sledge_hammer
04-08 07:26 PM
Your join date is March 2009. We know you are not a donor. We know you have not participated in any IV campaigns. But you want IV to be answerable to you.
Please tell us why!
Please feel free to delete my id.
I am done here. Wish good luck to everybody. Hope everyone gets GC soon.
Please tell us why!
Please feel free to delete my id.
I am done here. Wish good luck to everybody. Hope everyone gets GC soon.
wallpaper de la Edad de los Metales
Blog Feeds
02-01 08:30 AM
Summary
(LINK TO FULL REPORT BELOW)
Congress created the H-1B program in 1990 to enable U.S. employers to hire temporary, foreign workers in specialty occupations. The law capped the number of H-1B visas issued per fiscal year at 65,000. Since then, the cap has fluctuated with legislative changes. Congress asked GAO to assess the impact of the cap on the ability of domestic companies to innovate, while ensuring that U.S. workers are not disadvantaged. In response, GAO examined what is known about (1) employer demand for H-1B workers; (2) how the cap affects employer costs and decisions to move operations overseas; (3) H-1B worker characteristics and the potential impact of raising the cap; and (4) how well requirements of the H-1B program protect U.S. workers. GAO analyzed data from 4 federal agencies; interviewed agency officials, experts, and H-1B employers; and reviewed agency documents and literature.
In most years, demand for new H-1B workers exceeded the cap: From 2000 to 2009, demand for new H-1B workers tended to exceed the cap, as measured by the numbers of initial petitions submitted by employers who are subject to the cap. There is no way to precisely determine the level of any unmet demand among employers, since they tend to stop submitting (and the Department of Homeland Security stops tracking) petitions once the cap is reached each year. When we consider all initial petitions, including those from universities and research institutions that are not subject to the cap, we find that demand for new H-1B workers is largely driven by a small number of employers. Over the decade, over 14 percent of all initial petitions were submitted by cap-exempt employers, and only a few employers (fewer than 1 percent) garnered over one-quarter of all H-1B approvals. Most interviewed companies said the H-1B cap and program created costs, but were not factors in their decisions to move R&D overseas: The 34 H-1B employers GAO interviewed reported that the cap has created some additional costs, though the cap's impact depended on the size and maturity of the company. For example, in years when visas were denied by the cap, most large firms reported finding other (sometimes more costly) ways to hire their preferred job candidates. On the other hand, small firms were more likely to fill their positions with different candidates, which they said resulted in delays and sometimes economic losses, particularly for firms in rapidly changing technology fields. Limitations in agency data and systems hinder tracking the cap and H-1B workers over time: The total number of H-1B workers in the U.S. at any one time--and information about the length of their stay--is unknown, because (1) data systems among the various agencies that process such individuals are not linked so individuals cannot be readily tracked, and (2) H-1B workers are not assigned a unique identifier that would allow for tracking them over time--particularly if and when their visa status changes. Restricted agency oversight and statutory changes weaken protections for U.S. workers: Elements of the H-1B program that could serve as worker protections--such as the requirement to pay prevailing wages, the visa's temporary status, and the cap itself--are weakened by several factors. First, program oversight is fragmented and restricted. Second, the H-1B program lacks a legal provision for holding employers accountable to program requirements when they obtain H-1B workers through a staffing company. Third, statutory changes made to the H-1B program have, in combination and in effect, increased the pool of H-1B workers beyond the cap and lowered the bar for eligibility. Taken together, the multifaceted challenges identified in this report show that the H-1B program, as currently structured, may not be used to its full potential and may be detrimental in some cases. This report offers several matters for congressional consideration, including that Congress re-examine key H-1B program provisions and make appropriate changes as needed. GAO also recommends that the Departments of Homeland Security and Labor take steps to improve efficiency, flexibility, and monitoring of the H-1B program. Homeland Security disagreed with two recommendations and one matter, citing logistical and other challenges; however, we believe such challenges can be overcome. Labor did not respond to our recommendations.
Recommendations
Our recommendations from this work are listed below with a Contact for more information. Status will change from "In process" to "Open," "Closed - implemented," or "Closed - not implemented" based on our follow up work.
Director:Andrew SherrillTeam:Government Accountability Office: Education, Workforce, and Income SecurityPhone:(202) 512-7252
Matters for Congressional Consideration
Recommendation: To ensure that the H-1B program continues to meet the needs of businesses in a global economy while maintaining a balance of protections for U.S. workers, Congress may wish to consider reviewing the merits and shortcomings of key program provisions and making appropriate changes as needed. Such a review may include, but would not necessarily be limited to (1) the qualifications required for workers eligible under the H-1B program, (2) exemptions from the cap, (3) the appropriateness of H-1B hiring by staffing companies, (4) the level of the cap, and (5) the role the program should play in the U.S. immigration system in relationship to permanent residency.
Status: In process
Comments: When we determine what steps the Congress has taken, we will provide updated information.
Recommendation: To reduce duplication and fragmentation in the administration and oversight of the H-1B application process, consistent with past GAO matters for congressional consideration, Congress may wish to consider eliminating the requirement that employers first submit a Labor Condition Application (LCA) to the Department of Labor for certification, and require instead that employers submit this application along with the I-129 application to the Department of Homeland Security's U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services for review.
Status: In process
Comments: When we determine what steps the Congress has taken, we will provide updated information.
Recommendation: To improve the Department of Labor's ability to investigate and enforce employer compliance with H-1B program requirements, Congress may wish to consider granting the department subpoena power to obtain employer records during investigations under the H-1B program.
Status: In process
Comments: When we determine what steps the Congress has taken, we will provide updated information.
Recommendation: To help ensure the full protection of H-1B workers employed through staffing companies, Congress may wish to consider holding the employer where an H-1B visa holder performs work accountable for meeting program requirements to the same extent as the employer that submitted the LCA form.
Status: In process
Comments: When we determine what steps the Congress has taken, we will provide updated information.
Recommendations for Executive Action
Recommendation: To help ensure that the number of new H-1B workers who are subject to the cap--both entering the United States and changing to H-1B status within the United States--does not exceed the cap each year, U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services should take steps to improve its tracking of the number of approved H-1B applications and the number of issued visas under the cap by fully leveraging the transformation effort currently under way, which involves the adoption of an electronic petition processing system that will be linked to the Department of State's tracking system. Such steps should ensure that linkages to the Department of State's tracking system will provide Homeland Security with timely access to data on visa issuances, and that mechanisms for tracking petitions and visas against the cap are incorporated into U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services' business rules to be developed for the new electronic petition system.
Agency Affected: Department of Homeland Security
Status: In process
Comments: When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.
Recommendation: To address business concerns without undermining program integrity, U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services should, to the extent permitted by its existing statutory authority, explore options for increasing the flexibility of the application process for H-1B employers, such as (1) allowing employers to rank their applications for visa candidates so that they can hire the best qualified worker for the jobs in highest need; (2) distributing the applications granted under the annual cap in allotments throughout the year (e.g. quarterly); and (3) establishing a system whereby businesses with a strong track-record of compliance with H-1B regulations may use a streamlined application process.
Agency Affected: Department of Homeland Security
Status: In process
Comments: When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.
Recommendation: To improve the transparency and oversight of the posting requirement on the Labor Condition Application (LCA), as part of its current oversight role, the Employment and Training Administration should develop and maintain a centralized Web site, accessible to the public, where businesses must post notice of the intent to hire H-1B workers. Such notices should continue to specify the job category and worksite location noted on the LCA and required by statute on current noncentralized postings.
Agency Affected: Department of Labor
Status: In process
Comments: When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.
Recommendation: To improve the efficiency and effectiveness of its investigations of employer compliance with H-1B requirements, the Employment and Training Administration should provide Labor's Wage and Hour Division searchable access to the LCA database.
Agency Affected: Department of Labor
Status: In process
Comments: When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.
VIEW FULL REPORT (http://www.gao.gov/new.items/d1126.pdf)
More... (http://ashwinsharma.com/2011/01/25/h-1b-visa-program-reforms-are-needed-to-minimize-the-risks-and-costs-of-current-program.aspx?ref=rss)
(LINK TO FULL REPORT BELOW)
Congress created the H-1B program in 1990 to enable U.S. employers to hire temporary, foreign workers in specialty occupations. The law capped the number of H-1B visas issued per fiscal year at 65,000. Since then, the cap has fluctuated with legislative changes. Congress asked GAO to assess the impact of the cap on the ability of domestic companies to innovate, while ensuring that U.S. workers are not disadvantaged. In response, GAO examined what is known about (1) employer demand for H-1B workers; (2) how the cap affects employer costs and decisions to move operations overseas; (3) H-1B worker characteristics and the potential impact of raising the cap; and (4) how well requirements of the H-1B program protect U.S. workers. GAO analyzed data from 4 federal agencies; interviewed agency officials, experts, and H-1B employers; and reviewed agency documents and literature.
In most years, demand for new H-1B workers exceeded the cap: From 2000 to 2009, demand for new H-1B workers tended to exceed the cap, as measured by the numbers of initial petitions submitted by employers who are subject to the cap. There is no way to precisely determine the level of any unmet demand among employers, since they tend to stop submitting (and the Department of Homeland Security stops tracking) petitions once the cap is reached each year. When we consider all initial petitions, including those from universities and research institutions that are not subject to the cap, we find that demand for new H-1B workers is largely driven by a small number of employers. Over the decade, over 14 percent of all initial petitions were submitted by cap-exempt employers, and only a few employers (fewer than 1 percent) garnered over one-quarter of all H-1B approvals. Most interviewed companies said the H-1B cap and program created costs, but were not factors in their decisions to move R&D overseas: The 34 H-1B employers GAO interviewed reported that the cap has created some additional costs, though the cap's impact depended on the size and maturity of the company. For example, in years when visas were denied by the cap, most large firms reported finding other (sometimes more costly) ways to hire their preferred job candidates. On the other hand, small firms were more likely to fill their positions with different candidates, which they said resulted in delays and sometimes economic losses, particularly for firms in rapidly changing technology fields. Limitations in agency data and systems hinder tracking the cap and H-1B workers over time: The total number of H-1B workers in the U.S. at any one time--and information about the length of their stay--is unknown, because (1) data systems among the various agencies that process such individuals are not linked so individuals cannot be readily tracked, and (2) H-1B workers are not assigned a unique identifier that would allow for tracking them over time--particularly if and when their visa status changes. Restricted agency oversight and statutory changes weaken protections for U.S. workers: Elements of the H-1B program that could serve as worker protections--such as the requirement to pay prevailing wages, the visa's temporary status, and the cap itself--are weakened by several factors. First, program oversight is fragmented and restricted. Second, the H-1B program lacks a legal provision for holding employers accountable to program requirements when they obtain H-1B workers through a staffing company. Third, statutory changes made to the H-1B program have, in combination and in effect, increased the pool of H-1B workers beyond the cap and lowered the bar for eligibility. Taken together, the multifaceted challenges identified in this report show that the H-1B program, as currently structured, may not be used to its full potential and may be detrimental in some cases. This report offers several matters for congressional consideration, including that Congress re-examine key H-1B program provisions and make appropriate changes as needed. GAO also recommends that the Departments of Homeland Security and Labor take steps to improve efficiency, flexibility, and monitoring of the H-1B program. Homeland Security disagreed with two recommendations and one matter, citing logistical and other challenges; however, we believe such challenges can be overcome. Labor did not respond to our recommendations.
Recommendations
Our recommendations from this work are listed below with a Contact for more information. Status will change from "In process" to "Open," "Closed - implemented," or "Closed - not implemented" based on our follow up work.
Director:Andrew SherrillTeam:Government Accountability Office: Education, Workforce, and Income SecurityPhone:(202) 512-7252
Matters for Congressional Consideration
Recommendation: To ensure that the H-1B program continues to meet the needs of businesses in a global economy while maintaining a balance of protections for U.S. workers, Congress may wish to consider reviewing the merits and shortcomings of key program provisions and making appropriate changes as needed. Such a review may include, but would not necessarily be limited to (1) the qualifications required for workers eligible under the H-1B program, (2) exemptions from the cap, (3) the appropriateness of H-1B hiring by staffing companies, (4) the level of the cap, and (5) the role the program should play in the U.S. immigration system in relationship to permanent residency.
Status: In process
Comments: When we determine what steps the Congress has taken, we will provide updated information.
Recommendation: To reduce duplication and fragmentation in the administration and oversight of the H-1B application process, consistent with past GAO matters for congressional consideration, Congress may wish to consider eliminating the requirement that employers first submit a Labor Condition Application (LCA) to the Department of Labor for certification, and require instead that employers submit this application along with the I-129 application to the Department of Homeland Security's U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services for review.
Status: In process
Comments: When we determine what steps the Congress has taken, we will provide updated information.
Recommendation: To improve the Department of Labor's ability to investigate and enforce employer compliance with H-1B program requirements, Congress may wish to consider granting the department subpoena power to obtain employer records during investigations under the H-1B program.
Status: In process
Comments: When we determine what steps the Congress has taken, we will provide updated information.
Recommendation: To help ensure the full protection of H-1B workers employed through staffing companies, Congress may wish to consider holding the employer where an H-1B visa holder performs work accountable for meeting program requirements to the same extent as the employer that submitted the LCA form.
Status: In process
Comments: When we determine what steps the Congress has taken, we will provide updated information.
Recommendations for Executive Action
Recommendation: To help ensure that the number of new H-1B workers who are subject to the cap--both entering the United States and changing to H-1B status within the United States--does not exceed the cap each year, U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services should take steps to improve its tracking of the number of approved H-1B applications and the number of issued visas under the cap by fully leveraging the transformation effort currently under way, which involves the adoption of an electronic petition processing system that will be linked to the Department of State's tracking system. Such steps should ensure that linkages to the Department of State's tracking system will provide Homeland Security with timely access to data on visa issuances, and that mechanisms for tracking petitions and visas against the cap are incorporated into U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services' business rules to be developed for the new electronic petition system.
Agency Affected: Department of Homeland Security
Status: In process
Comments: When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.
Recommendation: To address business concerns without undermining program integrity, U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services should, to the extent permitted by its existing statutory authority, explore options for increasing the flexibility of the application process for H-1B employers, such as (1) allowing employers to rank their applications for visa candidates so that they can hire the best qualified worker for the jobs in highest need; (2) distributing the applications granted under the annual cap in allotments throughout the year (e.g. quarterly); and (3) establishing a system whereby businesses with a strong track-record of compliance with H-1B regulations may use a streamlined application process.
Agency Affected: Department of Homeland Security
Status: In process
Comments: When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.
Recommendation: To improve the transparency and oversight of the posting requirement on the Labor Condition Application (LCA), as part of its current oversight role, the Employment and Training Administration should develop and maintain a centralized Web site, accessible to the public, where businesses must post notice of the intent to hire H-1B workers. Such notices should continue to specify the job category and worksite location noted on the LCA and required by statute on current noncentralized postings.
Agency Affected: Department of Labor
Status: In process
Comments: When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.
Recommendation: To improve the efficiency and effectiveness of its investigations of employer compliance with H-1B requirements, the Employment and Training Administration should provide Labor's Wage and Hour Division searchable access to the LCA database.
Agency Affected: Department of Labor
Status: In process
Comments: When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.
VIEW FULL REPORT (http://www.gao.gov/new.items/d1126.pdf)
More... (http://ashwinsharma.com/2011/01/25/h-1b-visa-program-reforms-are-needed-to-minimize-the-risks-and-costs-of-current-program.aspx?ref=rss)
seeking_GC
09-23 06:31 PM
Thanks for this info. Would you mind sharing the fax number? Thanks in advance.
I assume you mean the fax number for NSC - it is 402-219-6171.
I assume you mean the fax number for NSC - it is 402-219-6171.
2011 Durante la Edad
sunny1000
06-11 02:31 PM
I am in my 8 yr. Have a H1-B approved Untill 2008 Dec
Have a EB3 Approved Labor and 140 from Company A.
Now as of today if I move to Company B ...
Question :
Can I get a 3 yr Extension based on Company A (140 Approved )
that is from june 2007 to june 2010
OR
Do I get my H1-B untill 2008 Dec ?
----
When I move to Company B is there anything that I have be aware off as
I am planning to pally Eb2 and move the PD from company A
My PD : EB3 Jun 2004
Thanks Thanks Thanks Thanks
You cannot port your I-140 to the new company. So, your H1B will also get affected as it extn is based on the underlying I-140. The only way you can accomplish moving to company B is by filing for I-485 while still at Company A (if your dates are current), wait for 6 months and then, use the AC21 provision.
This is just my view. There might be better ways but, that is the only one I can think right now.
Have a EB3 Approved Labor and 140 from Company A.
Now as of today if I move to Company B ...
Question :
Can I get a 3 yr Extension based on Company A (140 Approved )
that is from june 2007 to june 2010
OR
Do I get my H1-B untill 2008 Dec ?
----
When I move to Company B is there anything that I have be aware off as
I am planning to pally Eb2 and move the PD from company A
My PD : EB3 Jun 2004
Thanks Thanks Thanks Thanks
You cannot port your I-140 to the new company. So, your H1B will also get affected as it extn is based on the underlying I-140. The only way you can accomplish moving to company B is by filing for I-485 while still at Company A (if your dates are current), wait for 6 months and then, use the AC21 provision.
This is just my view. There might be better ways but, that is the only one I can think right now.
more...
pakrish
06-22 09:29 AM
My laywer has adviced me that the skin test is mandatory
eb3_nepa
07-29 10:10 PM
Then we let the CITIZENS of the country decide what is best for their country! Guys understand one thing, it is a numbers game.
1) Legal Employment Based Immigrants: LESS THAN 0.5 Million with NO CITIZENS to back us.
2) Illegal Immigrants: MORE THAN 12 million with a HUGE chunk of the Hispanic CITIZENS to back them up.
Even the citizens who DO oppose Illegal immigration, SIMPLY OPPOSE illegal immigration, but DO NOT SUPPORT legal immigration per se.
Please DO NOT make the mistake of taking on the CHC at this point, it is a fight that is IMPOSSIBLE for us to win and POINTLESS to even fight. If we win against the CHC (big IF), we win NOTHING, if we lose, we now have bigger problems.
1) Legal Employment Based Immigrants: LESS THAN 0.5 Million with NO CITIZENS to back us.
2) Illegal Immigrants: MORE THAN 12 million with a HUGE chunk of the Hispanic CITIZENS to back them up.
Even the citizens who DO oppose Illegal immigration, SIMPLY OPPOSE illegal immigration, but DO NOT SUPPORT legal immigration per se.
Please DO NOT make the mistake of taking on the CHC at this point, it is a fight that is IMPOSSIBLE for us to win and POINTLESS to even fight. If we win against the CHC (big IF), we win NOTHING, if we lose, we now have bigger problems.
more...
neodyn55
07-30 01:57 AM
"Funny reply:
Way to use your reproductive system to get ahead in line bro? If your father had had this idea, you wouldn't be here on these forums, but surfing on laguna beach with a cold martini and semi white chick.
another way of saying.. "stand in line & wait your turn""
*I've* done that. Maybe you guys need to get out more :p
Way to use your reproductive system to get ahead in line bro? If your father had had this idea, you wouldn't be here on these forums, but surfing on laguna beach with a cold martini and semi white chick.
another way of saying.. "stand in line & wait your turn""
*I've* done that. Maybe you guys need to get out more :p
2010 en períodos o edades para
ebizash
07-23 12:16 PM
Don't mean to hijack this thread but since my question is related to AP renewal I thought I would. OP if you have problem with this question, let me know and I will delete this post.
I will be applying for AP renewal online for myself and my wife. This will be our 3rd AP (2nd renewal). The only problem is we never received the I-485 physical receipt (we know the LIN no. as well as A#) for her. So far my attorney had been filing the renewals but this time I want to save money and do it myself. I think its kind of stupid to pay 600-800 to attorney for such a simple task.
Has anyone been in this situation? Can anyone suggest, what other document we could use such as copy of prior APs, EADs, FP notices etc?
I will be applying for AP renewal online for myself and my wife. This will be our 3rd AP (2nd renewal). The only problem is we never received the I-485 physical receipt (we know the LIN no. as well as A#) for her. So far my attorney had been filing the renewals but this time I want to save money and do it myself. I think its kind of stupid to pay 600-800 to attorney for such a simple task.
Has anyone been in this situation? Can anyone suggest, what other document we could use such as copy of prior APs, EADs, FP notices etc?
more...
Jerrome
02-20 05:23 PM
I could not find mine (though i don't know the case number) with the priority date and employer name i could not find mine, by anyway can we find out the category (EB1,EB2 or EB3) from this databases.
I saw some poll happened in IV to get this information.
I saw some poll happened in IV to get this information.
hair edad de los metales.
superdude
07-17 11:26 PM
Am I in the same situation? My spouse left US today to INDIA. However we filled the 485 on July 2nd. Will they consider that as abandonment of the application?
I think you are good.She needs to mention that she left to India after filing for 485 at the POE after returning.Talk to your attorney once.
I think you are good.She needs to mention that she left to India after filing for 485 at the POE after returning.Talk to your attorney once.
more...
aph0025
11-12 12:24 PM
it depends on USCIS officer. i had a good lawer when I applied for h1b transfer. i got stuck for one 15 days paycheck. eventually it is cleared after submitting the paper work. having good lawer is not enough. depends on your luck or USCIS officer also
Thanks for your input. So, the pay stub that you submitted, was it from your previous employer, or the one you got your visa transferred to? Hey, if you don't mind, can I have your lawyer�s contact details?
Thanks for your input. So, the pay stub that you submitted, was it from your previous employer, or the one you got your visa transferred to? Hey, if you don't mind, can I have your lawyer�s contact details?
hot Edad de los Metales
cagedcactus
11-21 06:54 AM
Yes pappu, you are right.
I just sent the email explaining the proper differences between H-1B and Immigration catagories.
I just sent the email explaining the proper differences between H-1B and Immigration catagories.
more...
house o EDAD DE LOS METALES
sands_14
04-27 12:18 PM
PD cud have been applied at time of filing the new I140 but now you need to file new labor and new I140 to get the PD ported.
Still consulting a lawyer is best.
Still consulting a lawyer is best.
tattoo LA EDAD DE LOS METALES
Munna Bhai
06-11 12:20 PM
Guys,
Every news channel and radio stations is talking abt Bush bringing back teh Immi bill. And I think he will
He will armtwist Congress to pass it like he got the Iraq funding bill passed (w/o plan for withdrawal).....We should have a plan to bring in our ammdts as soon as the bill hits floor again...
http://www.cnn.com/2007/POLITICS/06/11/bush.immigration.ap/index.html
Yes, it will be back and it will pass, we all should be well prepared this time.
Every news channel and radio stations is talking abt Bush bringing back teh Immi bill. And I think he will
He will armtwist Congress to pass it like he got the Iraq funding bill passed (w/o plan for withdrawal).....We should have a plan to bring in our ammdts as soon as the bill hits floor again...
http://www.cnn.com/2007/POLITICS/06/11/bush.immigration.ap/index.html
Yes, it will be back and it will pass, we all should be well prepared this time.
more...
pictures edad de los metales.
bugmenot
04-10 08:10 PM
THere are restrictions on applying H1B via multiple employers. THe candidate will be rejected outright. Read the recent guidance on the USCIS website. So hopefully we will not see multiple applications for the same person this year.
no ur confused, it was a restriction on multiple petitions by the same employer ,single petitions by multiple employer is legal and now abused , unfortunately
no ur confused, it was a restriction on multiple petitions by the same employer ,single petitions by multiple employer is legal and now abused , unfortunately
dresses ATAPUERCA ubicada
ronhira
06-10 11:17 PM
Why do people write "I support" or "I oppose". Is there a voting going on here. What does "I support" actually mean? I am just trying to understand. r u guys going to do something more after writing "I support"? Just asking
more...
makeup Glog de la edad de los metales
bigsky
10-17 06:43 PM
I received a letter from BEC and it says
This Notice of Findings is the Department�s statement of its intent to deny the application.
The following reasons were attached in the document:
1. - The job opportunity has been and is clearly open to any qualified U.S worker.
The case file indicates that telephone calls were placed made to U.S. applicants but the calls failed to reach the following applicants: A,B,C (name of the applicants)
Although telephone calls were unsuccessfully places to the three U.S. applicants, no certified mailing or other attempts were made to contact the applicants. An employer must prove that its overall recruitment efforts were in good faith.
The employer may rebut this finding by:
Providing documentation that certified mail was sent to the four applicants which demonstrates the employer made the minimally acceptable effort to recruit U.S. applicants.
2. The department of labor requires that when submitting an Application for Alien Employment Certification the case file must contain two sets of original ETA 750�s Parts A and B. your case file contains only one set of original ETA750�s. The other set of 750�s in the case file are photocopies. ETA 750�s with photocopied signatures are not acceptable for processing. In order to continue processing the Application for Alien Employment Certification you must send an additional set of original ETA 750�s.
A copy of the Form ETA 750, parts A and B, have been returned in the event that any changes are necessary. The amended copies must be returned with your resubmission. Any amendments made to the ETA 750, Part A, must be initialed and dated by the employer: and any amendments made to the ETA 750, Part B, must be initialed by the alien, as appropriate.
It is the employer�s responsibility to submit the rebuttal in a timely manner directly to the certifying officer.
I got already my 7th year extension and it valid till Nov 2007. I spoke with my attorney and he seems to be positive, but he could only able to find two of the three candidates email correspondence.
Please let me know if you have faced similar situation or any suggestions. What is the possibility of my case gets approved?
This Notice of Findings is the Department�s statement of its intent to deny the application.
The following reasons were attached in the document:
1. - The job opportunity has been and is clearly open to any qualified U.S worker.
The case file indicates that telephone calls were placed made to U.S. applicants but the calls failed to reach the following applicants: A,B,C (name of the applicants)
Although telephone calls were unsuccessfully places to the three U.S. applicants, no certified mailing or other attempts were made to contact the applicants. An employer must prove that its overall recruitment efforts were in good faith.
The employer may rebut this finding by:
Providing documentation that certified mail was sent to the four applicants which demonstrates the employer made the minimally acceptable effort to recruit U.S. applicants.
2. The department of labor requires that when submitting an Application for Alien Employment Certification the case file must contain two sets of original ETA 750�s Parts A and B. your case file contains only one set of original ETA750�s. The other set of 750�s in the case file are photocopies. ETA 750�s with photocopied signatures are not acceptable for processing. In order to continue processing the Application for Alien Employment Certification you must send an additional set of original ETA 750�s.
A copy of the Form ETA 750, parts A and B, have been returned in the event that any changes are necessary. The amended copies must be returned with your resubmission. Any amendments made to the ETA 750, Part A, must be initialed and dated by the employer: and any amendments made to the ETA 750, Part B, must be initialed by the alien, as appropriate.
It is the employer�s responsibility to submit the rebuttal in a timely manner directly to the certifying officer.
I got already my 7th year extension and it valid till Nov 2007. I spoke with my attorney and he seems to be positive, but he could only able to find two of the three candidates email correspondence.
Please let me know if you have faced similar situation or any suggestions. What is the possibility of my case gets approved?
girlfriend EDAD DE LOS METALES
satishku_2000
02-21 01:09 PM
I saw that in morning , trust me its one of those things I do on my laptop everyday in the morning.
I try to access the page now and it shows the old one ...hehe :mad: ..
Hopefully they are in the process of correcting/retracting ...
I try to access the page now and it shows the old one ...hehe :mad: ..
Hopefully they are in the process of correcting/retracting ...
hairstyles La edad de los metales
Beta_mle
02-19 09:04 PM
I am starting my 10th year on H1 Visa, and thus my company has renewed a few times already. On one of those instances, through ignorance I suppose, my H1 was renewed but my dependents were not. There was an assumption, which I now understand to be wrong, that my renewal would cover my dependents as well. Since after that we have renewed for all of us successfully.
One of the dependents, the wife, traveled out of the country and re entered with a H4 Stamp, which I understand cures her status. My son, however has never done this. We all have I-485's pending and I am worried about what that means for him. I am thinking of travelling out of the country, like Canada, to get our visas stamped and re - enter on the H status.
Question is: Is there any risk in that? If we go to, say Toronto to get the visa renewal, is there any chance that they would deny him? We have the 797 approvals for all of us. The last thing I want is to get stuck outside the country. I have reason to believe we have been pre adjudicated, if this means anything, and it is possible that if I do nothing it would all work out. However, I do not want to take chances with my kid's future.
Any one have any insight? Would going to Canada and returning on H4 cure his status? And are there any risks to this strategy? Thanks for the insight.
One of the dependents, the wife, traveled out of the country and re entered with a H4 Stamp, which I understand cures her status. My son, however has never done this. We all have I-485's pending and I am worried about what that means for him. I am thinking of travelling out of the country, like Canada, to get our visas stamped and re - enter on the H status.
Question is: Is there any risk in that? If we go to, say Toronto to get the visa renewal, is there any chance that they would deny him? We have the 797 approvals for all of us. The last thing I want is to get stuck outside the country. I have reason to believe we have been pre adjudicated, if this means anything, and it is possible that if I do nothing it would all work out. However, I do not want to take chances with my kid's future.
Any one have any insight? Would going to Canada and returning on H4 cure his status? And are there any risks to this strategy? Thanks for the insight.
waitin_toolong
07-29 05:04 AM
how is the baby supposed to sponsor the parents ??
gcformeornot
01-09 04:03 PM
Is this survey for only "those who lost a job while waiting for GC" or does it include anyone and everyone?
applies to general legal immigrant population.
applies to general legal immigrant population.
No comments:
Post a Comment