waitingGC
03-09 08:50 AM
The OVERFLOW from EB1 and EB2 is directly going to EB3!
Yes, however, i think the overflow from EB1 and EB2 goes to EB3 from other countries than Indian or China.
Yes, however, i think the overflow from EB1 and EB2 goes to EB3 from other countries than Indian or China.
SL%%
03-02 08:10 PM
Thanks SL & Lost in GC process,
Sorry for not being clear in C & D. I am in US. The question I meant to ask is about the the time that I am not physically present in US i.e. If I went for vacction in India for a month, can that one month be included in my H1B1 extension since I was not physically present in US. In other words I would file for 1.1 year extension as opposed to 1 year
One the same topic, a friend of mine got a three year extension post 6 years of H1B. When asked, his lawyer informed, if you have an approved I140 then you are elegible for 3 years extension as opposed to 1 year. Is this true. Can some refer to the right CFR's
Thanks
Senthil
For the first one, I don't think that is applicable. As to what I know it doesn't matter whether you left for 1 day, 2 mos or whatever, your expiration still stands and cannot be change. No rollover or so hence Sep. 07, 2009 still stands for you.
For the second one, seems like desi3933 answered your question.
Sorry for not being clear in C & D. I am in US. The question I meant to ask is about the the time that I am not physically present in US i.e. If I went for vacction in India for a month, can that one month be included in my H1B1 extension since I was not physically present in US. In other words I would file for 1.1 year extension as opposed to 1 year
One the same topic, a friend of mine got a three year extension post 6 years of H1B. When asked, his lawyer informed, if you have an approved I140 then you are elegible for 3 years extension as opposed to 1 year. Is this true. Can some refer to the right CFR's
Thanks
Senthil
For the first one, I don't think that is applicable. As to what I know it doesn't matter whether you left for 1 day, 2 mos or whatever, your expiration still stands and cannot be change. No rollover or so hence Sep. 07, 2009 still stands for you.
For the second one, seems like desi3933 answered your question.
insbaby
08-24 02:13 PM
I think something is missing here. How did they find out ?? Did they take you in for secondary inspection?? taxes?? If your university allows online classes, you might be able to finish your courses online and complete the required coursework(i.e. ofcourse if you dont need to finish thesis or defend project work) the university should be able to confer you a degree.... might be worth chatting with the international office.
CBP & INS officers are much trainined in strategies to ask specific questions to individuals.
Most people from India do not want to purposefully lie, afraid of maintaining with a series of lies.
CBP & INS knew that students work somewhere. Our friend was a student then and it is not a surprise that he was trapped with some specific questions.
CBP & INS officers are much trainined in strategies to ask specific questions to individuals.
Most people from India do not want to purposefully lie, afraid of maintaining with a series of lies.
CBP & INS knew that students work somewhere. Our friend was a student then and it is not a surprise that he was trapped with some specific questions.
hopeforgc
06-21 04:58 PM
I know a person who came to US on H4 in feb 2004 applied for H1 in the firt week of April 2005,
her Employer who filed for H1 suggested that she would get her H1 from Jan 1st 2006 , so she can travel to India
on that assurance she left for India on September 15 and came back on Dec 28th and
on Jan 1st when she called employer they mailed her H1 copy and the date of Approval is Oct 1st.
Does this mean H1 is Invalidated as per Last Actions Count Rule.
She has been working on H1 since then (not regularly though)
and did not file for H4 extension assuming her H1 is valid. H4 expired on Aril 2006
Has any one gone through the same situation.
Whats her Status as of now, If her husband is applying for 485 what do you guys suggest put on I94 what should her action from now on.
One lawyer suggests she should apply for 485 and and if they raise query come with some answer at that time.
another one says she should file for H4 and quit working.
She is totally clueless please help.
her Employer who filed for H1 suggested that she would get her H1 from Jan 1st 2006 , so she can travel to India
on that assurance she left for India on September 15 and came back on Dec 28th and
on Jan 1st when she called employer they mailed her H1 copy and the date of Approval is Oct 1st.
Does this mean H1 is Invalidated as per Last Actions Count Rule.
She has been working on H1 since then (not regularly though)
and did not file for H4 extension assuming her H1 is valid. H4 expired on Aril 2006
Has any one gone through the same situation.
Whats her Status as of now, If her husband is applying for 485 what do you guys suggest put on I94 what should her action from now on.
One lawyer suggests she should apply for 485 and and if they raise query come with some answer at that time.
another one says she should file for H4 and quit working.
She is totally clueless please help.
more...
hoolahoous
10-11 11:50 AM
hi ,
Now middle vendor is threatning me that he can sue me for breaking the line of contract .
i dont understand ho can even its possible as i never signed any document with middle vendor and he is not even my employer . He is just acting as middle layer by showing prime vendor that i am his employee which is wrong.
anyone can sue anyone for whatever reason. However that doesn't mean they will win. Also your case seems slam dunk for you in case they decide to peruse legal options. You did NOT sign any contract with them so there is NO breach of contract. Also you can tell them that you are going to report to Prime vendor that they knowingly misrepresented you (said they employed you whereas they did not). That will make sure that Prime vendor terminates all relations with middle vendor or does not give further business to them. Max middle vendor can do is sue your employer (most probably they signed a contract which your company is breaking) but that is not your problem. Don't be afraid.
Disclaimer: I am not a lawyer. Do not take this as legal advice.
Now middle vendor is threatning me that he can sue me for breaking the line of contract .
i dont understand ho can even its possible as i never signed any document with middle vendor and he is not even my employer . He is just acting as middle layer by showing prime vendor that i am his employee which is wrong.
anyone can sue anyone for whatever reason. However that doesn't mean they will win. Also your case seems slam dunk for you in case they decide to peruse legal options. You did NOT sign any contract with them so there is NO breach of contract. Also you can tell them that you are going to report to Prime vendor that they knowingly misrepresented you (said they employed you whereas they did not). That will make sure that Prime vendor terminates all relations with middle vendor or does not give further business to them. Max middle vendor can do is sue your employer (most probably they signed a contract which your company is breaking) but that is not your problem. Don't be afraid.
Disclaimer: I am not a lawyer. Do not take this as legal advice.
nogc12
08-03 06:08 PM
I dont think the three year extension has anything to do with 485. If your 140 is approved you get 3 years if there is no visa number is available for you. No need to be U.
more...
SDdesi
08-06 04:43 PM
Which center? TSC/NSC ??
stirfries
03-21 06:16 PM
Hi Stirfries
I have asked about whether I need to wait for the AP, but my lawyers have said I have to wait until the fingerprinting is done and I have the travel document before I leave..!!! Maybe I need to ring the immigration department again and confirm once again. I keep getting different information from different people..!!
Thanks for your response, there might be light at the end of the tunnel..!!!
I hear ya !!! End of the day, you alone is responsible for your action !!! :) I know how difficult it is, when you get different information from different people !
In my case, whatever information that I am giving you, is not based on hearsay. It's actually my personal experience. My spouse was supposed to leave the country in November 2009 and I got in touch with my Immigration attorney and this what he had to say...
Dear XXXXX -
1. The USCIS will take approximately 75 days to process the AP document. He/She must be present in the US when the AP document is filed. He/She can travel internationally while his/her AP extension is pending.
Ofcouse with the caveat that, that the person who is travelling internationally cannot enter into USA without a valid AP document. In our case, my spouse applied for her AP extension while in the country, and then she left the country. I received the approval sometime on December, 2009 and I mailed her the AP document and using the AP document that I mailed, she re-entered the country.
Ofcourse, you can say, I got lucky !!! May be, what I did was against the rules...May be, my attorney is an idiot and didn't know what he was talking about !!! :)
Like I said, End of the day, you would have to make an informed decision coz you alone is responsible for your actions !!! I hope this information helps you make the right & safe decision !!!
Good Luck !!!
I have asked about whether I need to wait for the AP, but my lawyers have said I have to wait until the fingerprinting is done and I have the travel document before I leave..!!! Maybe I need to ring the immigration department again and confirm once again. I keep getting different information from different people..!!
Thanks for your response, there might be light at the end of the tunnel..!!!
I hear ya !!! End of the day, you alone is responsible for your action !!! :) I know how difficult it is, when you get different information from different people !
In my case, whatever information that I am giving you, is not based on hearsay. It's actually my personal experience. My spouse was supposed to leave the country in November 2009 and I got in touch with my Immigration attorney and this what he had to say...
Dear XXXXX -
1. The USCIS will take approximately 75 days to process the AP document. He/She must be present in the US when the AP document is filed. He/She can travel internationally while his/her AP extension is pending.
Ofcouse with the caveat that, that the person who is travelling internationally cannot enter into USA without a valid AP document. In our case, my spouse applied for her AP extension while in the country, and then she left the country. I received the approval sometime on December, 2009 and I mailed her the AP document and using the AP document that I mailed, she re-entered the country.
Ofcourse, you can say, I got lucky !!! May be, what I did was against the rules...May be, my attorney is an idiot and didn't know what he was talking about !!! :)
Like I said, End of the day, you would have to make an informed decision coz you alone is responsible for your actions !!! I hope this information helps you make the right & safe decision !!!
Good Luck !!!
more...
finimits
05-04 02:35 PM
Hi kaarmaa
Thanks for your response.
I am guessing you had a 3 years extension after your 6 years and in your 7th year you transferred over just as a normal H1b would have done. Correct? So in this case, what is the significance of I-140 since your new emplyer will have to apply for PERM and LC again in any case?
Thanks for your response.
I am guessing you had a 3 years extension after your 6 years and in your 7th year you transferred over just as a normal H1b would have done. Correct? So in this case, what is the significance of I-140 since your new emplyer will have to apply for PERM and LC again in any case?
ramaonline
07-10 07:37 PM
My friend has this scenario and want expert advise from IV members.
- On L1 for 3 1/2 years and H1 for 2 years 3 months. About to complete 6
years in 3 months. - Filed Labor (approved. PD Aug 2004 EB3), I140 (applied in May 2007) and I485 (July fiasco)
- I140 still pending
Question:
1. Does L1 period is counted for H1 extention?
[I]H1 term of 6 years includes l1 time and excludes vacation periods
2. Can he do H1 transfer using AC21 without I140 approval?
Not sure what you are looking for. 1 year H1 extension is possible since labor PD is 2004. The extension also allows you to transfer / change employers[I]
As 6 years are going to be expired?
3. What if the old employer revokes his I140 now? His GC process is invalid?
premium processing for 140 is available in some cases - chk the faq on uscis website. If the 140 is withdrawn prior to approval then the PD cannot be ported. If it is revoked after approval then u can retain the PD for any new GC process. 3 year h1 extn is also possible
4. If we leave about GC, Can he do H1 transfer atleast?
Yes based on approved LC + h1 extension.
Note that gc is for a future job offer.
- On L1 for 3 1/2 years and H1 for 2 years 3 months. About to complete 6
years in 3 months. - Filed Labor (approved. PD Aug 2004 EB3), I140 (applied in May 2007) and I485 (July fiasco)
- I140 still pending
Question:
1. Does L1 period is counted for H1 extention?
[I]H1 term of 6 years includes l1 time and excludes vacation periods
2. Can he do H1 transfer using AC21 without I140 approval?
Not sure what you are looking for. 1 year H1 extension is possible since labor PD is 2004. The extension also allows you to transfer / change employers[I]
As 6 years are going to be expired?
3. What if the old employer revokes his I140 now? His GC process is invalid?
premium processing for 140 is available in some cases - chk the faq on uscis website. If the 140 is withdrawn prior to approval then the PD cannot be ported. If it is revoked after approval then u can retain the PD for any new GC process. 3 year h1 extn is also possible
4. If we leave about GC, Can he do H1 transfer atleast?
Yes based on approved LC + h1 extension.
Note that gc is for a future job offer.
more...
saileshdude
03-25 11:10 PM
On March 12 2009 I got an query on my I-485.
Requesting discrepancy in the labor applied on Nov'7 2002 and present working place.
My company(abc ltd) applied labor on Nov'07 2002 while I was working at the clients(xyz) place in Los Angeles.
I got my I-140 approved on Feb'15 2006, while I was with the same client(xyz) at that time.
On Dec'04 2006 I moved to Detroit, started working with different client.
RFE goes like this.
The Documentation submitted with your application and/or a review of service records indicate that you no longer reside in the same state or geographical location as the underlying form i-140 immigration petitioner and /or job location specified by your intended permanent employer.
There fore submit a currently dated letter from your original form I-140 employer which which address this discrepancy.
I am still working with the same employer who filed my labor certification.
Any gurus who can suggest me on the query would be greatly appreciated.
As per yates AC21 memo, job location should not be a problem. Also refer to murthy's FAQ on AC21. Your attorney should respond as per this memo.
Requesting discrepancy in the labor applied on Nov'7 2002 and present working place.
My company(abc ltd) applied labor on Nov'07 2002 while I was working at the clients(xyz) place in Los Angeles.
I got my I-140 approved on Feb'15 2006, while I was with the same client(xyz) at that time.
On Dec'04 2006 I moved to Detroit, started working with different client.
RFE goes like this.
The Documentation submitted with your application and/or a review of service records indicate that you no longer reside in the same state or geographical location as the underlying form i-140 immigration petitioner and /or job location specified by your intended permanent employer.
There fore submit a currently dated letter from your original form I-140 employer which which address this discrepancy.
I am still working with the same employer who filed my labor certification.
Any gurus who can suggest me on the query would be greatly appreciated.
As per yates AC21 memo, job location should not be a problem. Also refer to murthy's FAQ on AC21. Your attorney should respond as per this memo.
eastindia
05-21 01:05 PM
If this immigration backlog continues, more people will go to Canada and Australia. Is there any way to find such numbers. It will be America's loss
more...
satyasaich
03-16 12:45 PM
expect an RFE in a month or two. Also fill in your profile to help others...
Why he should expect an RFE in a Month or Two ?
Any rational reason ?
Why he should expect an RFE in a Month or Two ?
Any rational reason ?
pointlesswait
02-24 09:41 AM
u can log onto USCIS website and check the status of ur past and pending cases.
but u need to know the LIN #'s...
so add ur previous 140 case and check for any updates..simple!
Case reopened or reconsidered based on USCIS determination, and the case is now pendiDid anyone see this kind of status on their approved H1b application?
Please share your views.
but u need to know the LIN #'s...
so add ur previous 140 case and check for any updates..simple!
Case reopened or reconsidered based on USCIS determination, and the case is now pendiDid anyone see this kind of status on their approved H1b application?
Please share your views.
more...
learning01
02-25 05:03 PM
This is the most compelling piece I read about why this country should do more for scientists and engineers who are on temporary work visas. Read it till the end and enjoy.
learning01
From Yale Global Online:
Amid the Bush Administration's efforts to create a guest-worker program for undocumented immigrants, Nobel laureate economist Gary Becker argues that the US must do more to welcome skilled legal immigrants too. The US currently offers only 140,000 green cards each year, preventing many valuable scientists and engineers from gaining permanent residency. Instead, they are made to stay in the US on temporary visas�which discourage them from assimilating into American society, and of which there are not nearly enough. It is far better, argues Becker, to fold the visa program into a much larger green card quota for skilled immigrants. While such a program would force more competition on American scientists and engineers, it would allow the economy as a whole to take advantage of the valuable skills of new workers who would have a lasting stake in America's success. Skilled immigrants will find work elsewhere if we do not let them work here�but they want, first and foremost, to work in the US. Becker argues that the US should let them do so. � YaleGlobal
Give Us Your Skilled Masses
Gary S. Becker
The Wall Street Journal, 1 December 2005
With border security and proposals for a guest-worker program back on the front page, it is vital that the U.S. -- in its effort to cope with undocumented workers -- does not overlook legal immigration. The number of people allowed in is far too small, posing a significant problem for the economy in the years ahead. Only 140,000 green cards are issued annually, with the result that scientists, engineers and other highly skilled workers often must wait years before receiving the ticket allowing them to stay permanently in the U.S.
An alternate route for highly skilled professionals -- especially information technology workers -- has been temporary H-1B visas, good for specific jobs for three years with the possibility of one renewal. But Congress foolishly cut the annual quota of H-1B visas in 2003 from almost 200,000 to well under 100,000. The small quota of 65,000 for the current fiscal year that began on Oct. 1 is already exhausted!
This is mistaken policy. The right approach would be to greatly increase the number of entry permits to highly skilled professionals and eliminate the H-1B program, so that all such visas became permanent. Skilled immigrants such as engineers and scientists are in fields not attracting many Americans, and they work in IT industries, such as computers and biotech, which have become the backbone of the economy. Many of the entrepreneurs and higher-level employees in Silicon Valley were born overseas. These immigrants create jobs and opportunities for native-born Americans of all types and levels of skills.
So it seems like a win-win situation. Permanent rather than temporary admissions of the H-1B type have many advantages. Foreign professionals would make a greater commitment to becoming part of American culture and to eventually becoming citizens, rather than forming separate enclaves in the expectation they are here only temporarily. They would also be more concerned with advancing in the American economy and less likely to abscond with the intellectual property of American companies -- property that could help them advance in their countries of origin.
Basically, I am proposing that H-1B visas be folded into a much larger, employment-based green card program with the emphasis on skilled workers. The annual quota should be multiplied many times beyond present limits, and there should be no upper bound on the numbers from any single country. Such upper bounds place large countries like India and China, with many highly qualified professionals, at a considerable and unfair disadvantage -- at no gain to the U.S.
To be sure, the annual admission of a million or more highly skilled workers such as engineers and scientists would lower the earnings of the American workers they compete against. The opposition from competing American workers is probably the main reason for the sharp restrictions on the number of immigrant workers admitted today. That opposition is understandable, but does not make it good for the country as a whole.
Doesn't the U.S. clearly benefit if, for example, India's government spends a lot on the highly esteemed Indian Institutes of Technology to train scientists and engineers who leave to work in America? It certainly appears that way to the sending countries, many of which protest against this emigration by calling it a "brain drain."
Yet the migration of workers, like free trade in goods, is not a zero sum game, but one that usually benefits the sending and the receiving country. Even if many immigrants do not return home to the nations that trained them, they send back remittances that are often sizeable; and some do return to start businesses.
Experience shows that countries providing a good economic and political environment can attract back many of the skilled men and women who have previously left. Whether they return or not, they gain knowledge about modern technologies that becomes more easily incorporated into the production of their native countries.
Experience also shows that if America does not accept greatly increased numbers of highly skilled professionals, they might go elsewhere: Canada and Australia, to take two examples, are actively recruiting IT professionals.
Since earnings are much higher in the U.S., many skilled immigrants would prefer to come here. But if they cannot, they may compete against us through outsourcing and similar forms of international trade in services. The U.S. would be much better off by having such skilled workers become residents and citizens -- thus contributing to our productivity, culture, tax revenues and education rather than to the productivity and tax revenues of other countries.
I do, however, advocate that we be careful about admitting students and skilled workers from countries that have produced many terrorists, such as Saudi Arabia and Pakistan. My attitude may be dismissed as religious "profiling," but intelligent and fact-based profiling is essential in the war against terror. And terrorists come from a relatively small number of countries and backgrounds, unfortunately mainly of the Islamic faith. But the legitimate concern about admitting terrorists should not be allowed, as it is now doing, to deny or discourage the admission of skilled immigrants who pose little terrorist threat.
Nothing in my discussion should be interpreted as arguing against the admission of unskilled immigrants. Many of these individuals also turn out to be ambitious and hard-working and make fine contributions to American life. But if the number to be admitted is subject to political and other limits, there is a strong case for giving preference to skilled immigrants for the reasons I have indicated.
Other countries, too, should liberalize their policies toward the immigration of skilled workers. I particularly think of Japan and Germany, both countries that have rapidly aging, and soon to be declining, populations that are not sympathetic (especially Japan) to absorbing many immigrants. These are decisions they have to make. But America still has a major advantage in attracting skilled workers, because this is the preferred destination of the vast majority of them. So why not take advantage of their preference to come here, rather than force them to look elsewhere?
URL:
http://yaleglobal.yale.edu/display.article?id=6583
Mr. Becker, the 1992 Nobel laureate in economics, is University Professor of Economics and Sociology at the University of Chicago and the Rose-Marie and Jack R. Anderson Senior Fellow at Stanford's Hoover Institution.
Rights:
Copyright � 2005 Dow Jones & Company, Inc. All Rights Reserved
Related Articles:
America Should Open Its Doors Wide to Foreign Talent
Some Lost Jobs Never Leave Home
Bush's Proposal for Immigration Reform Misses the Point
Workers Falling Behind in Mexico
learning01
From Yale Global Online:
Amid the Bush Administration's efforts to create a guest-worker program for undocumented immigrants, Nobel laureate economist Gary Becker argues that the US must do more to welcome skilled legal immigrants too. The US currently offers only 140,000 green cards each year, preventing many valuable scientists and engineers from gaining permanent residency. Instead, they are made to stay in the US on temporary visas�which discourage them from assimilating into American society, and of which there are not nearly enough. It is far better, argues Becker, to fold the visa program into a much larger green card quota for skilled immigrants. While such a program would force more competition on American scientists and engineers, it would allow the economy as a whole to take advantage of the valuable skills of new workers who would have a lasting stake in America's success. Skilled immigrants will find work elsewhere if we do not let them work here�but they want, first and foremost, to work in the US. Becker argues that the US should let them do so. � YaleGlobal
Give Us Your Skilled Masses
Gary S. Becker
The Wall Street Journal, 1 December 2005
With border security and proposals for a guest-worker program back on the front page, it is vital that the U.S. -- in its effort to cope with undocumented workers -- does not overlook legal immigration. The number of people allowed in is far too small, posing a significant problem for the economy in the years ahead. Only 140,000 green cards are issued annually, with the result that scientists, engineers and other highly skilled workers often must wait years before receiving the ticket allowing them to stay permanently in the U.S.
An alternate route for highly skilled professionals -- especially information technology workers -- has been temporary H-1B visas, good for specific jobs for three years with the possibility of one renewal. But Congress foolishly cut the annual quota of H-1B visas in 2003 from almost 200,000 to well under 100,000. The small quota of 65,000 for the current fiscal year that began on Oct. 1 is already exhausted!
This is mistaken policy. The right approach would be to greatly increase the number of entry permits to highly skilled professionals and eliminate the H-1B program, so that all such visas became permanent. Skilled immigrants such as engineers and scientists are in fields not attracting many Americans, and they work in IT industries, such as computers and biotech, which have become the backbone of the economy. Many of the entrepreneurs and higher-level employees in Silicon Valley were born overseas. These immigrants create jobs and opportunities for native-born Americans of all types and levels of skills.
So it seems like a win-win situation. Permanent rather than temporary admissions of the H-1B type have many advantages. Foreign professionals would make a greater commitment to becoming part of American culture and to eventually becoming citizens, rather than forming separate enclaves in the expectation they are here only temporarily. They would also be more concerned with advancing in the American economy and less likely to abscond with the intellectual property of American companies -- property that could help them advance in their countries of origin.
Basically, I am proposing that H-1B visas be folded into a much larger, employment-based green card program with the emphasis on skilled workers. The annual quota should be multiplied many times beyond present limits, and there should be no upper bound on the numbers from any single country. Such upper bounds place large countries like India and China, with many highly qualified professionals, at a considerable and unfair disadvantage -- at no gain to the U.S.
To be sure, the annual admission of a million or more highly skilled workers such as engineers and scientists would lower the earnings of the American workers they compete against. The opposition from competing American workers is probably the main reason for the sharp restrictions on the number of immigrant workers admitted today. That opposition is understandable, but does not make it good for the country as a whole.
Doesn't the U.S. clearly benefit if, for example, India's government spends a lot on the highly esteemed Indian Institutes of Technology to train scientists and engineers who leave to work in America? It certainly appears that way to the sending countries, many of which protest against this emigration by calling it a "brain drain."
Yet the migration of workers, like free trade in goods, is not a zero sum game, but one that usually benefits the sending and the receiving country. Even if many immigrants do not return home to the nations that trained them, they send back remittances that are often sizeable; and some do return to start businesses.
Experience shows that countries providing a good economic and political environment can attract back many of the skilled men and women who have previously left. Whether they return or not, they gain knowledge about modern technologies that becomes more easily incorporated into the production of their native countries.
Experience also shows that if America does not accept greatly increased numbers of highly skilled professionals, they might go elsewhere: Canada and Australia, to take two examples, are actively recruiting IT professionals.
Since earnings are much higher in the U.S., many skilled immigrants would prefer to come here. But if they cannot, they may compete against us through outsourcing and similar forms of international trade in services. The U.S. would be much better off by having such skilled workers become residents and citizens -- thus contributing to our productivity, culture, tax revenues and education rather than to the productivity and tax revenues of other countries.
I do, however, advocate that we be careful about admitting students and skilled workers from countries that have produced many terrorists, such as Saudi Arabia and Pakistan. My attitude may be dismissed as religious "profiling," but intelligent and fact-based profiling is essential in the war against terror. And terrorists come from a relatively small number of countries and backgrounds, unfortunately mainly of the Islamic faith. But the legitimate concern about admitting terrorists should not be allowed, as it is now doing, to deny or discourage the admission of skilled immigrants who pose little terrorist threat.
Nothing in my discussion should be interpreted as arguing against the admission of unskilled immigrants. Many of these individuals also turn out to be ambitious and hard-working and make fine contributions to American life. But if the number to be admitted is subject to political and other limits, there is a strong case for giving preference to skilled immigrants for the reasons I have indicated.
Other countries, too, should liberalize their policies toward the immigration of skilled workers. I particularly think of Japan and Germany, both countries that have rapidly aging, and soon to be declining, populations that are not sympathetic (especially Japan) to absorbing many immigrants. These are decisions they have to make. But America still has a major advantage in attracting skilled workers, because this is the preferred destination of the vast majority of them. So why not take advantage of their preference to come here, rather than force them to look elsewhere?
URL:
http://yaleglobal.yale.edu/display.article?id=6583
Mr. Becker, the 1992 Nobel laureate in economics, is University Professor of Economics and Sociology at the University of Chicago and the Rose-Marie and Jack R. Anderson Senior Fellow at Stanford's Hoover Institution.
Rights:
Copyright � 2005 Dow Jones & Company, Inc. All Rights Reserved
Related Articles:
America Should Open Its Doors Wide to Foreign Talent
Some Lost Jobs Never Leave Home
Bush's Proposal for Immigration Reform Misses the Point
Workers Falling Behind in Mexico
senram
01-04 12:22 AM
It is possible that India might take this to WTO. But that is a long shot and by the time result comes it will be 2 years or more and law itself is irrelevant.
It's all gas gas gas... Manmohan Singh is heading one of the most corrupt & messy govt. in the history of India. All the ministers are busy looting the country and would like to make most in the remaining 3 years of their terms. Forget they will do anything that would benefit anybody else but themselves..it's only that overexcited journos ask the ministers what they will do and without even thinking they vomit nonsenses. Think logically how this can be a WTO issue, it is completely in their jurisdiction whatever fees they may want to charge, take it or move on...nobody is forcing them to use the expensive Visas ?
It's all gas gas gas... Manmohan Singh is heading one of the most corrupt & messy govt. in the history of India. All the ministers are busy looting the country and would like to make most in the remaining 3 years of their terms. Forget they will do anything that would benefit anybody else but themselves..it's only that overexcited journos ask the ministers what they will do and without even thinking they vomit nonsenses. Think logically how this can be a WTO issue, it is completely in their jurisdiction whatever fees they may want to charge, take it or move on...nobody is forcing them to use the expensive Visas ?
more...
shx
03-05 04:42 PM
You didn't mention how you got paid. Cash? Check? Did you get a 1099? Did you file taxes? Does the IRS have a record of your earnings?
mariusp
07-31 04:26 PM
Don't worry, that's what they do down here. I renewed twice and that was the deal every time. You'll get your DL in 30 days in the mail.
p7810456
06-22 07:55 PM
If i were you,I will prioritize what i want ?Filing 485 or a Married Name.If you want to change your name it can be done on any day after getting the GC ,after becoming a Citizen.
Royus.. said it right. I don't think changing the last name before GC is a "must". Name can be changed at anytime after GC is done.. even if taking GC takes few years. There are millions of couple in US where husband and wife uses different last name. My wife has been the same way for last 7 years.. and never faced any issue. She got it changed last year just for grins.
Royus.. said it right. I don't think changing the last name before GC is a "must". Name can be changed at anytime after GC is done.. even if taking GC takes few years. There are millions of couple in US where husband and wife uses different last name. My wife has been the same way for last 7 years.. and never faced any issue. She got it changed last year just for grins.
desi3933
08-27 01:52 PM
Thanks desi3933.
My followup qn to this is ..
If I get my 3yr H1 extn approved (before 140 cancellation) with company B and company A revokes my approved 140, is it possible to transfer my priority date(of the approved 140 ..which is now revoked by company A) to my new 140 filed by company B?
Thanks
A priority date can only be recaptured from one approved I-140 to another approved I-140, regardless of whether an I-485 was filed or not.
Please check with your attorney.
____________________
Not a legal advise.
My followup qn to this is ..
If I get my 3yr H1 extn approved (before 140 cancellation) with company B and company A revokes my approved 140, is it possible to transfer my priority date(of the approved 140 ..which is now revoked by company A) to my new 140 filed by company B?
Thanks
A priority date can only be recaptured from one approved I-140 to another approved I-140, regardless of whether an I-485 was filed or not.
Please check with your attorney.
____________________
Not a legal advise.
eb3_nepa
03-18 04:31 PM
Visit your local INS or USCIS office. They should guide you through the process.
On a lighter note, you will also experience their "hospitality".
On a lighter note, you will also experience their "hospitality".
No comments:
Post a Comment