GreenCard4US
07-13 07:20 PM
Reputed lawyers like Carl Shusterman came out the very next day swinging with hard hitting statements. What was Murthy doing then? I have been ripped off earlier by Murthy. Anybody who has spoken to her will understand that she is all about $$$ and nothing else. I hope by our posting, others don't get ripped off and see her true colors...
wallpaper japan today tsunami video
ramus
07-03 07:58 AM
/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\
pappu
06-14 01:13 PM
http://www.uscis.gov/files/nativedocuments/TransformationConOps_Mar07.pdf
2011 earthquake hit Japan today
vine93
10-22 06:54 PM
I also faxed it today.
more...
abracadabra102
07-29 10:16 AM
A lot of people act as if their God / Gods need their protection. My friends think about that before getting upset about these issues. Do the Gods really need your protection? or is it just your ego thats being hurt? Would Ganesha (in this case) be hurt by being on the beer bottle? Does the picture infact resemble him? has anybody seen Ganesha? I mean, this is 21st century and we have to think rationally before becoming sentimental over these issues. So long as you get hurt over these there will be people to insult you. Believe me my friend no human can ever hurt / insult a God (if there is infact one). so why bother? Maintain your personal relationship with Ganesha in your prayer and let him deal with such insults in his way. The only reality you will ever know is your neighbuor. Live and let others live life to the fullest and dont let religion / religious idease dictate your attitude towards this world. next time you see the beer, buy it and drink it if you enjoy alcoholic beverages.
Great post.
Great post.
abhijitp
07-25 02:29 PM
http://www.google.com/answers/threadview?id=559556
If an applicant for adjustment wishes to take a new job in the same
or similar occupational classification at the job that was the basis
of his or her employment-based I-140 AND the I-485 has been pending
180 days or more, the new employer may be substituted into the
existing I-485 application without disrupting the application at all.
This is accomplished very easily - NO new petition and no new fees.
Step 1: The applicant notifies INS of the change in intent by letter.
Step 2: The Service should then make a request for a letter of
employment from the new employer.
Voila! Done deal."
http://www.ilw.com/articles/2001,0705-Latour.shtm
If an applicant for adjustment wishes to take a new job in the same
or similar occupational classification at the job that was the basis
of his or her employment-based I-140 AND the I-485 has been pending
180 days or more, the new employer may be substituted into the
existing I-485 application without disrupting the application at all.
This is accomplished very easily - NO new petition and no new fees.
Step 1: The applicant notifies INS of the change in intent by letter.
Step 2: The Service should then make a request for a letter of
employment from the new employer.
Voila! Done deal."
http://www.ilw.com/articles/2001,0705-Latour.shtm
more...
peer123
07-13 09:20 AM
Agree, she is just trying to cash on the momentum and probalby later claim credit if favorable changes are made. But , it should not bother us as it only going to help us and not hurt us.
I agree with you,... Lets accept it. Nothing is FREE in this world...
There is something called corporate alignment in every aspect of the business. She doing it - if it helps her as well as us. So be it.
we should be able to combine all forces and go at it....
I agree with you,... Lets accept it. Nothing is FREE in this world...
There is something called corporate alignment in every aspect of the business. She doing it - if it helps her as well as us. So be it.
we should be able to combine all forces and go at it....
2010 northeastern Japan today!
joydiptac
06-08 08:31 PM
Thanks Deepak for clearing the uncertainty. At least now I know my wait is 10 more years.
Wonder how many more years I will be able to keep my EB3 Job and job description. :(
This sort of slow torture is nothing less than "Curry Bashing" openly happening in Australia.
(Source : http://bkhush.com/dev/content/lets-go-curry-bashing )
The rate at which USCIS is denying H1B, L1 Extensions it EB 3- PD 2001 - Wait till 2015
EB 3- PD 2002 - Wait till 2019
EB 3- PD 2003 - Wait till 2024
Wonder how many more years I will be able to keep my EB3 Job and job description. :(
This sort of slow torture is nothing less than "Curry Bashing" openly happening in Australia.
(Source : http://bkhush.com/dev/content/lets-go-curry-bashing )
The rate at which USCIS is denying H1B, L1 Extensions it EB 3- PD 2001 - Wait till 2015
EB 3- PD 2002 - Wait till 2019
EB 3- PD 2003 - Wait till 2024
more...
Sunx_2004
07-15 01:53 PM
I agree, Don't waste single minute and consult attorney if you haven'nt done so..
Good luck
ajthakur,
U r covered under AC-21 if I-140 is not revoked by your previous employer.
Be truthful to USCIS and using a very good attorney firm drat AC-21 and Employment verification letter to USCIS. Since your PD is current chances are after reviewing the new employment letter USCIS might approve your case.
Please dont waste time in on this forum, instead spend some money to consult Rajeev Khanna or Sheela Murthy, it is worth spending every penny on the advice and their services for invoking AC-21.
Per your RFE notice it looks like, USCIS is only interested in verifying your current employment in the similar profession. good employment verification letter and AC-21 draft is good to save your GC.
RFE might have triggered due to previous H1B transfer, it has nothing to do with your employer revoking I-140. Trust me lot of desi consulting companies dont want to take any "Panga" with USCIS and 99% of the time they just ignore employees leaving them. So dont worry, dial in Murthy or Khanna consulting services and see what's their take on your case. If you are getting any help from new Employer's attorney that will be free of cost to you.
Bottomline you need a competent attorney for answering this RFE and invoking AC-21.
Good luck
ajthakur,
U r covered under AC-21 if I-140 is not revoked by your previous employer.
Be truthful to USCIS and using a very good attorney firm drat AC-21 and Employment verification letter to USCIS. Since your PD is current chances are after reviewing the new employment letter USCIS might approve your case.
Please dont waste time in on this forum, instead spend some money to consult Rajeev Khanna or Sheela Murthy, it is worth spending every penny on the advice and their services for invoking AC-21.
Per your RFE notice it looks like, USCIS is only interested in verifying your current employment in the similar profession. good employment verification letter and AC-21 draft is good to save your GC.
RFE might have triggered due to previous H1B transfer, it has nothing to do with your employer revoking I-140. Trust me lot of desi consulting companies dont want to take any "Panga" with USCIS and 99% of the time they just ignore employees leaving them. So dont worry, dial in Murthy or Khanna consulting services and see what's their take on your case. If you are getting any help from new Employer's attorney that will be free of cost to you.
Bottomline you need a competent attorney for answering this RFE and invoking AC-21.
hair Japan Earthquake and Tsunami
joydiptac
02-13 06:37 PM
Ethnic cleansing or not. I somehow knew this was coming. It was obvious, people not getting GCs for so many years. Disaster waiting to happen - count down till the next downturn.
People from Britain and Germany if you are not affected please do not comment. We are smart people we know what is happening no need to rationalize. I would like to see your reaction if you were asked to move back to your country after building a life here for almost a decade.
People from Britain and Germany if you are not affected please do not comment. We are smart people we know what is happening no need to rationalize. I would like to see your reaction if you were asked to move back to your country after building a life here for almost a decade.
more...
ramaonline
04-22 04:05 PM
I attended the meeting and was there until 6:30 pm - The latinos were present in full strength, and some were distributing handouts to oppose the STRIVE bill.
The banners put up by illegal immigrants were more prominent than the lone banner which one of our members had brought. One banner was for the bill and another against the bill.
Our members asked a few questions, but the majority were posed from the illegal immigrant community and was about raids, deportation, family etc. Regardless, Title V is what matters to us and if the bill passes, Title V passes so we must support the bill as this is the only bill other than SKIL which addresses issues facing legal immigrants. In case the bill runs into a roadblock I hope the congressman can take Title V out of the bill and introduce a new bill for legal immigrants.
The Congressman also said he has the support of 180 democrats in the House and it takes 218 members to get the bill passed. He requested us to call local republican congressmen/women & get their support for the bill.
Note that this bill also allows u to file ead/485 even if a visa number is not available by paying an extra $500.
Check this link for the title 5 text
http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/z?c110:H.R.1645
The banners put up by illegal immigrants were more prominent than the lone banner which one of our members had brought. One banner was for the bill and another against the bill.
Our members asked a few questions, but the majority were posed from the illegal immigrant community and was about raids, deportation, family etc. Regardless, Title V is what matters to us and if the bill passes, Title V passes so we must support the bill as this is the only bill other than SKIL which addresses issues facing legal immigrants. In case the bill runs into a roadblock I hope the congressman can take Title V out of the bill and introduce a new bill for legal immigrants.
The Congressman also said he has the support of 180 democrats in the House and it takes 218 members to get the bill passed. He requested us to call local republican congressmen/women & get their support for the bill.
Note that this bill also allows u to file ead/485 even if a visa number is not available by paying an extra $500.
Check this link for the title 5 text
http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/z?c110:H.R.1645
hot Earthquake+japan+today
EB3_SEP04
06-11 12:49 PM
I wouldn't worry about this.. this bill is in embyonic stage, hundreds of such ridiculous bills are persented each years and they never make it to either house or senate floors for voting. Remember US politicians all the time "propose" or "talk about" such crazy bills to make happy the crazy segment of voters in their constituency and to make a buzz in the media. This is nothing more than Rakhi sawant accusing Mika of kissing. Nothing is going to happen without the full fledge CIR. Anyone believes the country which gives amnesty to illegals every 10-15 years will take such a nasty step and hurt itself ? Just watch in the months ahead what happens to AZ law or rather it's (non)implementation.
more...
house Earthquake+in+japan+today+
pappu
07-01 10:22 PM
Info on the lawsuit by AILA:
==============
USCIS VISA BULLETIN/
VISA AVAILABILTY LAWSUIT
Frequently Asked Questions about Participating in this Lawsuit
AILF is considering filing a lawsuit in federal district court against the U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) over its rejection of otherwise properly filed adjustment of status applications for the alleged reason that a visa was not available, even though the Visa Bulletin from the Department of State (DOS) states that a visa was available at the time of filing.
Any foreign national who is otherwise eligible for adjustment of status and whose adjustment of status application has been or will be returned or rejected solely on this basis may be eligible to be a plaintiff in this lawsuit. If you are considering being a participant in this lawsuit, you may find the following frequently asked questions and answers helpful.
Q: What is AILF?
A: The American Immigration Law Foundation (AILF) is a non-profit organization dedicated to protecting the rights of immigrants and refugees and to securing fair and just application and administration of the U.S. immigration laws. In order to achieve these goals, AILF sometimes files lawsuits involving various aspects of immigration law.
Q: What is this lawsuit about?
A: This lawsuit will be filed by plaintiffs who have been harmed because USCIS rejected or returned or is expected to reject or return a properly submitted adjustment of status application for the alleged reason that no visa was immediately available even though the DOS Visa Bulletin states that a visa was available at that time.
To be eligible for adjustment to lawful permanent resident status, a foreign national must show that a visa number is “immediately available.” USCIS regulations state that the DOS Visa Bulletin is used to determine whether a visa number is immediately available. This Bulletin is published once a month and lists the visa availability dates for all categories of immigrants for the following month. Thus, for example, the July 2007 bulletin, listing visa availability dates for the entire month of July, was published in June 2007.
AILF has learned that USCIS has refused to allow certain adjustment of status applications to be filed even though the DOS Visa Bulletin states that visa numbers are available for the immigrant category at that time. USCIS rejected these applications because DOS informed it in an internal communication that no visa numbers remained for that category of immigrants. To date, this has happened only in the employment-based “other worker” category. We anticipate that it may happen in a number of other types of employment-based immigrant categories beginning in July 2007.
We believe USCIS violated the law when it failed to apply the visa availability dates listed in the Visa Bulletin, as required by a federal regulation, and instead rejected properly filed adjustment applications. Through this lawsuit, we will challenge the rejection of adjustment of status applications on this basis. We will ask the court to order USCIS to accept the rejected adjustment applications and treat them as being filed as of the date they originally would have been filed had USCIS not rejected them.
Q: What is a “plaintiff” and how do I know if I am eligible to be a “plaintiff” in this lawsuit?
A: A plaintiff is a person who files a lawsuit against someone else. We are still determining the categories of plaintiffs but an eligible plaintiff for this lawsuit may include:
[other worker category]
A foreign national who:
Submitted an adjustment of status application in the “other worker” category for receipt by USCIS in June 2007; and
Is otherwise eligible for adjustment of status; and
Did not receive a receipt notice, cancelled check, or notice of approval of the adjustment application.
[other employment-based categories]
A foreign national who:
Submitted an adjustment of status application in any employment-based category other than “other worker” for receipt by USCIS in July 2007; and
Is otherwise eligible for adjustment of status; and
Did not receive a receipt notice, cancelled check, or notice of approval of the adjustment application.
Q: Why should I be a plaintiff in this lawsuit?
2
A: If the lawsuit is successful, USCIS should accept your adjustment application and treat it as if it had been filed as of the date that you originally tried to file it. Because your adjustment application will then be considered to be pending before the agency, you may be eligible for interim benefits, including an employment authorization document, advance parole, and others.
What the lawsuit will not do is make a visa number immediately available to you if none is available. If the visa numbers have in fact been used for the current fiscal year, the court does not have the authority under the law to make a new number available to you. However, if the court orders that USCIS accept your adjustment application as of the date that you originally tried to file it, you will be at an earlier place in line when visa numbers become available again in the next fiscal year, October 1, 2007. Additionally, as mentioned, you may be eligible for interim benefits while you are waiting.
Q: What is likely to happen because of the suit?
A: Lawsuits are uncertain by nature. We cannot predict the exact outcome. However, other efforts to resolve these problems with USCIS have not succeeded. For this reason, we believe that a lawsuit is the only remaining possible way to resolve these problems.
Q: Will being a plaintiff in this lawsuit hurt my chances for permanent residence?
A: If an individual is otherwise legally entitled to have an application granted, the government cannot lawfully deny that application on the basis that the person is participating or participated in a lawsuit. If we believed the government was taking such action, we would complain to the lawyers representing the government and to the judge handling the case. In our experience, this retaliation has not happened.
Please be aware, though, that USCIS is likely to examine plaintiffs’ adjustment of status applications more closely than it otherwise might. It may ask the plaintiffs questions and ask for additional information about their adjustment applications or immigration status. See below regarding “discovery.”
Q: How much time must plaintiffs spend on this lawsuit?
A: Plaintiffs will have to provide us with the information and documentation we need in order to prepare the lawsuit. AILF will do most of the work in the lawsuit on paper. Depending on how the case proceeds, the government and its attorneys may want to ask the plaintiffs some questions about their case, either through written questions and answers or in person. This is called “discovery.” One type of discovery is a “deposition,” which is an interview where parties are asked questions about their cases.
Depositions are possible but not common in this type of case. In the event that discovery and/or depositions were required, an AILF attorney or an attorney working with us would assist plaintiffs to comply with any discovery requests, and would appear with plaintiffs at any deposition at no charge (see below). At a later stage, a plaintiff may be required to be present at
3
a hearing or a trial and possibly be asked to testify about their particular case, but this is quite rare.
Q: Will it cost me anything to be a plaintiff in this lawsuit?
A: AILF and any co-counsel will not charge any attorney’s fees for representing individuals in this lawsuit. AILF and any co-counsel also will pay the costs and expenses associated with the lawsuit, such as filing fees, copying, long distance calls, travel expenses for AILF attorneys and staff, depositions, transcripts, etc. In the unlikely event that an individual should be required to be present at a deposition, hearing or a trial, we may ask that he/she pay their own travel and lodging expenses, if any. Those expenses would be reimbursed if the lawsuit is successful and we recover costs.
Q: Will anyone know that I am a plaintiff in this lawsuit?
A: Lawsuits are public information, and are available as a public court document. Many courts now have lawsuits and other documents available electronically, accessible via the internet. Also, USCIS will, of course, know the identity of the plaintiffs. We also will discuss plaintiffs’ cases with any other lawyers working with us on the lawsuit. It also is possible that the media – newspapers, radio, or TV reporters – will see the court documents and decide to do a story on the lawsuit.
Q: What should I do if I am eligible and interested in being a plaintiff in the lawsuit?
A: Please quickly submit the Questionnaire for Potential Plaintiffs and send us the documents requested. If you do not have the Questionnaire, please send an email to visabulletin@ailf.org, and we will send it to you. You may also fax a request to AILF LAC at (202) 742-5619. Please indicate this is a question about the visa bulletin litigation.
If you have any questions that are not answered by this FAQ or the questionnaire, please send them to visabulletin@ailf.org or fax to (202) 742-65619, and we will respond. Thank you!
===============
==============
USCIS VISA BULLETIN/
VISA AVAILABILTY LAWSUIT
Frequently Asked Questions about Participating in this Lawsuit
AILF is considering filing a lawsuit in federal district court against the U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) over its rejection of otherwise properly filed adjustment of status applications for the alleged reason that a visa was not available, even though the Visa Bulletin from the Department of State (DOS) states that a visa was available at the time of filing.
Any foreign national who is otherwise eligible for adjustment of status and whose adjustment of status application has been or will be returned or rejected solely on this basis may be eligible to be a plaintiff in this lawsuit. If you are considering being a participant in this lawsuit, you may find the following frequently asked questions and answers helpful.
Q: What is AILF?
A: The American Immigration Law Foundation (AILF) is a non-profit organization dedicated to protecting the rights of immigrants and refugees and to securing fair and just application and administration of the U.S. immigration laws. In order to achieve these goals, AILF sometimes files lawsuits involving various aspects of immigration law.
Q: What is this lawsuit about?
A: This lawsuit will be filed by plaintiffs who have been harmed because USCIS rejected or returned or is expected to reject or return a properly submitted adjustment of status application for the alleged reason that no visa was immediately available even though the DOS Visa Bulletin states that a visa was available at that time.
To be eligible for adjustment to lawful permanent resident status, a foreign national must show that a visa number is “immediately available.” USCIS regulations state that the DOS Visa Bulletin is used to determine whether a visa number is immediately available. This Bulletin is published once a month and lists the visa availability dates for all categories of immigrants for the following month. Thus, for example, the July 2007 bulletin, listing visa availability dates for the entire month of July, was published in June 2007.
AILF has learned that USCIS has refused to allow certain adjustment of status applications to be filed even though the DOS Visa Bulletin states that visa numbers are available for the immigrant category at that time. USCIS rejected these applications because DOS informed it in an internal communication that no visa numbers remained for that category of immigrants. To date, this has happened only in the employment-based “other worker” category. We anticipate that it may happen in a number of other types of employment-based immigrant categories beginning in July 2007.
We believe USCIS violated the law when it failed to apply the visa availability dates listed in the Visa Bulletin, as required by a federal regulation, and instead rejected properly filed adjustment applications. Through this lawsuit, we will challenge the rejection of adjustment of status applications on this basis. We will ask the court to order USCIS to accept the rejected adjustment applications and treat them as being filed as of the date they originally would have been filed had USCIS not rejected them.
Q: What is a “plaintiff” and how do I know if I am eligible to be a “plaintiff” in this lawsuit?
A: A plaintiff is a person who files a lawsuit against someone else. We are still determining the categories of plaintiffs but an eligible plaintiff for this lawsuit may include:
[other worker category]
A foreign national who:
Submitted an adjustment of status application in the “other worker” category for receipt by USCIS in June 2007; and
Is otherwise eligible for adjustment of status; and
Did not receive a receipt notice, cancelled check, or notice of approval of the adjustment application.
[other employment-based categories]
A foreign national who:
Submitted an adjustment of status application in any employment-based category other than “other worker” for receipt by USCIS in July 2007; and
Is otherwise eligible for adjustment of status; and
Did not receive a receipt notice, cancelled check, or notice of approval of the adjustment application.
Q: Why should I be a plaintiff in this lawsuit?
2
A: If the lawsuit is successful, USCIS should accept your adjustment application and treat it as if it had been filed as of the date that you originally tried to file it. Because your adjustment application will then be considered to be pending before the agency, you may be eligible for interim benefits, including an employment authorization document, advance parole, and others.
What the lawsuit will not do is make a visa number immediately available to you if none is available. If the visa numbers have in fact been used for the current fiscal year, the court does not have the authority under the law to make a new number available to you. However, if the court orders that USCIS accept your adjustment application as of the date that you originally tried to file it, you will be at an earlier place in line when visa numbers become available again in the next fiscal year, October 1, 2007. Additionally, as mentioned, you may be eligible for interim benefits while you are waiting.
Q: What is likely to happen because of the suit?
A: Lawsuits are uncertain by nature. We cannot predict the exact outcome. However, other efforts to resolve these problems with USCIS have not succeeded. For this reason, we believe that a lawsuit is the only remaining possible way to resolve these problems.
Q: Will being a plaintiff in this lawsuit hurt my chances for permanent residence?
A: If an individual is otherwise legally entitled to have an application granted, the government cannot lawfully deny that application on the basis that the person is participating or participated in a lawsuit. If we believed the government was taking such action, we would complain to the lawyers representing the government and to the judge handling the case. In our experience, this retaliation has not happened.
Please be aware, though, that USCIS is likely to examine plaintiffs’ adjustment of status applications more closely than it otherwise might. It may ask the plaintiffs questions and ask for additional information about their adjustment applications or immigration status. See below regarding “discovery.”
Q: How much time must plaintiffs spend on this lawsuit?
A: Plaintiffs will have to provide us with the information and documentation we need in order to prepare the lawsuit. AILF will do most of the work in the lawsuit on paper. Depending on how the case proceeds, the government and its attorneys may want to ask the plaintiffs some questions about their case, either through written questions and answers or in person. This is called “discovery.” One type of discovery is a “deposition,” which is an interview where parties are asked questions about their cases.
Depositions are possible but not common in this type of case. In the event that discovery and/or depositions were required, an AILF attorney or an attorney working with us would assist plaintiffs to comply with any discovery requests, and would appear with plaintiffs at any deposition at no charge (see below). At a later stage, a plaintiff may be required to be present at
3
a hearing or a trial and possibly be asked to testify about their particular case, but this is quite rare.
Q: Will it cost me anything to be a plaintiff in this lawsuit?
A: AILF and any co-counsel will not charge any attorney’s fees for representing individuals in this lawsuit. AILF and any co-counsel also will pay the costs and expenses associated with the lawsuit, such as filing fees, copying, long distance calls, travel expenses for AILF attorneys and staff, depositions, transcripts, etc. In the unlikely event that an individual should be required to be present at a deposition, hearing or a trial, we may ask that he/she pay their own travel and lodging expenses, if any. Those expenses would be reimbursed if the lawsuit is successful and we recover costs.
Q: Will anyone know that I am a plaintiff in this lawsuit?
A: Lawsuits are public information, and are available as a public court document. Many courts now have lawsuits and other documents available electronically, accessible via the internet. Also, USCIS will, of course, know the identity of the plaintiffs. We also will discuss plaintiffs’ cases with any other lawyers working with us on the lawsuit. It also is possible that the media – newspapers, radio, or TV reporters – will see the court documents and decide to do a story on the lawsuit.
Q: What should I do if I am eligible and interested in being a plaintiff in the lawsuit?
A: Please quickly submit the Questionnaire for Potential Plaintiffs and send us the documents requested. If you do not have the Questionnaire, please send an email to visabulletin@ailf.org, and we will send it to you. You may also fax a request to AILF LAC at (202) 742-5619. Please indicate this is a question about the visa bulletin litigation.
If you have any questions that are not answered by this FAQ or the questionnaire, please send them to visabulletin@ailf.org or fax to (202) 742-65619, and we will respond. Thank you!
===============
tattoo Video on Tsunami Japan Tsunami
pasupuleti
04-20 04:20 PM
Thank you Sanjeev. That will be very helpful.
I will send my phone number as pm.
I will send my phone number as pm.
more...
pictures +pictures+in+japan+today
FinalGC
12-27 08:39 AM
You mean 529? Thanks of telling. I was planning to open an account for my kid's college.
Are you sure they wont let you open an account even if the kid is american citizen by birth?
GUYS THIS SEEMS INCORRECT, I HAVE A 529 FOR BOTH MY BOYS......MY FINANCIAL BROKER SET IT UP FOR ME..
Are you sure they wont let you open an account even if the kid is american citizen by birth?
GUYS THIS SEEMS INCORRECT, I HAVE A 529 FOR BOTH MY BOYS......MY FINANCIAL BROKER SET IT UP FOR ME..
dresses Japan+earthquake+today+cnn
mayhemt
08-02 06:20 PM
Although they promise a lot of things on paper, we generally skip reading the fine print. Fine print generally would include this clause (language will be a bit different)...
"Although these are our policies, these might change at any time, with or without written notice".
End of story to all 'You promised me gold in your agreement' arguments.
Practically speaking, if you think from a company's perspective also, I don't blame them. Would you (Mr OP sir) be willing to invest in something that you are not sure that you will get profit from it? Like, you give me 100$, I may give it back+10%interest or may not give it back. If I want to give it back, I may give it back in 2yrs or even 30yrs, 100 yrs its upto me, depending on some citing of random comet I choose.
Same thing in company's point of view, if they invest in endless lawyer fees, filing fees, humongous paperwork and easily these days GC process take 5-35 years and during/after this time, What is the guarantee that you will still stick with the company - after all this investment of time & money? Companies need visible & predictable ROIs.
It is the age of cost cutting. If you don't like it, just quit it & start a company on your own and show them how to run it by sponsoring GCs left & right.
It is an unfortunate truth we all need to get accustomed to live with.
I guess it is in our Indian blood to expect freebies/extra perks from government, from employers (being socialist, a bit communist country and what not), and we forget it is the FREE MARKET that rules here. If your skills are in high demand, they will make you the king. If supply is high for your skills, they will go for someone cheaper..
"Although these are our policies, these might change at any time, with or without written notice".
End of story to all 'You promised me gold in your agreement' arguments.
Practically speaking, if you think from a company's perspective also, I don't blame them. Would you (Mr OP sir) be willing to invest in something that you are not sure that you will get profit from it? Like, you give me 100$, I may give it back+10%interest or may not give it back. If I want to give it back, I may give it back in 2yrs or even 30yrs, 100 yrs its upto me, depending on some citing of random comet I choose.
Same thing in company's point of view, if they invest in endless lawyer fees, filing fees, humongous paperwork and easily these days GC process take 5-35 years and during/after this time, What is the guarantee that you will still stick with the company - after all this investment of time & money? Companies need visible & predictable ROIs.
It is the age of cost cutting. If you don't like it, just quit it & start a company on your own and show them how to run it by sponsoring GCs left & right.
It is an unfortunate truth we all need to get accustomed to live with.
I guess it is in our Indian blood to expect freebies/extra perks from government, from employers (being socialist, a bit communist country and what not), and we forget it is the FREE MARKET that rules here. If your skills are in high demand, they will make you the king. If supply is high for your skills, they will go for someone cheaper..
more...
makeup Earthquake Slams Japan Today
Canuck
02-14 08:15 PM
maybe there is no divide and rule - but definitely when they thought of country limits - they must have debated and come to conclusion that there should not be domination from one country (as one country people can become powerful - demand more etc) .so in a way it is divide. but in this age - country limits dont make sense. the problem is laws dont change easily.
Of course they thought about that! They don't want too much of one ethnic group, which is why they apply per country rationing for EB immigration, which is completely discriminatory and flies in the face of basic employment laws.
If they are too worried about voting blocs, they should then implement a system whereby, no more than a certain percentage of green card holders in a given year from a certain country of birth can become citizens. Personally, I could care less about voting, I just want the ability to have my green card on a shorter time scale!
Of course they thought about that! They don't want too much of one ethnic group, which is why they apply per country rationing for EB immigration, which is completely discriminatory and flies in the face of basic employment laws.
If they are too worried about voting blocs, they should then implement a system whereby, no more than a certain percentage of green card holders in a given year from a certain country of birth can become citizens. Personally, I could care less about voting, I just want the ability to have my green card on a shorter time scale!
girlfriend EARTHQUAKE IN JAPAN 2011 TODAY
eager_immi
01-18 11:15 AM
Signed up for $20 a month. Have contributed $300 earlier.
Thanks
Thanks
hairstyles Map of earthquakes in Japan on
gc_chahiye
12-21 12:54 AM
He did not pay you. Thats all. don't worry about it. Even I know people who got GC's even with a real degree I mean completed degree even from INdia. Its all LUCK.
unfortunately even if the employer screwed up, if an employee in H1-B does not get paid, he is out of status and pays the consequences. Does not matter if employer stopped paying suddenly or whatever else...
the OPs travel outside US and back after this out-of-status is what has 'saved' him in this case, since the out-of-status clock got reset with that re-entry. Also, 180 days of out-of-status past your last re-entry is forgiven. This might still come up in an interview, but cannot be grounds for denial from what I know.
unfortunately even if the employer screwed up, if an employee in H1-B does not get paid, he is out of status and pays the consequences. Does not matter if employer stopped paying suddenly or whatever else...
the OPs travel outside US and back after this out-of-status is what has 'saved' him in this case, since the out-of-status clock got reset with that re-entry. Also, 180 days of out-of-status past your last re-entry is forgiven. This might still come up in an interview, but cannot be grounds for denial from what I know.
optimist578
01-31 01:46 PM
If one gets an H-1B approval now (Jan/Feb), can he start working right away? Or does he have to wait till the start of fiscal year, October?
What if the employer is an NGO or NPO? I believe, it is not counted against the H-1 quota but in that case, can he start working right away?
What if the employer is an NGO or NPO? I believe, it is not counted against the H-1 quota but in that case, can he start working right away?
imneedy
05-07 03:46 PM
Thanks for sending the letter to USCIS and now posting the response here. IV has taken action in this regards.
What is the next step? Do I need to follow up with another letter?
What is the next step? Do I need to follow up with another letter?
No comments:
Post a Comment