chmur
07-27 06:09 PM
otherwise society would have have no use for lawyers....who make a living making interpretation of the existing laws.
Anyway, the current discussion is not even about the law but about the different interpretations of the same law . The Visa Bulletin extract also provided yet another interpretation by the same authority.
The Law/Directions from the congress regarding spill over distribution has not changed in over 5 years but it's interpretation and implementation by DOS has changed drastically in the same period.
They have gone "Vertical" to "Horizontal" and probably will somersault next .
2006 -2007 saw EB3 getting lion share of the spill over EB2. It is being reversed now, all without change in any laws/directions from congress.
This year's interpretation cannot be assumed as absolute just because it is favorable to a particular segment of applicants and it is incorrect to opine that any change in such interpretation requires change in law.
All this indicates that congress has given enough leeway to DOS to interpret it's directions , as DOS sees fit to run it's business.
and I think herein lies an oppurtunity for EB3 applicants to state their case and explain if DOS continues with it's current interpretation.
EB3 lobby has to impress upon the DOS that it is in DOS's intrest to not to starve any particular queue lest it will damage it's own throughput.
If convinced , DOS might look at alternative algorithm to mitigate starving within the current directions, atleast we can hope for that.
Now what that mitigation strategy will be within the current laws is known only to DOS. Which algorithm requires law changes... which do not none of us know yet ...everything alternative suggested is speculation based on contradicting interpretations provided by DOS over the years.
Anyway, the current discussion is not even about the law but about the different interpretations of the same law . The Visa Bulletin extract also provided yet another interpretation by the same authority.
The Law/Directions from the congress regarding spill over distribution has not changed in over 5 years but it's interpretation and implementation by DOS has changed drastically in the same period.
They have gone "Vertical" to "Horizontal" and probably will somersault next .
2006 -2007 saw EB3 getting lion share of the spill over EB2. It is being reversed now, all without change in any laws/directions from congress.
This year's interpretation cannot be assumed as absolute just because it is favorable to a particular segment of applicants and it is incorrect to opine that any change in such interpretation requires change in law.
All this indicates that congress has given enough leeway to DOS to interpret it's directions , as DOS sees fit to run it's business.
and I think herein lies an oppurtunity for EB3 applicants to state their case and explain if DOS continues with it's current interpretation.
EB3 lobby has to impress upon the DOS that it is in DOS's intrest to not to starve any particular queue lest it will damage it's own throughput.
If convinced , DOS might look at alternative algorithm to mitigate starving within the current directions, atleast we can hope for that.
Now what that mitigation strategy will be within the current laws is known only to DOS. Which algorithm requires law changes... which do not none of us know yet ...everything alternative suggested is speculation based on contradicting interpretations provided by DOS over the years.
wallpaper 231: Nate Dogg, Snoop Dogg and
desi3933
07-12 06:43 PM
.....
If AC21 memo is non-binding, which immigartion law is binding? We can go with only current rules/laws; the rest is speculation.
USCIS memoranda articulate internal guidelines for agency personnel; they do not establish judicially enforceable standards.
http://www.uscis.gov/err/D7%20-%20Intracompany%20Transferees%20(L-1A%20and%20L-1B)/Decisions_Issued_in_2008/Nov032008_17D7101.pdf (http://www.uscis.gov/err/D7%20-%20Intracompany%20Transferees%20%28L-1A%20and%20L-1B%29/Decisions_Issued_in_2008/Nov032008_17D7101.pdf)
CIS memoranda articulate internal guidelines for agency personnel; they do not establish judicially enforceable standards. Agency interpretations that are not arrived at through precedent decision or notice and comment rule making such as those in opinion letters, policy statements, agency manuals, and lack the force of law
.
If AC21 memo is non-binding, which immigartion law is binding? We can go with only current rules/laws; the rest is speculation.
USCIS memoranda articulate internal guidelines for agency personnel; they do not establish judicially enforceable standards.
http://www.uscis.gov/err/D7%20-%20Intracompany%20Transferees%20(L-1A%20and%20L-1B)/Decisions_Issued_in_2008/Nov032008_17D7101.pdf (http://www.uscis.gov/err/D7%20-%20Intracompany%20Transferees%20%28L-1A%20and%20L-1B%29/Decisions_Issued_in_2008/Nov032008_17D7101.pdf)
CIS memoranda articulate internal guidelines for agency personnel; they do not establish judicially enforceable standards. Agency interpretations that are not arrived at through precedent decision or notice and comment rule making such as those in opinion letters, policy statements, agency manuals, and lack the force of law
.
priti8888
10-08 08:34 PM
First I-485 is triggered by an act of the applicant (he has to apply). So USCIS is never going to know whether an earlier applicant is still out there trying to file his application or not. In fact I would blame the entire retrogression on USCIS' attempt at FIFO which is scientifically impossible. It only results in wastage of visa numbers. In 2004 USCIS wasted 47000 visa numbers, in 2006 it wasted 10000 visa numbers. What USCIS could think of doing is just approve whoever is approvable. So the visa bulletin has only 2 possible values "C" and "U". If an earlier I485 applicant is stuck in name check then he should take appropriate action (writing to senators, FL, GWB or file WoM) and get his case adjudicated.
There are a lot of misconceptions about AoS. Let me write it here.
1. A visa number is not needed to get AoS adjudicated. A visa number is only required to file the application. But USCIS' stand is that visa number is required both while filing and adjudicating. This according to the statutes and regulations is not true and valid. If USCIS screwed up and delayed adjudicating your application that is their problem. According to statutes and regulations a visa number is only required at the time the application is filed.
2. Neither Statutes nor regulations call for any fbi name check. Remember FBI name check is different from criminal back ground check or finger print check. The name check is an arbitrary decision by FBI and USCIS and will not stand in any court of law.
3. An FBI name check was never called for by USCIS on AoS applicants. It was only required for naturalization applicants. FBI screwed up by sending every one's name through this dreaded name check and now claims that it has too many names to check.
4. If your AoS application is pending for more than a year file a law suit against USCIS because USCIS violated regulations 103.2(b)(18). According to this regulation if an investigation is pending for 6 months district director should review it. At the end of 1 year he should again review it. After that it has to be escalated to higher authorities. Trust me this never happens. Violation of regulations is a serious offense.
So FIFO will never happen because USCIS cannot control who will apply when. Second FIFO is really bad because USCIS then has to keep shuffling its visa numbers around. Instead if it just approves anyone who is approvable atleast visa numbers would get used.
Well said !
There are a lot of misconceptions about AoS. Let me write it here.
1. A visa number is not needed to get AoS adjudicated. A visa number is only required to file the application. But USCIS' stand is that visa number is required both while filing and adjudicating. This according to the statutes and regulations is not true and valid. If USCIS screwed up and delayed adjudicating your application that is their problem. According to statutes and regulations a visa number is only required at the time the application is filed.
2. Neither Statutes nor regulations call for any fbi name check. Remember FBI name check is different from criminal back ground check or finger print check. The name check is an arbitrary decision by FBI and USCIS and will not stand in any court of law.
3. An FBI name check was never called for by USCIS on AoS applicants. It was only required for naturalization applicants. FBI screwed up by sending every one's name through this dreaded name check and now claims that it has too many names to check.
4. If your AoS application is pending for more than a year file a law suit against USCIS because USCIS violated regulations 103.2(b)(18). According to this regulation if an investigation is pending for 6 months district director should review it. At the end of 1 year he should again review it. After that it has to be escalated to higher authorities. Trust me this never happens. Violation of regulations is a serious offense.
So FIFO will never happen because USCIS cannot control who will apply when. Second FIFO is really bad because USCIS then has to keep shuffling its visa numbers around. Instead if it just approves anyone who is approvable atleast visa numbers would get used.
Well said !
2011 We Remember: Rapper Nate Dogg
GreeNever
05-03 12:42 PM
Thank you folks for stepping up to answer a couple of us. Good Luck to everyone involved!
more...
dkshitij
11-19 10:21 AM
Could we please change the Advocacy title? When I share the page on facebook, only the word Advocacy shows up. I would rather see this when I link it.
Action Alert
DREAM Act: Help the Legal Immigrants
Get involved, Act Now
Contact Members of Congress to request inclusion of ammendments in the DREAM act for Legal Immigrants.
Also the spelling of amendments is wrong there as you can see above. Thanks!
Action Alert
DREAM Act: Help the Legal Immigrants
Get involved, Act Now
Contact Members of Congress to request inclusion of ammendments in the DREAM act for Legal Immigrants.
Also the spelling of amendments is wrong there as you can see above. Thanks!
hebron
07-08 08:46 PM
If that is so, no one who is on H1-b can sue their employer for exploiting them. BTW, I personally know people who have successfully sued their employer (US company) for not paying the salary they agreed.
more...
myvoice23
08-08 10:53 AM
Last night got a message welcome notice sent.
Today message changed to ( the dates shows yesterday)
Current Status: Card production ordered.
On August 7, 2008, we ordered production of your new card. Please allow 30 days for your card to be mailed to you. If we need something from you we will contact you. If you move before you receive the card, call customer service. You can also receive automatic e-mail updates as we process your case. Just follow the link below to register.
Today message changed to ( the dates shows yesterday)
Current Status: Card production ordered.
On August 7, 2008, we ordered production of your new card. Please allow 30 days for your card to be mailed to you. If we need something from you we will contact you. If you move before you receive the card, call customer service. You can also receive automatic e-mail updates as we process your case. Just follow the link below to register.
2010 To Legend Nate Dogg Via
cal97
11-07 05:54 PM
I took an infopass appointment today. The IO sent an e-mail to NSC after taking details like DOB, address etc. for me and my wife.
btw, FP for us has been scheduled. Looks like they have some kind of a queue for that but a notice has not been sent out.
So that was it. Am going to wait it out patiently.
I had taken an infopass appointment after filing an SR. All the IO said was I should call NSC. I don't think the IO's at the local USCIS office can issue FP notices.
Shall try again sometime this week or next and update the same here. I am a NSC->CSC->NSC transferee.
btw, FP for us has been scheduled. Looks like they have some kind of a queue for that but a notice has not been sent out.
So that was it. Am going to wait it out patiently.
I had taken an infopass appointment after filing an SR. All the IO said was I should call NSC. I don't think the IO's at the local USCIS office can issue FP notices.
Shall try again sometime this week or next and update the same here. I am a NSC->CSC->NSC transferee.
more...
forever
08-03 07:07 PM
I live in IL
As per my analysis, your case will not be transferred to TSC. You should get receipt from NSC.
As per my analysis, your case will not be transferred to TSC. You should get receipt from NSC.
hair SNOOP DOGG HAS A NATE DOGG
krishnam70
07-05 11:26 AM
Sorry - I had no idea what this thread was about.
Apologize, did not realize that fact. Can the thread owner please update the thread title and add some description.
Apologize, did not realize that fact. Can the thread owner please update the thread title and add some description.
more...
gc_chahiye
10-08 01:11 PM
Being a 2001 PD myself I fully sympathize with you for your trauma and support your notion that the Immigration System should give weightage to the number of years in the US, I do not support the notion of ending retrogression. Given that there are only a finite number of visa quotas, ending retrogression will make the GC a game of Inky-Pinky-Ponky. Either they give it to everyone (all the 800000 that applied) or they do FIFO based on date of entry in the US. If not, the present system of retrogression at least ensures that a person who came into the US in 2007 does not win the Inky-Pinki-Ponky game before a person like me in the queue since 2001. I agree that some extremely unfortunate people like you lose out, but it is still fairer than having no retrogression with the quota limitations in place, as that would be totally unfair.
I totally miss your point: why is ending retrogression bad? Because all 800K people might get the GC within 6 months? Whats wrong with that? Its not fair to those who have waited longer than others? Dont be a member of the "just because I suffered I want everyone else to suffer" That makes you no different from that talkshow host (who is now a citizen) on the radio channel recently who said he waited 10 years to get his GC, so everyone else also should, otherwise its not "fair"
Or, are you mixing up ending retrogression with making dates current? No thats not what we want. We want dates made current after the visa supply = demand. Just making all VBs like the July VB is pointless, and does lead to lots of uncertainties. By ending retrogression I mean making sure we have enough visa numbers for all who have been qualified by DOL (LC) and USCIS (I-140), by:
- ending per-country quota
- not counting dependents
- recapturing wasted visa numbers.
I totally miss your point: why is ending retrogression bad? Because all 800K people might get the GC within 6 months? Whats wrong with that? Its not fair to those who have waited longer than others? Dont be a member of the "just because I suffered I want everyone else to suffer" That makes you no different from that talkshow host (who is now a citizen) on the radio channel recently who said he waited 10 years to get his GC, so everyone else also should, otherwise its not "fair"
Or, are you mixing up ending retrogression with making dates current? No thats not what we want. We want dates made current after the visa supply = demand. Just making all VBs like the July VB is pointless, and does lead to lots of uncertainties. By ending retrogression I mean making sure we have enough visa numbers for all who have been qualified by DOL (LC) and USCIS (I-140), by:
- ending per-country quota
- not counting dependents
- recapturing wasted visa numbers.
hot Snoop Dogg and etc.
ski_dude12
09-07 04:33 PM
We got our receipts today. Mailed out the application on the 2nd - Reached NSC on the 3rd. Receipt numbers are SRC so my case got transferred to TSC.
Receipts are coming... just hang in there.
Receipts are coming... just hang in there.
more...
house Nate Dogg Remembered By Snoop
paulavijit
05-25 02:15 PM
Sent emails and made phone calls to all Senators mentioned.
Thanks IV.
Good luck.
Thanks IV.
Good luck.
tattoo Nate Dogg Songs Late Singer
qplearn
12-10 10:52 AM
Why don't posters on this forum move back to their home country and concentrate on making their home country great instead of slamming into someone else's country and just living off the wealth others have created?
The bottom line is that a SKIL act is not needed. Hundreds of thousands of American programmers have lost their job to the third world, both in outsourcing and insourcing of third world programmers who work for cheaper wages. There is absolutely no need for more foreigners here and no need for more green cards. Temporary workers are just that - temporary. If you are on a temporary visa, work your time, make some money for your family and head home when your time is up. Don't cry that we don't provide enough green cards when you knew what kind of visa you were on.
Why don't you move back to Britain or whichever country you or your ancestors came from? Also, a lot of wealth in the US has been created by these people who "slam into someone else's country." So your argument has little validity. Maybe I should not be wasting my time in responding to xenophobes.
The bottom line is that a SKIL act is not needed. Hundreds of thousands of American programmers have lost their job to the third world, both in outsourcing and insourcing of third world programmers who work for cheaper wages. There is absolutely no need for more foreigners here and no need for more green cards. Temporary workers are just that - temporary. If you are on a temporary visa, work your time, make some money for your family and head home when your time is up. Don't cry that we don't provide enough green cards when you knew what kind of visa you were on.
Why don't you move back to Britain or whichever country you or your ancestors came from? Also, a lot of wealth in the US has been created by these people who "slam into someone else's country." So your argument has little validity. Maybe I should not be wasting my time in responding to xenophobes.
more...
pictures Snoop Dogg Honors Nate Dogg
desi3933
07-10 02:25 PM
@desi3933:
On the other hand, I-140 is linked to Permanent Labor Certification (http://www.foreignlaborcert.doleta.gov/perm.cfm) (aka GC labor)
"Permanent Labor Certification" does not mean the job has to be "permanent" (you're again *assuming*, no?) It could also mean LC for "permanent" residency!
Looks like you missed this on that link:
The job opportunity must be for a full time, permanent position.
There must be a bona fide job opening available to U.S. workers.
Job requirements must adhere to what is customarily required for the occupation in the U.S. and may not be tailored to the foreign worker's qualifications. The employer must pay at least the prevailing wage for the occupation in the area of intended employment.
On the other hand, I-140 is linked to Permanent Labor Certification (http://www.foreignlaborcert.doleta.gov/perm.cfm) (aka GC labor)
"Permanent Labor Certification" does not mean the job has to be "permanent" (you're again *assuming*, no?) It could also mean LC for "permanent" residency!
Looks like you missed this on that link:
The job opportunity must be for a full time, permanent position.
There must be a bona fide job opening available to U.S. workers.
Job requirements must adhere to what is customarily required for the occupation in the U.S. and may not be tailored to the foreign worker's qualifications. The employer must pay at least the prevailing wage for the occupation in the area of intended employment.
dresses Image. Nate Dogg Songs Late
senthil1
05-08 05:48 PM
It is true that country quota is a discrimination. But when you just try to remove the country quota other country persons are going to oppose as they will be impacted if country quota is removed. But if you try with other agenda like recapture then opposition may not be strong and also every one will get benefit.
QUOTE=hindu_king;339926]Below is what I sent. Maybe we can tweak this letter and send it to all senators and congressmen.
Subject: Discrimination of Indian Immigrants
Dear President Obama,
I wanted to bring to your attention the plight of hundreds of thousands of highly skilled Indian immigrants waiting endlessly for many years in order to obtain a permanent residency in the US. The process of getting a permanent residency is a long, winding, time consuming, financially and emotionally draining experience, with no end at sight. After 5 to 10 years of waiting in line, paying taxes, obeying law, many high skilled workers from India find that permanent residency is only a dangling carrot that they may never get it.
One of the biggest hurdles for high skilled immigrants from India is a country cap that limits applicants from any one country from having more than 7% of the available employment based green cards (140,000 visa numbers per year). This means applicants from countries like Andorra and Luxembourg get the same number of green cards as applicants from India and China. This causes a person from India and China to wait 5 to 10 years in order to get permanent residency while applicants from all other countries have zero wait time. We are here in USA because we wanted to be a part of USA, and not because we came from a certain country. All applicants should be treated equally and country cap only allows discrimination by national origin in the disguise of fairness to all, as US has a lot more high skilled workers from India or China than from Andorra or Luxembourg.
President Obama, we are here to pursue the American Dream and we find hurdles at every level during the immigration process. I request you to kindly remove the discriminatory country cap and provide us relief. This is a small step that can enormously help hundred of thousands of high skilled immigrants and we will be grateful to you for our lifetime.
Thank you President Obama and you are doing a wonderful job!
Sincerely,
Xxxxx xxxxx[/QUOTE]
QUOTE=hindu_king;339926]Below is what I sent. Maybe we can tweak this letter and send it to all senators and congressmen.
Subject: Discrimination of Indian Immigrants
Dear President Obama,
I wanted to bring to your attention the plight of hundreds of thousands of highly skilled Indian immigrants waiting endlessly for many years in order to obtain a permanent residency in the US. The process of getting a permanent residency is a long, winding, time consuming, financially and emotionally draining experience, with no end at sight. After 5 to 10 years of waiting in line, paying taxes, obeying law, many high skilled workers from India find that permanent residency is only a dangling carrot that they may never get it.
One of the biggest hurdles for high skilled immigrants from India is a country cap that limits applicants from any one country from having more than 7% of the available employment based green cards (140,000 visa numbers per year). This means applicants from countries like Andorra and Luxembourg get the same number of green cards as applicants from India and China. This causes a person from India and China to wait 5 to 10 years in order to get permanent residency while applicants from all other countries have zero wait time. We are here in USA because we wanted to be a part of USA, and not because we came from a certain country. All applicants should be treated equally and country cap only allows discrimination by national origin in the disguise of fairness to all, as US has a lot more high skilled workers from India or China than from Andorra or Luxembourg.
President Obama, we are here to pursue the American Dream and we find hurdles at every level during the immigration process. I request you to kindly remove the discriminatory country cap and provide us relief. This is a small step that can enormously help hundred of thousands of high skilled immigrants and we will be grateful to you for our lifetime.
Thank you President Obama and you are doing a wonderful job!
Sincerely,
Xxxxx xxxxx[/QUOTE]
more...
makeup May Nate Dogg rest in eternal
map_boiler
08-12 12:56 PM
did you move within the same city, or was this an out of state move?
- if within the same city, you could possibly check with people living at your old address...who knows, they could be helpful. generally usps does not deliver uscis mail without your name on the mailbox; also there is no mail forwarding for such mails
- check with uscis to see if the card was already mailed out, or otherwise try to get their help in tracking it down (given their customer service though, this could be difficult)
- your attorney should also receive a copy of the approval notice, so check with him/her. uscis sends the card and welcome notice only to you, but they (afaik) generally send out a copy of the approval notice to the attorney as well.
- if unable to resolve this in 30-days, file I-90 (see below). again, check with attorney before doing anything.
- can also consider getting I-551 stamp from local uscis office
http://www.uscis.gov/portal/site/uscis/menuitem.5af9bb95919f35e66f614176543f6d1a/?vgnextoid=b3f7ab0a43b5d010VgnVCM10000048f3d6a1RCR D&vgnextchannel=db029c7755cb9010VgnVCM10000045f3d6a1 RCRD
Filing Fee if you are filing because:
• You never received your Permanent Resident Card; or
• Your Permanent Resident Card was issued with incorrect information because of a USCIS administrative error;
Then there is no fee required. Please review the Where to File Instructions, below, if you are filing for these reasons. Total filing fee = $0
If you are filing because your card was never received
• If USCIS mailed you a Permanent Resident Card more than 30 days ago and you have not received it; and
• It has been returned to USCIS by the Post Office as undeliverable; and
• You have not moved from the address you provided to USCIS during the application or immigrant visa process that led to the creation of the card not received;
My husband called USCIS today to check if they have correct address on file and alas they had old address. When we moved after filing for I-485/EAD/AP, we changed the address in Oct and also after we received receipt notices in Jan. We received EAD/AP/Finger printing notices at the present address for all three of us and now they are saying they had old address on my husband's I485 only, great!!!
They were not sure where the card/welcome notice/approval notice were mailed, to my old address or the attorney. Will check with the attorney today, if not what is the procedure as the card will return back. Thanks in advance.
- if within the same city, you could possibly check with people living at your old address...who knows, they could be helpful. generally usps does not deliver uscis mail without your name on the mailbox; also there is no mail forwarding for such mails
- check with uscis to see if the card was already mailed out, or otherwise try to get their help in tracking it down (given their customer service though, this could be difficult)
- your attorney should also receive a copy of the approval notice, so check with him/her. uscis sends the card and welcome notice only to you, but they (afaik) generally send out a copy of the approval notice to the attorney as well.
- if unable to resolve this in 30-days, file I-90 (see below). again, check with attorney before doing anything.
- can also consider getting I-551 stamp from local uscis office
http://www.uscis.gov/portal/site/uscis/menuitem.5af9bb95919f35e66f614176543f6d1a/?vgnextoid=b3f7ab0a43b5d010VgnVCM10000048f3d6a1RCR D&vgnextchannel=db029c7755cb9010VgnVCM10000045f3d6a1 RCRD
Filing Fee if you are filing because:
• You never received your Permanent Resident Card; or
• Your Permanent Resident Card was issued with incorrect information because of a USCIS administrative error;
Then there is no fee required. Please review the Where to File Instructions, below, if you are filing for these reasons. Total filing fee = $0
If you are filing because your card was never received
• If USCIS mailed you a Permanent Resident Card more than 30 days ago and you have not received it; and
• It has been returned to USCIS by the Post Office as undeliverable; and
• You have not moved from the address you provided to USCIS during the application or immigrant visa process that led to the creation of the card not received;
My husband called USCIS today to check if they have correct address on file and alas they had old address. When we moved after filing for I-485/EAD/AP, we changed the address in Oct and also after we received receipt notices in Jan. We received EAD/AP/Finger printing notices at the present address for all three of us and now they are saying they had old address on my husband's I485 only, great!!!
They were not sure where the card/welcome notice/approval notice were mailed, to my old address or the attorney. Will check with the attorney today, if not what is the procedure as the card will return back. Thanks in advance.
girlfriend Akon, Nate Dogg amp; Snoop Dogg
vbkris77
05-04 10:52 PM
(d) Treatment of Family Members. - A spouse or child as defined in subparagraph (A), (B), (C), (D), or (E) of section 101(b)(1) shall, if not otherwise entitled to an immigrant status and the immediate issuance of a visa under subsection (a), (b), or (c), be entitled to the same status, and the same order of consideration provided in the respective subsection, if accompanying or following to join, the spouse or parent.
This basically tells me that they need to be given the same status only if they can't given immigrant visa in other category. But if they can be, why should they be used in this category? As someone said earlier, FB for Family is actually better than EB2. So this basically rules out their rational on giving EB2, EB3 dependents on this VISA.
I am not talking about EB1 here.
Naveen, I haven't given you any Reds. I feel sorry for your situation. Guys, lets discuss and analyze in a constructive way and don't go personal. None of us here will get GC twice by chasing someone's moral down..
This basically tells me that they need to be given the same status only if they can't given immigrant visa in other category. But if they can be, why should they be used in this category? As someone said earlier, FB for Family is actually better than EB2. So this basically rules out their rational on giving EB2, EB3 dependents on this VISA.
I am not talking about EB1 here.
Naveen, I haven't given you any Reds. I feel sorry for your situation. Guys, lets discuss and analyze in a constructive way and don't go personal. None of us here will get GC twice by chasing someone's moral down..
hairstyles Snoop Dogg inks Nate Dogg
BharatPremi
11-08 11:47 AM
Thanks SIRINEME for Sharing your experiance.
Quick Question though,
What Happens if you are offered Higher Position then the responsibility listed in Job descirption? For eg. Lots of perople apply for Programmer/Analyst Position and over the years of cumulative experiance he is offered Architect Position.
Thanks,
In my opinion, This Job code/description related facts ONLY relates to immigration related paper work. In real life , practically one may be handling the load of directing or managing people though for immigration pupose s/he may just be a software engineer or programmer. But in this kind of scenario one has to be extra cautious to have "Software Engineer or programmer" on offer letter till s/he gets done with immigration. Now some companies may prefer to go by book then one may not have a lot of levarage or choice other than performing the things what offer letter says.. And in that case one should not accept the oppertunity of higher skill and/or function inspite of its lucrativeness as to conclude immigration successfully.
Quick Question though,
What Happens if you are offered Higher Position then the responsibility listed in Job descirption? For eg. Lots of perople apply for Programmer/Analyst Position and over the years of cumulative experiance he is offered Architect Position.
Thanks,
In my opinion, This Job code/description related facts ONLY relates to immigration related paper work. In real life , practically one may be handling the load of directing or managing people though for immigration pupose s/he may just be a software engineer or programmer. But in this kind of scenario one has to be extra cautious to have "Software Engineer or programmer" on offer letter till s/he gets done with immigration. Now some companies may prefer to go by book then one may not have a lot of levarage or choice other than performing the things what offer letter says.. And in that case one should not accept the oppertunity of higher skill and/or function inspite of its lucrativeness as to conclude immigration successfully.
tonyHK12
02-17 04:57 PM
thanks Madhuri, updating total...
snathan
04-20 10:19 AM
Normally the employer will thread like this. But they wont do anything because if they sue you, they have to spend lot of money then what you have to pay them. Just reply like this.
1. I am ready to face the law suit, I got my attorny and ready to take legal action and I know how to deal with you.
2. I give you this many XX days. Pay me or I am going to refer this case to DOL and DHS.
3. Definitely they will not do anything. Once you refer them to DOL and DHS they are screwed. DHS security will investigate this and if there is any violation of law, this employer can not do any H1 for any one and all their GC process would be in limbo.
Simply they can not afford to take legal action or face DHS. If I were you I would do whatever it takes to recover my money. I wont let them go without hard time.
Be bold and do this.
1. I am ready to face the law suit, I got my attorny and ready to take legal action and I know how to deal with you.
2. I give you this many XX days. Pay me or I am going to refer this case to DOL and DHS.
3. Definitely they will not do anything. Once you refer them to DOL and DHS they are screwed. DHS security will investigate this and if there is any violation of law, this employer can not do any H1 for any one and all their GC process would be in limbo.
Simply they can not afford to take legal action or face DHS. If I were you I would do whatever it takes to recover my money. I wont let them go without hard time.
Be bold and do this.
No comments:
Post a Comment