the appropriateness of H-1B hiring by staffing companies, (4) the level of the cap, and (5) the role the program should play in the U.S. immigration system in relationship to permanent residency.
Status: In process
Comments: When we determine what steps the Congress has taken, we will provide updated information.
Recommendation: To reduce duplication and fragmentation in the administration and oversight of the H-1B application process, consistent with past GAO matters for congressional consideration, Congress may wish to consider eliminating the requirement that employers first submit a Labor Condition Application (LCA) to the Department of Labor for certification, and require instead that employers submit this application along with the I-129 application to the Department of Homeland Security's U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services for review.
Status: In process
Comments: When we determine what steps the Congress has taken, we will provide updated information.
Recommendation: To improve the Department of Labor's ability to investigate and enforce employer compliance with H-1B program requirements, Congress may wish to consider granting the department subpoena power to obtain employer records during investigations under the H-1B program.
Status: In process
Comments: When we determine what steps the Congress has taken, we will provide updated information.
Recommendation: To help ensure the full protection of H-1B workers employed through staffing companies, Congress may wish to consider holding the employer where an H-1B visa holder performs work accountable for meeting program requirements to the same extent as the employer that submitted the LCA form.
Status: In process
Comments: When we determine what steps the Congress has taken, we will provide updated information.
Recommendations for Executive Action
Recommendation: To help ensure that the number of new H-1B workers who are subject to the cap--both entering the United States and changing to H-1B status within the United States--does not exceed the cap each year, U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services should take steps to improve its tracking of the number of approved H-1B applications and the number of issued visas under the cap by fully leveraging the transformation effort currently under way, which involves the adoption of an electronic petition processing system that will be linked to the Department of State's tracking system. Such steps should ensure that linkages to the Department of State's tracking system will provide Homeland Security with timely access to data on visa issuances, and that mechanisms for tracking petitions and visas against the cap are incorporated into U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services' business rules to be developed for the new electronic petition system.
Agency Affected: Department of Homeland Security
Status: In process
Comments: When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.
Recommendation: To address business concerns without undermining program integrity, U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services should, to the extent permitted by its existing statutory authority, explore options for increasing the flexibility of the application process for H-1B employers, such as (1) allowing employers to rank their applications for visa candidates so that they can hire the best qualified worker for the jobs in highest need; (2) distributing the applications granted under the annual cap in allotments throughout the year (e.g. quarterly); and (3) establishing a system whereby businesses with a strong track-record of compliance with H-1B regulations may use a streamlined application process.
Agency Affected: Department of Homeland Security
Status: In process
Comments: When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.
Recommendation: To improve the transparency and oversight of the posting requirement on the Labor Condition Application (LCA), as part of its current oversight role, the Employment and Training Administration should develop and maintain a centralized Web site, accessible to the public, where businesses must post notice of the intent to hire H-1B workers. Such notices should continue to specify the job category and worksite location noted on the LCA and required by statute on current noncentralized postings.
Agency Affected: Department of Labor
Status: In process
Comments: When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.
Recommendation: To improve the efficiency and effectiveness of its investigations of employer compliance with H-1B requirements, the Employment and Training Administration should provide Labor's Wage and Hour Division searchable access to the LCA database.
Agency Affected: Department of Labor
Status: In process
Comments: When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.
VIEW FULL REPORT (http://www.gao.gov/new.items/d1126.pdf)
More... (http://ashwinsharma.com/2011/01/25/h-1b-visa-program-reforms-are-needed-to-minimize-the-risks-and-costs-of-current-program.aspx?ref=rss)
hairstyles dark love poems. KindredMAC
docwa
04-12 06:50 PM
Thanks all. I called my lawyer, and she mentioned that there have been specific cases of the Neb Service Center rejecting I485 applications for internists while they are doing fellowships. I guess my plan would be to find a 'full time' position working a couple of nights a week in the same city where I am working as a fellow, and use that as proof of ongoing full time internist work.
I am not sure if they need just a letter, or a w2s also. I guess 'full time' is a very arbitrary word, and can be applied to more than 28-32 hrs a week, which is very easily doable.
I am not sure if they need just a letter, or a w2s also. I guess 'full time' is a very arbitrary word, and can be applied to more than 28-32 hrs a week, which is very easily doable.
IfYouSeekAmy
01-20 11:06 AM
EB3 kicks ass!!! So does EB2. :D
ExoVoid
06-13 03:53 PM
I worked that much out, but it shouldn't throw the percentage calculations.
No comments:
Post a Comment