gjoe
10-05 11:07 AM
Are you a lawyer? :)
Lawsuit was done few years ago by Rajiv Khanna. Its big business for the lawyers. End result: nothing. So if you want to throw your money to the lawyers, be my guest.
God helps those who help themselves and not to those who throw money to the lawyers. If you want to help yourself, then help IV.
If we have a strong case we won't end up in monetory loses. BTW USCIS has plenty of money now to pay with all those new fees they collected for the applications.
Lawyers will charge money for their service, but finding a good lawyer is what we have to do.
PS: Pardon my typos and spellings
Lawsuit was done few years ago by Rajiv Khanna. Its big business for the lawyers. End result: nothing. So if you want to throw your money to the lawyers, be my guest.
God helps those who help themselves and not to those who throw money to the lawyers. If you want to help yourself, then help IV.
If we have a strong case we won't end up in monetory loses. BTW USCIS has plenty of money now to pay with all those new fees they collected for the applications.
Lawyers will charge money for their service, but finding a good lawyer is what we have to do.
PS: Pardon my typos and spellings
wallpaper Rose amp; hearts coloring page
bkshres
01-22 12:50 PM
I am also in similar situation.
I have pending I-485 and used AC21 to switch to the new company but I am still in H1B status. However, my wife is using EAD and she need to travel using AP.
Can anyone suggest whether there will be any issue in travelling outside USA, if I (Primary applicant) is still in H1B status but used AC-21 and wife is using EAD (has to use AP)?
Thanks in advance.
BK
I have pending I-485 and used AC21 to switch to the new company but I am still in H1B status. However, my wife is using EAD and she need to travel using AP.
Can anyone suggest whether there will be any issue in travelling outside USA, if I (Primary applicant) is still in H1B status but used AC-21 and wife is using EAD (has to use AP)?
Thanks in advance.
BK
kranti_veer
08-13 01:52 AM
looks like vldrao got his GC and took a hike ;)
Yea...expect to have Vldrao back after the visa bulletin is out.
Where is mr. rao?
Yea...expect to have Vldrao back after the visa bulletin is out.
Where is mr. rao?
2011 love hearts, arrow, roses
gccovet
09-04 10:12 AM
Question : If I get H1 transferred to NEWEMP (basically work on H1 and NOT EAD), and CURREMP revokes I-140, will this effect my GC process. I intend to work on H1 and keep on renewing EAD based on i-485 filed. NEWEMP will be providing AC21 letter which will be send to USCIS after I join them.
NO, I-485 filing > 180, also the I-140 is approved.
1. Will there be any effect to my GC process in case CURR Company revokes I-140?
No. if you send AC21 letter, you will not receive NOID (you might get RFE)
2. Can I keep on renewing EAD even though I would work on H1 with NewEMP?
Yes
Here is my thought -
If you are on H1B until Dec 2009, you will have to file H1B Extention for 7th Year (I am guessing you are in your second h1B renewal). For any reason if you get denial for I-485, your H1B extention will also be cancelled, remember extention was given to you on the basis of pending I-485 (GC).
so after DEC 2009 , it's the same wheather you are on EAD or H1B Extention.
Let say if you start using EAD now, you will have 1 yr 5 months left on your H1B. if there is something wrong with I-485, you can file H1B from different employer (this will not count against quota, as you have unsed 1 yr 5 month left on your H1B), go out of country and come back on H1B (you have more than 1 year left you can start another GC process :))
just my thought, you might want to validate this with any leagal expert.
Thank you Amit for your response.
GCCovet
NO, I-485 filing > 180, also the I-140 is approved.
1. Will there be any effect to my GC process in case CURR Company revokes I-140?
No. if you send AC21 letter, you will not receive NOID (you might get RFE)
2. Can I keep on renewing EAD even though I would work on H1 with NewEMP?
Yes
Here is my thought -
If you are on H1B until Dec 2009, you will have to file H1B Extention for 7th Year (I am guessing you are in your second h1B renewal). For any reason if you get denial for I-485, your H1B extention will also be cancelled, remember extention was given to you on the basis of pending I-485 (GC).
so after DEC 2009 , it's the same wheather you are on EAD or H1B Extention.
Let say if you start using EAD now, you will have 1 yr 5 months left on your H1B. if there is something wrong with I-485, you can file H1B from different employer (this will not count against quota, as you have unsed 1 yr 5 month left on your H1B), go out of country and come back on H1B (you have more than 1 year left you can start another GC process :))
just my thought, you might want to validate this with any leagal expert.
Thank you Amit for your response.
GCCovet
more...
pappu
02-11 10:10 AM
E-mail Matthai Chakko Kuruvila at mkuruvila@sfchronicle.com
has anyone sent email to this id? we need several people to write to reporters so that they can cover our issues.
thanks
has anyone sent email to this id? we need several people to write to reporters so that they can cover our issues.
thanks
nc14
05-14 09:10 PM
Thanks Guys, It is very reassuring to hear from you.
.................................................. ......................
$100 + $20 recurring
.................................................. ......................
$100 + $20 recurring
more...
kondur_007
10-30 12:17 PM
Thanks for your reply it was helpful.
BUt can any one tell me do we have to be on payroll for at least 6 months after you get Gc or can we on and off payroll and still be with the same employer for what ever length of time we stick to the same employer who filed GC..
Srh1: Please read my comments in the above two threads (thread links posted by bluez). I tried to summarize everything there.
As far as your above question is concerned: You will be just fine even if you are on and off the payroll (especially if the empolyer does not have the project for some time...meaning that on and off was triggerred by the employer); because it still shows YOUR intention to stay with the employer.
Feel free to ask any further questions (after going through above two threads) if you need any further info...I am not a lawyer but I will be happy to share what I know.
Good Luck.
BUt can any one tell me do we have to be on payroll for at least 6 months after you get Gc or can we on and off payroll and still be with the same employer for what ever length of time we stick to the same employer who filed GC..
Srh1: Please read my comments in the above two threads (thread links posted by bluez). I tried to summarize everything there.
As far as your above question is concerned: You will be just fine even if you are on and off the payroll (especially if the empolyer does not have the project for some time...meaning that on and off was triggerred by the employer); because it still shows YOUR intention to stay with the employer.
Feel free to ask any further questions (after going through above two threads) if you need any further info...I am not a lawyer but I will be happy to share what I know.
Good Luck.
2010 Roses coloring page
waltz
08-24 02:05 PM
I'm sorry if this has been posted before, but the show is based on the following study:
************************************************
Kauffman Foundation Study Points to �Brain-Drain� of Skilled U.S. Immigrant Entrepreneurs to Home Country
Contacts:
Barbara Pruitt, 816-932-1288, bpruitt@kauffman.org, Kauffman Foundation
Tom Phillips, 212-935-4655, comptwp@aol.com, Communication Partners
More than a million skilled foreign nationals in the United States, including doctors and scientists, face mounting visa backlog
(KANSAS CITY, Mo.) Aug. 22, 2007 � More than one million skilled immigrant workers, including scientists, engineers, doctors and researchers and their families, are competing for 120,000 permanent U.S. resident visas each year, creating a sizeable imbalance likely to fuel a �reverse brain-drain� with skilled workers returning to their home country, according to a new report released today by the Ewing Marion Kauffman Foundation.
The situation is even bleaker as the number of employment visas issued to immigrants from any single country is less than 10,000 per year with a wait time of several years.
�The United States benefits from having foreign-born innovators create their ideas in this country,� said Vivek Wadhwa, Wertheim fellow with the Harvard Law School and executive in residence at Duke University. �Their departures would be detrimental to U.S. economic well-being. And, when foreigners come to the United States, collaborate with Americans in developing and patenting new ideas, and employ those ideas in business in ways they could not readily do in their home countries, the world benefits.�
Conducted by researchers at Duke University, New York University and Harvard University, the study is the third in a series of studies focusing on immigrants� contributions to the competitiveness of the U.S. economy. Earlier research revealed a dramatic increase in the contributions of foreign nationals to U.S. intellectual property over an eight-year period.
In this study, "Intellectual Property, the Immigration Backlog, and a Reverse Brain-Drain," researchers offer a more refined measure of this rise in contributions of foreign nationals to U.S. intellectual property and seek to explain this increase with an analysis of the immigrant-visa backlog for skilled workers. The key finding from this research is that the number of skilled workers waiting for visas is significantly larger than the number that can be admitted to the United States. This imbalance creates the potential for a sizeable reverse brain-drain from the United States to the skilled workers� home countries.
The earlier studies, �America�s New Immigrant Entrepreneurs� and �Entrepreneurship, Education and Immigration: America�s New Immigrant Entrepreneurs, Part II,� documented that one in four engineering and technology companies founded between 1995 and 2005 had an immigrant founder. Researchers found that these companies employed 450,000 workers and generated $52 billion in revenue in 2006. Indian immigrants founded more companies than the next four groups (from the United Kingdom, China, Taiwan and Japan) combined.
Furthermore, these companies� founders tended to be highly educated in science, technology, math and engineering-related disciplines, with 96 percent holding bachelor�s degrees and 75 percent holding master�s or PhD degrees.
Among key findings in the most recent report:
Foreign nationals residing in the United States were named as inventors or co-inventors in 25.6 percent of international patent applications filed from the United States in 2006. This represents an increase from 7.6 percent in 1998.
Foreign nationals contributed to more than half of the international patents filed by a number of large, multi-national companies, including Qualcomm (72 percent), Merck & Co. (65 percent), General Electric (64 percent), Siemens (63 percent) and Cisco (60 percent). Forty-one percent of the patents filed by the U.S. government had foreign nationals as inventors or co-inventors.
In 2006, 16.8 percent of international patent applications from the United States had an inventor or co-inventor with a Chinese-heritage name, representing an increase from 11.2 percent in 1998. The contribution of inventors with Indian-heritage names increased to 13.7 percent from 9.5 percent in the same period.
The total number of employment-based principals in the employment-based categories and their family members waiting for legal permanent residence in the United States in 2006 was estimated at 1,055,084. Additionally, there are an estimated 126,421 residents abroad also waiting for employment-based U.S. legal permanent residence, adding up to a worldwide total of 1,181,505.
Using data from the New Immigrant Survey, the authors find that, in 2003, approximately one in five new legal immigrants in the United States and about one in three employment-based new legal immigrants either planned to leave the United States or were uncertain about remaining. The authors had no data on how many foreign nationals have actually returned to their homelands.
�Given that the U.S. comparative advantage in the global economy is in creating knowledge and applying it to business, it behooves the country to consider how we might adjust policies to reduce the immigration backlog, encourage innovative foreign minds to remain in the country, and entice new innovators to come,� said Robert Litan, vice president of Research and Policy at the Kauffman Foundation.
About the research team
For more information about the Global Engineering and Entrepreneurship research at Duke University, visit http://www.globalizationresearch.com; visit http://www.law.harvard.edu/programs/lwp/ to learn about Harvard Law�s Labor and Worklife Program; and visit http://www.nyu.edu/ for more information about New York University.
Read the report
************************************************
Kauffman Foundation Study Points to �Brain-Drain� of Skilled U.S. Immigrant Entrepreneurs to Home Country
Contacts:
Barbara Pruitt, 816-932-1288, bpruitt@kauffman.org, Kauffman Foundation
Tom Phillips, 212-935-4655, comptwp@aol.com, Communication Partners
More than a million skilled foreign nationals in the United States, including doctors and scientists, face mounting visa backlog
(KANSAS CITY, Mo.) Aug. 22, 2007 � More than one million skilled immigrant workers, including scientists, engineers, doctors and researchers and their families, are competing for 120,000 permanent U.S. resident visas each year, creating a sizeable imbalance likely to fuel a �reverse brain-drain� with skilled workers returning to their home country, according to a new report released today by the Ewing Marion Kauffman Foundation.
The situation is even bleaker as the number of employment visas issued to immigrants from any single country is less than 10,000 per year with a wait time of several years.
�The United States benefits from having foreign-born innovators create their ideas in this country,� said Vivek Wadhwa, Wertheim fellow with the Harvard Law School and executive in residence at Duke University. �Their departures would be detrimental to U.S. economic well-being. And, when foreigners come to the United States, collaborate with Americans in developing and patenting new ideas, and employ those ideas in business in ways they could not readily do in their home countries, the world benefits.�
Conducted by researchers at Duke University, New York University and Harvard University, the study is the third in a series of studies focusing on immigrants� contributions to the competitiveness of the U.S. economy. Earlier research revealed a dramatic increase in the contributions of foreign nationals to U.S. intellectual property over an eight-year period.
In this study, "Intellectual Property, the Immigration Backlog, and a Reverse Brain-Drain," researchers offer a more refined measure of this rise in contributions of foreign nationals to U.S. intellectual property and seek to explain this increase with an analysis of the immigrant-visa backlog for skilled workers. The key finding from this research is that the number of skilled workers waiting for visas is significantly larger than the number that can be admitted to the United States. This imbalance creates the potential for a sizeable reverse brain-drain from the United States to the skilled workers� home countries.
The earlier studies, �America�s New Immigrant Entrepreneurs� and �Entrepreneurship, Education and Immigration: America�s New Immigrant Entrepreneurs, Part II,� documented that one in four engineering and technology companies founded between 1995 and 2005 had an immigrant founder. Researchers found that these companies employed 450,000 workers and generated $52 billion in revenue in 2006. Indian immigrants founded more companies than the next four groups (from the United Kingdom, China, Taiwan and Japan) combined.
Furthermore, these companies� founders tended to be highly educated in science, technology, math and engineering-related disciplines, with 96 percent holding bachelor�s degrees and 75 percent holding master�s or PhD degrees.
Among key findings in the most recent report:
Foreign nationals residing in the United States were named as inventors or co-inventors in 25.6 percent of international patent applications filed from the United States in 2006. This represents an increase from 7.6 percent in 1998.
Foreign nationals contributed to more than half of the international patents filed by a number of large, multi-national companies, including Qualcomm (72 percent), Merck & Co. (65 percent), General Electric (64 percent), Siemens (63 percent) and Cisco (60 percent). Forty-one percent of the patents filed by the U.S. government had foreign nationals as inventors or co-inventors.
In 2006, 16.8 percent of international patent applications from the United States had an inventor or co-inventor with a Chinese-heritage name, representing an increase from 11.2 percent in 1998. The contribution of inventors with Indian-heritage names increased to 13.7 percent from 9.5 percent in the same period.
The total number of employment-based principals in the employment-based categories and their family members waiting for legal permanent residence in the United States in 2006 was estimated at 1,055,084. Additionally, there are an estimated 126,421 residents abroad also waiting for employment-based U.S. legal permanent residence, adding up to a worldwide total of 1,181,505.
Using data from the New Immigrant Survey, the authors find that, in 2003, approximately one in five new legal immigrants in the United States and about one in three employment-based new legal immigrants either planned to leave the United States or were uncertain about remaining. The authors had no data on how many foreign nationals have actually returned to their homelands.
�Given that the U.S. comparative advantage in the global economy is in creating knowledge and applying it to business, it behooves the country to consider how we might adjust policies to reduce the immigration backlog, encourage innovative foreign minds to remain in the country, and entice new innovators to come,� said Robert Litan, vice president of Research and Policy at the Kauffman Foundation.
About the research team
For more information about the Global Engineering and Entrepreneurship research at Duke University, visit http://www.globalizationresearch.com; visit http://www.law.harvard.edu/programs/lwp/ to learn about Harvard Law�s Labor and Worklife Program; and visit http://www.nyu.edu/ for more information about New York University.
Read the report
more...
pointlesswait
05-05 10:08 AM
absurd..!!
hair heart coloring page, roses
akred
06-08 12:10 AM
But the letter doesn't seem to address the direct behaviour of the companies in question. Seems like a bunch of broader level issues were tackled - while true, it doesn't address H1B abuse in any way. Wasn't that the point?
I'm sure that is not addressed in this letter because from their POV there is no abuse.
The Senators are convieniently overlooking the fact that they need to get deadbeat departments like the DOL and USCIS to shape up. And where is their concern for the American worker when they make these departments process massive loads of illegals without providing additional funding?
I'm sure that is not addressed in this letter because from their POV there is no abuse.
The Senators are convieniently overlooking the fact that they need to get deadbeat departments like the DOL and USCIS to shape up. And where is their concern for the American worker when they make these departments process massive loads of illegals without providing additional funding?
more...
boreal
02-25 08:02 PM
I would like to ask the same question but a bit more specific.
For someone who is an MBA (Finance) with 7-8 yrs of Financial and HR benefits experience who wants to move to IT or IT related field what would you advice would be the best field to move to or best certification to take ?
Thanks
Field to move to would probably be SAP/Oracle Financials/PeopleSoft ..
For someone who is an MBA (Finance) with 7-8 yrs of Financial and HR benefits experience who wants to move to IT or IT related field what would you advice would be the best field to move to or best certification to take ?
Thanks
Field to move to would probably be SAP/Oracle Financials/PeopleSoft ..
hot Catholic Coloring Pages for
BharatPremi
07-18 01:06 PM
Depending upon the uscis announcement in a day or two (i.e,7/17 or 7/18)things may change for the short term so we will plan any specific action item after that.
But for now lets continue to urge everyone we know in Texas to join IV to continue pursuing our efforts as much intelligent, elite and vivid group for acheiving our goals and objectives.
Can I expect Conference call this Sunday (07/21) ? Please provide me the Phone number / Any password-Pin/ ANd time for the conference call.
But for now lets continue to urge everyone we know in Texas to join IV to continue pursuing our efforts as much intelligent, elite and vivid group for acheiving our goals and objectives.
Can I expect Conference call this Sunday (07/21) ? Please provide me the Phone number / Any password-Pin/ ANd time for the conference call.
more...
house Three hearts pierced by arrow
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)
tattoo Fuzzy Kitty with Hearts and
dalishi
10-13 02:54 PM
Thanks guys!!
more...
pictures My Heart is in Envelope
gkaplan
04-21 04:43 PM
Hello
My story is:
I've been on J2 for a while, it expires in May 2011. I have a EAD and currentlt I'm working for a company as a professional.I have a 5 years of Bs degree.
Questions are:
1. Can my employer apply for a Perm Cert for me if they want.
2. After getting the perm cert. can my employer file I 140 under EB3 for me?
3. Will I be eligible for premium processing for I 140 application, in 15 days?
4. Lets say all the above steps are accomplished and I got approved for I 140, all happened prior to May 2011 (this is the actual date my J visa and EAD expires).
a. Then I'll still be working with my current EAD, right?
b. Then what happens after May 2011?
c. DO I need to wait to file I 485 or can I file it right after my I 140 approved?
d. how can I legally work in the USA after my EAD from J visa expires, but if I have approved I 140.
thank you very much
My story is:
I've been on J2 for a while, it expires in May 2011. I have a EAD and currentlt I'm working for a company as a professional.I have a 5 years of Bs degree.
Questions are:
1. Can my employer apply for a Perm Cert for me if they want.
2. After getting the perm cert. can my employer file I 140 under EB3 for me?
3. Will I be eligible for premium processing for I 140 application, in 15 days?
4. Lets say all the above steps are accomplished and I got approved for I 140, all happened prior to May 2011 (this is the actual date my J visa and EAD expires).
a. Then I'll still be working with my current EAD, right?
b. Then what happens after May 2011?
c. DO I need to wait to file I 485 or can I file it right after my I 140 approved?
d. how can I legally work in the USA after my EAD from J visa expires, but if I have approved I 140.
thank you very much
dresses coloring pages of hearts and
Green.Tech
08-06 12:53 PM
In my particular case, when i signed the contract, the employer agreed to pay for my GC process. But as usual, My employer also did not follow the contract and when my labor was approved, he asked me to pay for the Labor and take care of GC application fees hence forth. I was kind of surprised and did argue with my employer. But Employer gave me an option to leave his company and move to a diff company if needed. But since the labor was approved and the current project was going fine, i thought of sticking with the company and agreed on paying the GC fees.
I dont know if we can really go and harass our employer to re-imburse the GC expenses as they know what they are doing and what are the consequences if they go back on their words..I think they know pretty well about all the loopholes in this immigration process.
I am sorry to learn that your employer backed down on its contract. Thanks for your input.
I dont know if we can really go and harass our employer to re-imburse the GC expenses as they know what they are doing and what are the consequences if they go back on their words..I think they know pretty well about all the loopholes in this immigration process.
I am sorry to learn that your employer backed down on its contract. Thanks for your input.
more...
makeup coloring pages of hearts and
FinalGC
05-12 05:02 PM
hopefulgc:
Are you willing???
Are you willing???
girlfriend coloring pages hearts
honge_kamyaab
11-30 09:24 AM
Remember I-140 is owned by your employer. If you quit the job your greencard process will start from PERM again with your new employer.
Portability applys six months after filing I-485.
Hope that helps.
Portability applys six months after filing I-485.
Hope that helps.
hairstyles coloring pages of hearts and
logiclife
04-02 10:15 AM
Somehow prove that you were undocumented(illegal) before Jan 2004 to claim that benefit.
If you were legally present and have always been legal then the benefit does not apply and you have to wait for your turn in the line for greencard.
If you were legally present and have always been legal then the benefit does not apply and you have to wait for your turn in the line for greencard.
sledge_hammer
02-09 03:44 PM
Please keep this thread alive ...
nonimmi
06-11 04:39 PM
Please keep all bilateral discussion between yourself. Most discussions are soon being targeted to personal criticism or attack. Please respect others views (which are following IV line of course) and be polite.
No comments:
Post a Comment