Springflower
04-15 03:56 PM
Enjoy the flexibility and the freedom GC provides.
wallpaper Love+poems+for+oyfriend
jliechty
August 14th, 2006, 10:27 PM
If you plan to print larger than 11x14 (roughly), or if you want more cropping flexibility, the D80 is a clear choice. Otherwise, between the D50 and D70, the D70 has a few more options (check DPreview for feature lists) that may or may not matter to you. It also takes CompactFlash, so if you have any aspirations of moving up to a D200 or D2x-like camera in the future, the D70 will get you started with the right type of memory. If being limited to SD media doesn't bother you, then get the D50 and spend the money you saved on better lenses.
Blog Feeds
02-10 08:50 PM
Most lawyers that are versed in the H1B visa process, are getting busier and busier these days. As we are nearing the April 1, 2010 filing deadline for the H1B visa. Many speculations out there as to when will the Cap be reached this year. The economy is still in recovery mode, and employers are careful before hiring. Yet, many Immigration experts feel the Cap will be met early this year, but when is the big question.
With drastic changes to the Labor Condition Application (http://www.visalawyerblog.com/2009/07/icert_portal_for_lca_filing.html)process (now taking more than 7 days to process), as well as unreasonable denials (http://www.visalawyerblog.com/2009/08/h1b_visa_lawyer_about_icert_wo.html), planning early is the key to a successful H1B case this year. But in this post, I want to go back to the basics, the Cap and the legislative background.
Background
On October 21, 1998 Congress passed, and the President signed into law, the much debated American Competitiveness and Workforce Improvement Act of 1998, Pub. L. No. 105-277 (hereinafter ACWIA). This legislation was first introduced by Senator Spencer Abraham (R-MI), the Chairman of the Senate Subcommittee on Immigration, in response to the inadequate numbers of H-1B visas available in any fiscal year. As part of the Immigration Act of 1990, Congress imposed a 65,000 per year cap on these visas. In 1997, the cap was reached prior to the end of the fiscal year. The situation grew to crisis proportions in fiscal year 1998 when all 65,000 visas numbers were taken in May of 1998.
In early March 1998, Senator Abraham introduced a bill entitled, "The American Competitiveness Act." The legislation was introduced on the heels of numerous reports and hearings concerning the high tech worker shortage in the United States. The primary goal of the legislation was to address the looming exhaustion of the H-1B professional or specialty occupation worker visa numbers. (http://www.h1b.biz/lawyer-attorney-1137085.html)
The ACWIA went through many different stages before an agreement could be reached. A complete elimination of the cap had originally been proposed by Senator Abraham. The legislation was then modified to increase the number of H-1B visa numbers available during the government fiscal year; provide additional funds for scholarships in the computer science and mathematics areas; increase enforcement of the Department of Labor component of the H-1B visa process; and provide clarification on the prevailing wage requirements of the process. The legislation also addressed permanent residence by providing for an extension of the H-1B visa should a permanent residence petition be pending, and through restructuring the allocation of the employment-based immigrant visa numbers.
This legislative game between conservative isolationists/liberal protectors of the U.S. workforce and moderate Democrats and Republicans supporting business needs and demands, caused chaos among U.S.-based businesses in need of skilled professional workers. From May 11, 1998 until October 1, 1998 U.S. businesses, research institutions and other organizations were unable to recruit foreign workers as temporary professionals. With the U.S. economy still booming and unemployment rates remaining at an all-time low, businesses, especially in the high tech sector, encountered many problems as a result of the cut-off in H-1B visa availability. These problems included, but were not limited to, taking employees off the U.S. payroll, sending employees back to their home country or to sites outside the U.S. as well as the termination of some critical development projects.
Requirements in the Statute
The ACWIA purportedly balances the need for increased professional visas numbers for foreign workers and the desire to protect the U.S. workforce. The following is a summary of the significant changes made by the legislation.
A. Temporary Increase in the Number of Professional Visas Available
There will be an increase from 65,000 to 115,000 visas for fiscal year 1999 and 2000 (through September 30, 2000). In fiscal year 2001, 107,500 visas will be available. Beginning October 1, 2001 the numbers will revert back to 65,000.
B. Electronic Postings
LCA notices may be posted electronically in situations without a bargaining representative. This provision was effective upon date of enactment.
C. Attestations Required for Employers Dependent Upon Foreign Professionals
U.S. employers of 51 or more employees, whose workforce is comprised of 15% or more foreign nationals in the H-1B category are considered dependent employers and must make certain attestations. Employers will also be considered dependent if they employ 26- 50 full time employees and have more than 12 H-1B employees or if they employ 7 -25 employees and have more than 7 H-1B employees.
The dependent employer must attest that it has not and will not displace a U.S. worker within 90 days before and 90 days after filing the visa application. This attestation carries through to employers who place employees at another worksite. The H-1B dependent employer must also attest that it has taken good faith steps to recruit U.S. workers using industry wide standards and has offered the position to any U.S. worker who is equally or better qualified for the job the foreign worker is sought.
H-1B employees with a Master�s degree or a salary of $60,000 or higher are not included in the attestation requirements and for the first 6 months following the implementation will not be included in the dependent employer calculation.
D. Increased Enforcement and Penalties for Violations
The Department of Labor may fine employers between $1,000-$35,000 per violation and preclude participation in the H-1B program for up to three years.
E. Back Benching H-1B Employees
Employers must pay H-1B nonimmigrants the wage stated on the H-1B petition even if the beneficiary is in nonproductive status. This does not apply to non-productive time due to non work related factors.
F. Benefits
Employers must offer foreign workers benefits and eligibility for insurance, disability, retirement and savings plans, stock options, etc., on the same basis as offerings made to U.S. workers.
G. Additional Fee for Use of H-1B Program
Beginning December 1, 1998, employers are required to pay an additional fee of $500 for an initial H-1B petition and for the first extension. These fees are to be used to support job training programs and scholarships for U.S. workers.
H. Prevailing Wage Computations
For institutions of higher education, related or affiliated non-profit entities or non profit or governmental research organizations, the prevailing wage shall take into account employees at such institutions in the area of employment.
I. Academic Honoraria
Payments of honoraria may now be made to B-1 and B-2 visitors for usual academic activity lasting 9 days at an academic institution or affiliated non-profit entity or a non-profit governmental research organization. No more than 5 honorarium may be received within a six month period.
Employers based in the U.S. now have a temporary reprieve when hiring foreign professionals. However, it is uncertain whether the 65,000 visas for this fiscal year will be adequate to meet the demand for this year and next. Some government officials estimate that visas will be unavailable as early as the beginning of May 2010. In addition, it is still unclear what is on the legislative horizon, reform or not. Pro Immigrants want to come with a proposal to reform legal immigration. U.S. employers employing foreign nationals in any capacity would be well advised to carefully monitor future legislative and regulatory proposals on the horizon. All I can say is that if you plan on hiring a foreign worker, you better call your lawyer now!!!
More... (http://www.visalawyerblog.com/2010/02/h1b_visa_lawyer_the_filing_sea.html)
With drastic changes to the Labor Condition Application (http://www.visalawyerblog.com/2009/07/icert_portal_for_lca_filing.html)process (now taking more than 7 days to process), as well as unreasonable denials (http://www.visalawyerblog.com/2009/08/h1b_visa_lawyer_about_icert_wo.html), planning early is the key to a successful H1B case this year. But in this post, I want to go back to the basics, the Cap and the legislative background.
Background
On October 21, 1998 Congress passed, and the President signed into law, the much debated American Competitiveness and Workforce Improvement Act of 1998, Pub. L. No. 105-277 (hereinafter ACWIA). This legislation was first introduced by Senator Spencer Abraham (R-MI), the Chairman of the Senate Subcommittee on Immigration, in response to the inadequate numbers of H-1B visas available in any fiscal year. As part of the Immigration Act of 1990, Congress imposed a 65,000 per year cap on these visas. In 1997, the cap was reached prior to the end of the fiscal year. The situation grew to crisis proportions in fiscal year 1998 when all 65,000 visas numbers were taken in May of 1998.
In early March 1998, Senator Abraham introduced a bill entitled, "The American Competitiveness Act." The legislation was introduced on the heels of numerous reports and hearings concerning the high tech worker shortage in the United States. The primary goal of the legislation was to address the looming exhaustion of the H-1B professional or specialty occupation worker visa numbers. (http://www.h1b.biz/lawyer-attorney-1137085.html)
The ACWIA went through many different stages before an agreement could be reached. A complete elimination of the cap had originally been proposed by Senator Abraham. The legislation was then modified to increase the number of H-1B visa numbers available during the government fiscal year; provide additional funds for scholarships in the computer science and mathematics areas; increase enforcement of the Department of Labor component of the H-1B visa process; and provide clarification on the prevailing wage requirements of the process. The legislation also addressed permanent residence by providing for an extension of the H-1B visa should a permanent residence petition be pending, and through restructuring the allocation of the employment-based immigrant visa numbers.
This legislative game between conservative isolationists/liberal protectors of the U.S. workforce and moderate Democrats and Republicans supporting business needs and demands, caused chaos among U.S.-based businesses in need of skilled professional workers. From May 11, 1998 until October 1, 1998 U.S. businesses, research institutions and other organizations were unable to recruit foreign workers as temporary professionals. With the U.S. economy still booming and unemployment rates remaining at an all-time low, businesses, especially in the high tech sector, encountered many problems as a result of the cut-off in H-1B visa availability. These problems included, but were not limited to, taking employees off the U.S. payroll, sending employees back to their home country or to sites outside the U.S. as well as the termination of some critical development projects.
Requirements in the Statute
The ACWIA purportedly balances the need for increased professional visas numbers for foreign workers and the desire to protect the U.S. workforce. The following is a summary of the significant changes made by the legislation.
A. Temporary Increase in the Number of Professional Visas Available
There will be an increase from 65,000 to 115,000 visas for fiscal year 1999 and 2000 (through September 30, 2000). In fiscal year 2001, 107,500 visas will be available. Beginning October 1, 2001 the numbers will revert back to 65,000.
B. Electronic Postings
LCA notices may be posted electronically in situations without a bargaining representative. This provision was effective upon date of enactment.
C. Attestations Required for Employers Dependent Upon Foreign Professionals
U.S. employers of 51 or more employees, whose workforce is comprised of 15% or more foreign nationals in the H-1B category are considered dependent employers and must make certain attestations. Employers will also be considered dependent if they employ 26- 50 full time employees and have more than 12 H-1B employees or if they employ 7 -25 employees and have more than 7 H-1B employees.
The dependent employer must attest that it has not and will not displace a U.S. worker within 90 days before and 90 days after filing the visa application. This attestation carries through to employers who place employees at another worksite. The H-1B dependent employer must also attest that it has taken good faith steps to recruit U.S. workers using industry wide standards and has offered the position to any U.S. worker who is equally or better qualified for the job the foreign worker is sought.
H-1B employees with a Master�s degree or a salary of $60,000 or higher are not included in the attestation requirements and for the first 6 months following the implementation will not be included in the dependent employer calculation.
D. Increased Enforcement and Penalties for Violations
The Department of Labor may fine employers between $1,000-$35,000 per violation and preclude participation in the H-1B program for up to three years.
E. Back Benching H-1B Employees
Employers must pay H-1B nonimmigrants the wage stated on the H-1B petition even if the beneficiary is in nonproductive status. This does not apply to non-productive time due to non work related factors.
F. Benefits
Employers must offer foreign workers benefits and eligibility for insurance, disability, retirement and savings plans, stock options, etc., on the same basis as offerings made to U.S. workers.
G. Additional Fee for Use of H-1B Program
Beginning December 1, 1998, employers are required to pay an additional fee of $500 for an initial H-1B petition and for the first extension. These fees are to be used to support job training programs and scholarships for U.S. workers.
H. Prevailing Wage Computations
For institutions of higher education, related or affiliated non-profit entities or non profit or governmental research organizations, the prevailing wage shall take into account employees at such institutions in the area of employment.
I. Academic Honoraria
Payments of honoraria may now be made to B-1 and B-2 visitors for usual academic activity lasting 9 days at an academic institution or affiliated non-profit entity or a non-profit governmental research organization. No more than 5 honorarium may be received within a six month period.
Employers based in the U.S. now have a temporary reprieve when hiring foreign professionals. However, it is uncertain whether the 65,000 visas for this fiscal year will be adequate to meet the demand for this year and next. Some government officials estimate that visas will be unavailable as early as the beginning of May 2010. In addition, it is still unclear what is on the legislative horizon, reform or not. Pro Immigrants want to come with a proposal to reform legal immigration. U.S. employers employing foreign nationals in any capacity would be well advised to carefully monitor future legislative and regulatory proposals on the horizon. All I can say is that if you plan on hiring a foreign worker, you better call your lawyer now!!!
More... (http://www.visalawyerblog.com/2010/02/h1b_visa_lawyer_the_filing_sea.html)
2011 love poems for your oyfriend.
nixstor
12-08 06:17 PM
Hi
Does any one have contacts in websites like Rediff.com, Samachar.com so that we can put a banner and advt many companies when they lauch new products they put it there. For Eg Airtel similar to Reliance India call, has put a banner on samachar.com
What makes you think that they will do it for free? Unfortunately, I tried contacting some websites. I couldnt elicit a resposne even. their prominent audience are outside of India and in Indian cities. How ever they dont seem to be concerned. We might need some back door connections for these people to get their attention and spread the word.
Does any one have contacts in websites like Rediff.com, Samachar.com so that we can put a banner and advt many companies when they lauch new products they put it there. For Eg Airtel similar to Reliance India call, has put a banner on samachar.com
What makes you think that they will do it for free? Unfortunately, I tried contacting some websites. I couldnt elicit a resposne even. their prominent audience are outside of India and in Indian cities. How ever they dont seem to be concerned. We might need some back door connections for these people to get their attention and spread the word.
more...
hopefulgc
08-03 02:25 PM
I like the idea of linking to the High-5 campaign a lot.
$5 sounds like a resonable donation for replies to a harrowing immigration question from experts who have lived it, seen it, done it.
BTW... Could we have a link that bring one to the paypal page directly where you could choose from a drop-down from $5, $10, $20... More like one click donation.
This would save potential donors from having to sift through the Contribution page and locate the place to click to get to the paypal page. It is likely lead to a lot of "conversions".
Just a thought
$5 sounds like a resonable donation for replies to a harrowing immigration question from experts who have lived it, seen it, done it.
BTW... Could we have a link that bring one to the paypal page directly where you could choose from a drop-down from $5, $10, $20... More like one click donation.
This would save potential donors from having to sift through the Contribution page and locate the place to click to get to the paypal page. It is likely lead to a lot of "conversions".
Just a thought
satishbsk
08-05 11:01 AM
When was ur recent visa issued?
If it is more than 1 year then G-825A wont be cross checked with the info what you gave on DS-157.
____________________
Contirbuted $280 so far
If it is more than 1 year then G-825A wont be cross checked with the info what you gave on DS-157.
____________________
Contirbuted $280 so far
more...
485Mbe4001
11-10 02:34 PM
One of the funniest movies i have ever seen.:)..'swiss cake hai, thoda khao, thoda feko'
I think we should still concentrate on taking to Sen. McCains office. Immigration reform was his pet project and now that the election is over he can muster up the bipartisan effort required to move this forward. Immigration is not high on Obamas agenda and i doubt you will see action from him on that issue. The other option is to keep pushing for the 5882 during the lame duck session.
Meeting the first lady will be a waste of time and efforts...imo.
Have you heard of "Jaane Bhi Do Yaaro"? Jalaluddin Akbar is a character in Ramayan and Mahabharat. Here is a proof.
.
I think we should still concentrate on taking to Sen. McCains office. Immigration reform was his pet project and now that the election is over he can muster up the bipartisan effort required to move this forward. Immigration is not high on Obamas agenda and i doubt you will see action from him on that issue. The other option is to keep pushing for the 5882 during the lame duck session.
Meeting the first lady will be a waste of time and efforts...imo.
Have you heard of "Jaane Bhi Do Yaaro"? Jalaluddin Akbar is a character in Ramayan and Mahabharat. Here is a proof.
.
2010 love poems for oyfriend you
rkm
08-16 10:00 AM
Why dont you put a counter in the excel sheet based on the pending cases, will know how many people are in line to get approval.
I observed this repeatedly, a gmail user "prakashnetmkt" has been deleting all data repeatedly and I believe intentionally. I have reverted back to the old revision again.
I have modified some permissions, so now you do have to login to be able to edit. Still it is easy to mess up the data if you want t
Link below:
http://spreadsheets.google.com/ccc?key=pQG8H7vLQOz5-YnFYQw71PA&t=6902263567496904009&guest
I observed this repeatedly, a gmail user "prakashnetmkt" has been deleting all data repeatedly and I believe intentionally. I have reverted back to the old revision again.
I have modified some permissions, so now you do have to login to be able to edit. Still it is easy to mess up the data if you want t
Link below:
http://spreadsheets.google.com/ccc?key=pQG8H7vLQOz5-YnFYQw71PA&t=6902263567496904009&guest
more...
Aah_GC
10-24 07:53 PM
Thanks to all of your replies. Much appreciated.
I think you would have to fill out W7 to apply for ITIN. So, should I get my father to sign on the form right away?
I think you would have to fill out W7 to apply for ITIN. So, should I get my father to sign on the form right away?
hair irthday love poems
gcisadawg
01-01 12:07 AM
cygent,
Congratulations! I hope your $-485 gets approved soon!
-GCisaDawg
Congratulations! I hope your $-485 gets approved soon!
-GCisaDawg
more...
gcisadawg
02-03 02:12 PM
hello boss...
whoever is replying to my thread...
iam not faking or frauding anything ..and you guys dont have any right to tell me.
I had a very nice job back in my home country and iam well experienced guy..
unfortunately due to some personal reasons nothing strike me in my way.
u guys dont have to be so rude.
thought i will get help from this forum but not a negative response
thanku very much
I understand you are experienced and had a great job at home! But do you understand that you have already broken the law?
whoever is replying to my thread...
iam not faking or frauding anything ..and you guys dont have any right to tell me.
I had a very nice job back in my home country and iam well experienced guy..
unfortunately due to some personal reasons nothing strike me in my way.
u guys dont have to be so rude.
thought i will get help from this forum but not a negative response
thanku very much
I understand you are experienced and had a great job at home! But do you understand that you have already broken the law?
hot i love you poems for your
mbartosik
04-10 09:32 PM
I posted a few days ago here
http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/showthread.php?t=544
For those people on 1 year extensions (or near end of 6 years) they cannot refile without perfect timing because otherwise the labor would be cancelled when filing, and thus PERM would not be outstanding for greater than 12 months.
Also if your job has been in DoL and BEC for 4 years and is in the technoology business then it is likely that the description has changed enough to make an identical filing untrue, just because technology changes and thus skills requirements do, and thus PD is not kept because the job is not identical. Also DoL has not defined "how equal" the application must be to qualify to keep the PD.
Thus we need a law to allow keeping the PD even if the job description has changed.
Also it would be good to allow people to file PERM without withdrawing their Labor app. However, this might flood PERM, because too many people might do that.
My current estimate is that BEC will process my application within about 12 months, if their 18 month estimate is right. But it would take 6 months of recruitment effort plus overhead to do PERM -- maybe or 9 months total, and then two months waiting for PERM -- total 11 months. Saving 1 month. But the PERM queue could grow too.
If I trust BECs on their estimate it is not worth the hassel of PERM, but should I trust someone who's estimates have been wrong two or three times before?
What is also needed is an "insurance policy" if BECs do not deliver on their promise of only 18 more months, but it would be hard to get law made on this. For example, after 18 month deadline, the assumption could be that all remaining applications are valid and allowed to proceed UNLESS BEC later demonstrates a fraudulant application. Otherwise people are always in the situation of DoL saying "just another X months". This would also allow BECs after 18 months to change mode into just looking for fraud which should be easier to do than qualifying the case.
There is also an issue of employers not wanting to file PERM, because they know that they have an endentured / captive employee and the BECs are doing their dirty work. So it is important to break this chain.
So in summary law changes:
1) Allow PD to be kept even if employer withdrawns labor, changes description, or refiles with PERM. After some date any labor application unprocessed by BEC would give the immigrant a guarenteed priority date.
2) Consider allowing concurrent PERM filing.
3) If DoL does not meet its own target (which is well behind congress's target), then all outstanding applications are assumed valid and allowed to proceed as if certified, unless the application is later shown to be frivolent or clearly fraudulant. Leaving BECs to just "skim check" for fraud and stupid applications after 18 months.
http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/showthread.php?t=544
For those people on 1 year extensions (or near end of 6 years) they cannot refile without perfect timing because otherwise the labor would be cancelled when filing, and thus PERM would not be outstanding for greater than 12 months.
Also if your job has been in DoL and BEC for 4 years and is in the technoology business then it is likely that the description has changed enough to make an identical filing untrue, just because technology changes and thus skills requirements do, and thus PD is not kept because the job is not identical. Also DoL has not defined "how equal" the application must be to qualify to keep the PD.
Thus we need a law to allow keeping the PD even if the job description has changed.
Also it would be good to allow people to file PERM without withdrawing their Labor app. However, this might flood PERM, because too many people might do that.
My current estimate is that BEC will process my application within about 12 months, if their 18 month estimate is right. But it would take 6 months of recruitment effort plus overhead to do PERM -- maybe or 9 months total, and then two months waiting for PERM -- total 11 months. Saving 1 month. But the PERM queue could grow too.
If I trust BECs on their estimate it is not worth the hassel of PERM, but should I trust someone who's estimates have been wrong two or three times before?
What is also needed is an "insurance policy" if BECs do not deliver on their promise of only 18 more months, but it would be hard to get law made on this. For example, after 18 month deadline, the assumption could be that all remaining applications are valid and allowed to proceed UNLESS BEC later demonstrates a fraudulant application. Otherwise people are always in the situation of DoL saying "just another X months". This would also allow BECs after 18 months to change mode into just looking for fraud which should be easier to do than qualifying the case.
There is also an issue of employers not wanting to file PERM, because they know that they have an endentured / captive employee and the BECs are doing their dirty work. So it is important to break this chain.
So in summary law changes:
1) Allow PD to be kept even if employer withdrawns labor, changes description, or refiles with PERM. After some date any labor application unprocessed by BEC would give the immigrant a guarenteed priority date.
2) Consider allowing concurrent PERM filing.
3) If DoL does not meet its own target (which is well behind congress's target), then all outstanding applications are assumed valid and allowed to proceed as if certified, unless the application is later shown to be frivolent or clearly fraudulant. Leaving BECs to just "skim check" for fraud and stupid applications after 18 months.
more...
house oyfriend poems,short love
mohican
02-18 06:17 PM
raj 1998-i hope u realize that ur question/comment is not in synch with the theme for this thread. Please ensure that you post your questions/comment on the appropriate thread so as to be able to get some kind of response.
tattoo i miss you oyfriend poems.
viswanadh73
01-04 08:47 AM
hi gjoe,
thanks for your reply. now EB3 Priority dates are gone back to 2001. say there is no visa numbers available after the 485 applications processed which are submitted in july and aug 2007. then waht they do? they have to keep the processed applications aside untill the visa numbers available right? so at that time which one become priority is Labour filing date or 485 RD?
thanks for your reply. now EB3 Priority dates are gone back to 2001. say there is no visa numbers available after the 485 applications processed which are submitted in july and aug 2007. then waht they do? they have to keep the processed applications aside untill the visa numbers available right? so at that time which one become priority is Labour filing date or 485 RD?
more...
pictures love poems for oyfriend.
ultimo
10-02 10:03 AM
u can apply 4 student loan . Even if ur credit is bad u will get SL
dresses love poems for ur oyfriend.
jamesingham
06-22 04:20 PM
Mine is the same company that applied for EB2 in the first place
more...
makeup Love+poems+for+oyfriend
rbharol
08-23 02:25 AM
Any US postgraduate degree + 3 years prior to I-140/I-485. Read the text of the bill for more details.
Dixie and Other experts,
See copy-paste from the bill below:
It seems that Aliens who have earned Masters degree outside US 'AND' has
3 years experience in related field are listed along with those who have
masters or higher degree from US.
check sections (F), (I) and (K) below.
Does it mean non-US masters with 3 years exp too shall be excluded from
the numbers quota?
--------------- copy paste begins --------------------------------
WORKERS EDUCATED IN THE UNITED STATES
SEC. 201. UNITED STATES EDUCATED IMMIGRANTS.
(a) IN GENERAL.�Section 201(b)(1) of the Immigration and Nationality Act
(8 U.S.C. 1151(b)(1)) is amended by adding at the end the following:
��(F) Aliens who have earned a master�s or higher degree from an accredited
United States university.
��(G) Aliens who have been awarded medical specialty certification based on
post-doc-toral training and experience in the United States preceding
their application for an immi grant visa under section 203(b).
��(H) Aliens who will perform labor in shortage occupations designated by
the Secretary of Labor for blanket certification under section
212(a)(5)(A) as lacking sufficient United States workers able, willing,
qualified, and available for such occupations and for which the
employment of aliens will not adversely affect the terms and conditions
of similarly employed United States workers.
��(I) Aliens who have earned a master�s degree or higher in science,
technology, engineering, or math and have been working in a related
field in the United States in a nonimmigrant status during the 3-year
period preceding their application for an immigrant visa under section
203(b).
��(J) Aliens described in subparagraph (A) or (B) of section 203(b)(1) or who
have received a national interest waiver under section 203(b)(2)(B).
��(K) The spouse and minor children of an alien who is admitted as an
employment-based immigrant under section 203(b).��.
------------------------------ Copy paste ends --------------------
Dixie and Other experts,
See copy-paste from the bill below:
It seems that Aliens who have earned Masters degree outside US 'AND' has
3 years experience in related field are listed along with those who have
masters or higher degree from US.
check sections (F), (I) and (K) below.
Does it mean non-US masters with 3 years exp too shall be excluded from
the numbers quota?
--------------- copy paste begins --------------------------------
WORKERS EDUCATED IN THE UNITED STATES
SEC. 201. UNITED STATES EDUCATED IMMIGRANTS.
(a) IN GENERAL.�Section 201(b)(1) of the Immigration and Nationality Act
(8 U.S.C. 1151(b)(1)) is amended by adding at the end the following:
��(F) Aliens who have earned a master�s or higher degree from an accredited
United States university.
��(G) Aliens who have been awarded medical specialty certification based on
post-doc-toral training and experience in the United States preceding
their application for an immi grant visa under section 203(b).
��(H) Aliens who will perform labor in shortage occupations designated by
the Secretary of Labor for blanket certification under section
212(a)(5)(A) as lacking sufficient United States workers able, willing,
qualified, and available for such occupations and for which the
employment of aliens will not adversely affect the terms and conditions
of similarly employed United States workers.
��(I) Aliens who have earned a master�s degree or higher in science,
technology, engineering, or math and have been working in a related
field in the United States in a nonimmigrant status during the 3-year
period preceding their application for an immigrant visa under section
203(b).
��(J) Aliens described in subparagraph (A) or (B) of section 203(b)(1) or who
have received a national interest waiver under section 203(b)(2)(B).
��(K) The spouse and minor children of an alien who is admitted as an
employment-based immigrant under section 203(b).��.
------------------------------ Copy paste ends --------------------
girlfriend Love+poems+for+oyfriend
ivgclive
10-29 01:53 PM
Because,
You have been threatened
You have been fired
You have been unemployed...
...You want to try something against them. But what are we trying to prove?
Take it to court only if you think you want to sue them and get money. As other said, it is an expensive process on your side too.
If you just want to prove it is a "wrongful termination", you don't have to. In US eveyone knows what is "fired" means in this economy.
If you just want to be reinstated in the same position, it is difficult to continue the job in a private company, if they are not willing to employ you.
In few days, the urge will go away.
You will realise that your new job is much better than the one you left. Just enjoy.
You can lodge a complaint with DOL, USCIS, sue your employer, prove 'wrongful termination' etc. But unncessary load to carry.
Good luck with your new job.
Hi Guys,
I am based out of NJ and was working for an imports company for more than 8 years. I have an approved I-140 with this company. This company wanted me to sign an overly broad non compete agreement which would be valid for 5 years after termination. I refused to sign this agreement and I was verbally threatened with dire consequences if I did not sign. They fired me yesterday for not signing it and also stated that they are canceling my H1. Would this be treated as wrongful termination? Is there any way that I can file a complaint with the DOL? Has the complaint to be filed thru an attorney or can I do it myself?
Good news is another company has already applied for my H1 transfer.
I will appreciate all suggestions and advices for which I thank you in advance.
You have been threatened
You have been fired
You have been unemployed...
...You want to try something against them. But what are we trying to prove?
Take it to court only if you think you want to sue them and get money. As other said, it is an expensive process on your side too.
If you just want to prove it is a "wrongful termination", you don't have to. In US eveyone knows what is "fired" means in this economy.
If you just want to be reinstated in the same position, it is difficult to continue the job in a private company, if they are not willing to employ you.
In few days, the urge will go away.
You will realise that your new job is much better than the one you left. Just enjoy.
You can lodge a complaint with DOL, USCIS, sue your employer, prove 'wrongful termination' etc. But unncessary load to carry.
Good luck with your new job.
Hi Guys,
I am based out of NJ and was working for an imports company for more than 8 years. I have an approved I-140 with this company. This company wanted me to sign an overly broad non compete agreement which would be valid for 5 years after termination. I refused to sign this agreement and I was verbally threatened with dire consequences if I did not sign. They fired me yesterday for not signing it and also stated that they are canceling my H1. Would this be treated as wrongful termination? Is there any way that I can file a complaint with the DOL? Has the complaint to be filed thru an attorney or can I do it myself?
Good news is another company has already applied for my H1 transfer.
I will appreciate all suggestions and advices for which I thank you in advance.
hairstyles love poems boyfriend. love poems for a oyfriend you
jsb
05-20 07:18 AM
Your mention of 30 miles maximum, I believe, refers to distance to your work place. It is a lot of distance to commute at rush time. Nevertheless, Ferederick County is your best bet, where a small SFH or a good size TH can be found for your price.
BTW, why do you need "Lots of Indians". Don't you want to be part of the main stream if you have decided to live here?
I want to purchase an house in Washington DC/MD/VA. My office is close to Rockville. Please recommend the best place to buy an house based on the following criteria.
1> Very good school district
2> Low property tax
3> Very low crime rate
4> Rental value should be same as mortgage amount+insurance+PMI+property tax
5> Property values should be in 300K range max
6> Lot of Indians
9> Maximum distance to DC should not exceed 30 miles
10> Close to shopping places
BTW, why do you need "Lots of Indians". Don't you want to be part of the main stream if you have decided to live here?
I want to purchase an house in Washington DC/MD/VA. My office is close to Rockville. Please recommend the best place to buy an house based on the following criteria.
1> Very good school district
2> Low property tax
3> Very low crime rate
4> Rental value should be same as mortgage amount+insurance+PMI+property tax
5> Property values should be in 300K range max
6> Lot of Indians
9> Maximum distance to DC should not exceed 30 miles
10> Close to shopping places
rawmuk7
03-18 04:21 PM
If you really need help on this kind of case. Talk to Shah Peerally in Fremont, a good attorney.510-798-2742. He is accessible and good.
Thx.
Thx.
rviswa2007
07-14 01:54 PM
I sent my EAD extension documents on 7/9 via FedEx to Nebraska. They recvd it on 7/11 morning and got signature proof. Can you please let me know how many days it take for the check to be encashed? This will be helpful. Thanks!!
For private courier (non usps deliveries) there is different address please see in the Instruction on completing I-765 form on USCIS website.
I send my application via fedex today to following address..
For private courier (non-USPS) deliveries:
USCIS
Nebraska Service Center
850 S. Street
Lincoln, NE 68508-1225
For private courier (non usps deliveries) there is different address please see in the Instruction on completing I-765 form on USCIS website.
I send my application via fedex today to following address..
For private courier (non-USPS) deliveries:
USCIS
Nebraska Service Center
850 S. Street
Lincoln, NE 68508-1225
No comments:
Post a Comment