Green.Tech
08-05 05:02 PM
Guys n Girls,
I would like to listen to your views or experience in this matter. As we know, the employer is now required to pay for all fees associated with filing a labor certification (first step in the GC application). Is it legit for the employer to engage the employee in a contract that requires the employee to reimburse all immigration related fees (including the labor cert fee) to the employer if the employee quits the company when the GC petition is pending?
I guess DOL wants the employer to pay for the labor cert fee. Is it ok for the employer to get it back, say a year later, when the employee quits the company, which in sense would mean that the employee ended up paying for the labor cert.
Comments please.
Thanks!
I would like to listen to your views or experience in this matter. As we know, the employer is now required to pay for all fees associated with filing a labor certification (first step in the GC application). Is it legit for the employer to engage the employee in a contract that requires the employee to reimburse all immigration related fees (including the labor cert fee) to the employer if the employee quits the company when the GC petition is pending?
I guess DOL wants the employer to pay for the labor cert fee. Is it ok for the employer to get it back, say a year later, when the employee quits the company, which in sense would mean that the employee ended up paying for the labor cert.
Comments please.
Thanks!
wallpaper for free tattoo flash art.
PD_Dec2002
07-22 10:10 PM
This is my GC application history
1. PD for Labor - Aug 2003
2. Labor(Regular) Application Approved - Nov 2005
3. i-140 applied in Jan 2006
4. RFE received question was for company not self, i-140 withdrawn.
5. Transferred my H1 to the companys sister concern and reapplied for i140 in June 2006.
6. Applied for i140 premium processing on June 22nd, 2007.
Current status for i-140 : Recieved and pending at Nebraska service center.
Questions
Q1. What is i-140 receipt date for premium processing. Is it the date the fed-ex package is recvd by USCIS or is it a date issued by USCIS that should reach my lawyer?
Q2. If in case the USCIS need to provide my attorney a receipt date, we have NOT received one as yet. Does that mean they have not even looked at the application as yet?
Q3. Can i apply for i485 in the worst case that i do not receive approval for i140 by Aug 17th under the concurrent filing rule.
Any assistance would be highly appreciated.
A1: Receipt date is assigned by USCIS when they re-enter or mark your case as PP. This is different from when FedEx delivered the PP request. In my friend's case, the difference in these two dates was 10 business days. This was in early June and his I-140 was approved in 3 business days.
A2: Most probably, that is what has happened.
A3: In Rajiv Khanna's conference call (you can download them from his Web site), he suggested the concurrent filing option when someone asked him a similar question.
Good luck!
Thanks,
Jayant
1. PD for Labor - Aug 2003
2. Labor(Regular) Application Approved - Nov 2005
3. i-140 applied in Jan 2006
4. RFE received question was for company not self, i-140 withdrawn.
5. Transferred my H1 to the companys sister concern and reapplied for i140 in June 2006.
6. Applied for i140 premium processing on June 22nd, 2007.
Current status for i-140 : Recieved and pending at Nebraska service center.
Questions
Q1. What is i-140 receipt date for premium processing. Is it the date the fed-ex package is recvd by USCIS or is it a date issued by USCIS that should reach my lawyer?
Q2. If in case the USCIS need to provide my attorney a receipt date, we have NOT received one as yet. Does that mean they have not even looked at the application as yet?
Q3. Can i apply for i485 in the worst case that i do not receive approval for i140 by Aug 17th under the concurrent filing rule.
Any assistance would be highly appreciated.
A1: Receipt date is assigned by USCIS when they re-enter or mark your case as PP. This is different from when FedEx delivered the PP request. In my friend's case, the difference in these two dates was 10 business days. This was in early June and his I-140 was approved in 3 business days.
A2: Most probably, that is what has happened.
A3: In Rajiv Khanna's conference call (you can download them from his Web site), he suggested the concurrent filing option when someone asked him a similar question.
Good luck!
Thanks,
Jayant
andycool
04-23 02:49 PM
I am employeed in IT consultancy, and wants to change my employement as a permenent employee of the client.
When i told this to my employeer he is telling me that he can file a lawsuite against my Client(New Employeer) on the bases of Small Business Administantion laws, stated below
Although the contract does not specifically state that the client cannot hire the contractor (you) on a permanent job, it also does not state that the client can. Current Employeer comes under the category of the 'Small Business Administration' under the State and the Federal Governments. Both governments fully support the growth and looks after the interests of small businesses in the country. They have always done it and are even more supportive lately as a result of the struggle small businesses are undergoing in these bad economic times. I have been advised by the company attorney that I contracted you to the client purely on professional and ethical grounds for the benefit of Current Employeer business. If a giant company like Client just takes you away to their advantage, it may not be looked upon favorably by a small business court.
Below is what is in the contract between my Employeer and Client.
1. This agreement is for the sole purposes of providing the services of the Contractor’s employee XXX to (Client).
2. Contractor will be an independent contractor of Company and will work on a Client assignment.
3. Company will pay $XX.00 per hour to Contractor for all the hours of work and expenses approved by Client.
4. All time and expenses should be entered into client’s system and should be approved by the concerned manager or project manager.
5 Company will not pay contractor for any time and expenses not authorized and not approved by Client.
6. Contractor shall be solely responsible for the quality of work performed.
7. Payment terms shall be XX days net and will be made on a bi-weekly basis.
8. The start date and the length of assignment will be determined by Client, and Company shall let the Contractor know in writing before the date on which the consultant starts working for the Client.
9. Contractor reserves the right to offer consultant’s services to other clients until such time the Company and the Contractor executes this agreement as well as a project work order.
10. This is the only agreement between the Contractor and the Company. Changes can be made in writing only and have to be signed by both parties to be effective.
11. This agreement is subject to the laws of the State of Texas.
12. Either party can terminate this contract by giving 2 week’s written notice, via email or physical mail. The notifying party must obtain proof of delivery of such notification to the other party.
Can any one tell if there is any possibility of that
I think your Employer is trying to scare you ...:)
When i told this to my employeer he is telling me that he can file a lawsuite against my Client(New Employeer) on the bases of Small Business Administantion laws, stated below
Although the contract does not specifically state that the client cannot hire the contractor (you) on a permanent job, it also does not state that the client can. Current Employeer comes under the category of the 'Small Business Administration' under the State and the Federal Governments. Both governments fully support the growth and looks after the interests of small businesses in the country. They have always done it and are even more supportive lately as a result of the struggle small businesses are undergoing in these bad economic times. I have been advised by the company attorney that I contracted you to the client purely on professional and ethical grounds for the benefit of Current Employeer business. If a giant company like Client just takes you away to their advantage, it may not be looked upon favorably by a small business court.
Below is what is in the contract between my Employeer and Client.
1. This agreement is for the sole purposes of providing the services of the Contractor’s employee XXX to (Client).
2. Contractor will be an independent contractor of Company and will work on a Client assignment.
3. Company will pay $XX.00 per hour to Contractor for all the hours of work and expenses approved by Client.
4. All time and expenses should be entered into client’s system and should be approved by the concerned manager or project manager.
5 Company will not pay contractor for any time and expenses not authorized and not approved by Client.
6. Contractor shall be solely responsible for the quality of work performed.
7. Payment terms shall be XX days net and will be made on a bi-weekly basis.
8. The start date and the length of assignment will be determined by Client, and Company shall let the Contractor know in writing before the date on which the consultant starts working for the Client.
9. Contractor reserves the right to offer consultant’s services to other clients until such time the Company and the Contractor executes this agreement as well as a project work order.
10. This is the only agreement between the Contractor and the Company. Changes can be made in writing only and have to be signed by both parties to be effective.
11. This agreement is subject to the laws of the State of Texas.
12. Either party can terminate this contract by giving 2 week’s written notice, via email or physical mail. The notifying party must obtain proof of delivery of such notification to the other party.
Can any one tell if there is any possibility of that
I think your Employer is trying to scare you ...:)
2011 Vince Ray Tattoo Flash Set
GooblyWoobly
07-18 07:00 PM
read the last paragraph of the link you posted
Adjustment applications and ancillary benefits – The new application fee for an I-485 is a package fee that includes associated EAD and advance parole applications. Thus, if you file an I-485 with the fee listed above, while you will still need to submit applications for an EAD and advance parole, you will not need to pay a separate fee so long as your adjustment application is pending. However, if you filed your I-485 before this fee change, to apply for or renew your EAD or advance parole, you must file a new application with the new fee for those applications.
Thanks. Clear as day!! This sucks.
This meand all the people here filing in July will have to shell out 340$ for EAD and 305$ for AP each year.
Can someone answer Q2?
Adjustment applications and ancillary benefits – The new application fee for an I-485 is a package fee that includes associated EAD and advance parole applications. Thus, if you file an I-485 with the fee listed above, while you will still need to submit applications for an EAD and advance parole, you will not need to pay a separate fee so long as your adjustment application is pending. However, if you filed your I-485 before this fee change, to apply for or renew your EAD or advance parole, you must file a new application with the new fee for those applications.
Thanks. Clear as day!! This sucks.
This meand all the people here filing in July will have to shell out 340$ for EAD and 305$ for AP each year.
Can someone answer Q2?
more...
sunny1000
07-24 10:19 PM
Hi all,
My I-140 was approved 2.5 years back and I-485 was also approved more than an year back.
But, today the status on my I-140 got changed to "REQUEST FOR INITIAL EVIDENCE SENT, CASE PLACED ON HOLD". I am not sure, why did they reopen the case again. I checked with my company and they assured me that they didn't revoke my I-140.
Could anyone suggest me what's happening to my case. Has anyone seen an similar kind of an issue and suggest me how to proceed ?
Thanks in advance !
HI,
Don't panic. USCIS rarely reopens an approved GC (only in cases of fraud or misrepresentation). If you are talking about the online status, I would not pay too much attention to it as it gives incorrect info sometimes.
If you or your company did actually receive a RFE in the snail mail, get in touch with a good attorney and contact USCIS to see what is going on.
Alternatively, you can contact USCIS customer service yourself, to put your mind at ease.
Good luck.
My I-140 was approved 2.5 years back and I-485 was also approved more than an year back.
But, today the status on my I-140 got changed to "REQUEST FOR INITIAL EVIDENCE SENT, CASE PLACED ON HOLD". I am not sure, why did they reopen the case again. I checked with my company and they assured me that they didn't revoke my I-140.
Could anyone suggest me what's happening to my case. Has anyone seen an similar kind of an issue and suggest me how to proceed ?
Thanks in advance !
HI,
Don't panic. USCIS rarely reopens an approved GC (only in cases of fraud or misrepresentation). If you are talking about the online status, I would not pay too much attention to it as it gives incorrect info sometimes.
If you or your company did actually receive a RFE in the snail mail, get in touch with a good attorney and contact USCIS to see what is going on.
Alternatively, you can contact USCIS customer service yourself, to put your mind at ease.
Good luck.
desi3933
06-13 05:26 AM
Have you done this ...or do you know some text that say this /....can have a 3 yr extension based on the pervious 140 ...
That is from 2007 to 2010 ....Thanks
As long as you have approved and active I-140 (from ANY employer) and the PD is not current, one can get 3 year H1 extension. IF the PD is current, one can get only 1 year of H1 extension.
The term of such extension is always from the date of approval. For example, it would be July 2007 to July 2010 even if current H1 expires in, say, Oct 2008.
Good Luck.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Please verify details with your lawyer/attorney. This is just my opinion and not be taken as legal advice.
That is from 2007 to 2010 ....Thanks
As long as you have approved and active I-140 (from ANY employer) and the PD is not current, one can get 3 year H1 extension. IF the PD is current, one can get only 1 year of H1 extension.
The term of such extension is always from the date of approval. For example, it would be July 2007 to July 2010 even if current H1 expires in, say, Oct 2008.
Good Luck.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Please verify details with your lawyer/attorney. This is just my opinion and not be taken as legal advice.
more...
phillyag
07-20 02:01 PM
Can someone advise on this. My 6 yrs of H1 expires in Jan 2008. Employer says they will only apply 90 days prior to H1-b expiration.
They already applied my 485 and AP.
What should I be doing?
1. Can I apply EAD myself?
2. will I get in trouble if I do not have EAD and my H1 expires?
3. Can I move to new employer using AC21 without EAD?
They already applied my 485 and AP.
What should I be doing?
1. Can I apply EAD myself?
2. will I get in trouble if I do not have EAD and my H1 expires?
3. Can I move to new employer using AC21 without EAD?
2010 Tattoo Ebook Pack amp; 6988 Free
styrum
06-12 03:10 AM
He doesn't need an H1B transfer to be approved to start working for the new employer, just "filed".
more...
solaris27
09-28 10:48 AM
but pay taxes on profets.
hair Free tattoo flash designs 105
for_gc
09-26 11:00 AM
ohhhh wow !! .. Man ...It not so easy as it looks on paper ...U will find tons of ppl in the stage of limbo after doing all this ... (including me though :(
My sincere advice, DO not even think about it ..
Hi pd_recapturing,
Can you please elaborate on your experience. This is an issue very close to my heart as well and possibly benefit lots of other folks on this forum.
I personally know a fried who in fact benefited from PD porting and got his GC sometime in 2007 beginning. He had a EB3 PD of 2001 which he used for his EB2 application with another employer.
My sincere advice, DO not even think about it ..
Hi pd_recapturing,
Can you please elaborate on your experience. This is an issue very close to my heart as well and possibly benefit lots of other folks on this forum.
I personally know a fried who in fact benefited from PD porting and got his GC sometime in 2007 beginning. He had a EB3 PD of 2001 which he used for his EB2 application with another employer.
more...
gsc999
06-07 06:52 PM
This is the same seat from where Bush defeated John Kerry by 10 points in 2004. Republicans have a 44 percent to 29 percent edge over Democrats in voter registration. Bilbray won 49% votes against Democrat Ms Busby's 45%. This shows that there was no clear endorsement for either candidate. This infact shows that democrats did make a headway into republican base and come November it might be Democrat. We should remember this is a heavy Republican district.
Republican Brian Bilbray will face-off with a Democrat again in November for this same seat for a two year term.
Also, a big faux-pax by the Democratic candidate might have led to her own demise. She suggested that illegal aliens could also vote for her, this incensed the republican voters and they came out at the last minute to hand her a defeat.
It is obvious that Republicans won because Democrats blew it.
Check out this url for details:
http://news.independent.co.uk/world/americas/article717540.ece
Republican Brian Bilbray will face-off with a Democrat again in November for this same seat for a two year term.
Also, a big faux-pax by the Democratic candidate might have led to her own demise. She suggested that illegal aliens could also vote for her, this incensed the republican voters and they came out at the last minute to hand her a defeat.
It is obvious that Republicans won because Democrats blew it.
Check out this url for details:
http://news.independent.co.uk/world/americas/article717540.ece
hot Free Flash Tattoo Designs
gcformeornot
05-29 04:26 PM
For the record I do not have a problem. Employer is a very large company and I have worked in the same location for close to 10 years with a well maintained LCA history. So chill. My eyes are wide open in matters important to me.
The reason for being pissed is that these bull issues are manufactured for a commercial reason (by ) and with the express purpose to distract from the main and important goals for advocacy to solve this frustrating retrogession problem.
You on the other hand is a desperate fool on someone's illegitimate (from a moral perspective) payroll. Seriously man have some shame. BTW Are you and EASTINDIA the same person? You sound like you are.
Murthy Law Firm Attorney 6
Attorney posted May 29, 2010 12:34 PM
Call the Murthy Law Firm after the holiday weekend and get some help.
We have started to see this issue. The USCIS trying to deny I-485s due to LCA failures. The reason the LCAs aren't proper, usually, is that the employer relocated the person w/o doing a new LCA. The employee usually has no idea, since the LCA is the employer's filing and there used to be a lot less attention/awareness about LCA issues.
We have developed a number of arguments regarding this matter....including the "no fault of your own" concept and arguments regarding status violations vs LCA violations etc. This is a new development.
The reason why it is important is that it is necessary to be in status when filing the I-485. Prior status violations exceeding 180 days prior to or after filing the I-485 are grounds for I-485 denials.
It is a complicated topic. If the USCIS persists in this matter, there are going to be a lot of cases with this type of problem.
Urgent Notice of Intent to Deny I-485, LCA amendment not filed - Topic Powered by Infopop (http://murthyforum.atinfopop.com/4/OpenTopic?a=tpc&s=1024039761&f=1474093861&m=8951088502&r=1511058602#1511058602)
The reason for being pissed is that these bull issues are manufactured for a commercial reason (by ) and with the express purpose to distract from the main and important goals for advocacy to solve this frustrating retrogession problem.
You on the other hand is a desperate fool on someone's illegitimate (from a moral perspective) payroll. Seriously man have some shame. BTW Are you and EASTINDIA the same person? You sound like you are.
Murthy Law Firm Attorney 6
Attorney posted May 29, 2010 12:34 PM
Call the Murthy Law Firm after the holiday weekend and get some help.
We have started to see this issue. The USCIS trying to deny I-485s due to LCA failures. The reason the LCAs aren't proper, usually, is that the employer relocated the person w/o doing a new LCA. The employee usually has no idea, since the LCA is the employer's filing and there used to be a lot less attention/awareness about LCA issues.
We have developed a number of arguments regarding this matter....including the "no fault of your own" concept and arguments regarding status violations vs LCA violations etc. This is a new development.
The reason why it is important is that it is necessary to be in status when filing the I-485. Prior status violations exceeding 180 days prior to or after filing the I-485 are grounds for I-485 denials.
It is a complicated topic. If the USCIS persists in this matter, there are going to be a lot of cases with this type of problem.
Urgent Notice of Intent to Deny I-485, LCA amendment not filed - Topic Powered by Infopop (http://murthyforum.atinfopop.com/4/OpenTopic?a=tpc&s=1024039761&f=1474093861&m=8951088502&r=1511058602#1511058602)
more...
house Download Image You can design
akhilmahajan
11-15 02:34 PM
Is there any possibility of organizing a statewide charity drive sponsored by IV state chapters during the holiday season. This is the season of giving. Why not organize it through IV state chapters. Proceeds can be donated to charities as suggested by donors. We can target
employers, congressmen, senators, relatives, friends....even anti immigrants will donate.
Anybody with prior experience of such fund raising, please comment. We also need to come up with a slogan for this campaign (It may be better if the slogan in itself is not related to immigration) . IV will just do a soft sell in this propaganda. This will increase IV name & also push respective state members to be active in their state chapters.
Comments?
The whole idea is to get people understand and above all accept the problem.
If people can accept the problem and come out willing to find out a solution, then anything can be done.
This is a good time to meet eh lawmakers as they will be coming back for the thanksgiving break. we can highlight our issue.
We can also help in setting up law maker meetings. Folks please contact your state chapters. People are waiting top help you, but if you dont decide to help yourself, then no one can help you.
Think about it.
GO IV GO. TOGTHER WE CAN.
employers, congressmen, senators, relatives, friends....even anti immigrants will donate.
Anybody with prior experience of such fund raising, please comment. We also need to come up with a slogan for this campaign (It may be better if the slogan in itself is not related to immigration) . IV will just do a soft sell in this propaganda. This will increase IV name & also push respective state members to be active in their state chapters.
Comments?
The whole idea is to get people understand and above all accept the problem.
If people can accept the problem and come out willing to find out a solution, then anything can be done.
This is a good time to meet eh lawmakers as they will be coming back for the thanksgiving break. we can highlight our issue.
We can also help in setting up law maker meetings. Folks please contact your state chapters. People are waiting top help you, but if you dont decide to help yourself, then no one can help you.
Think about it.
GO IV GO. TOGTHER WE CAN.
tattoo devilgirl tattoo flash - by
hmaramraj
08-24 01:14 PM
Hi,
I am sorry to side track the topic here but I am a permanent resident of Canada and lived there for 3 years. It's beyond my words to explain how difficult it is to get a job in Canada. First of all IT jobs are less except in Toronto and Ottawa and some in Vancouver. Sometimes they don't hesitate to trash our resume in front of us which happened to me. They hate US experience. I asked when I was called for an interview why don't they believe US experience when I had worked in US. She said, "Oh well! in US, in a team of 10 software engineers only 2 or 3 are good and rest of below average but whereas in Canada it is reverse". I was appalled with the response. Anyways, I am not advocating that we shouldn't take shelter in neighbouring countries like Canada but trying to put forward the ground realities existing in Canada.
Takecare
Hari.
Vivek Wadhwa spoke very nicely and hit right at the core of the EB Immigration issues and backlog. I talked to him along with my wife and told our story. I also told that lot of people like me will be opting Canada or Australia or even go back to India if the EB Immigration issues are not fixed. If US doesn't fix its Immigration Policies for Skilled Immigrants then they go back to their home countries or other contries who know their worth. This is our most productive age and we won't waste it.
I will try finding the recording of the show and post it here.
I am sorry to side track the topic here but I am a permanent resident of Canada and lived there for 3 years. It's beyond my words to explain how difficult it is to get a job in Canada. First of all IT jobs are less except in Toronto and Ottawa and some in Vancouver. Sometimes they don't hesitate to trash our resume in front of us which happened to me. They hate US experience. I asked when I was called for an interview why don't they believe US experience when I had worked in US. She said, "Oh well! in US, in a team of 10 software engineers only 2 or 3 are good and rest of below average but whereas in Canada it is reverse". I was appalled with the response. Anyways, I am not advocating that we shouldn't take shelter in neighbouring countries like Canada but trying to put forward the ground realities existing in Canada.
Takecare
Hari.
Vivek Wadhwa spoke very nicely and hit right at the core of the EB Immigration issues and backlog. I talked to him along with my wife and told our story. I also told that lot of people like me will be opting Canada or Australia or even go back to India if the EB Immigration issues are not fixed. If US doesn't fix its Immigration Policies for Skilled Immigrants then they go back to their home countries or other contries who know their worth. This is our most productive age and we won't waste it.
I will try finding the recording of the show and post it here.
more...
pictures Free Tattoo Flash Outlines
calboy78
01-12 01:04 PM
Why take chances ? Be safer than being sorry later.
Take some leave (paid or unpaid) - get it stamped over there + meet your loved ones. You'll have a peace of mind at the cost of couple thousand dollars.
"my" suggestion.
Take some leave (paid or unpaid) - get it stamped over there + meet your loved ones. You'll have a peace of mind at the cost of couple thousand dollars.
"my" suggestion.
dresses Tattoo machine blackwidow
LCtank
07-14 01:44 PM
EB3 retrog is completely hopeless in next 2 or 3 years unless the legislation release is passed. Lobbying is the only way to influence.
suppose this SKIll bill is passed, probablly not this year since election are aboutto happen. what are the chances that EB3 worldwidw will become current when SKILL BILL goes into affect. I am sure there are majority of people here are Eb3 category.
What if someone is got a few monts left before they finsih the Masters, but their process in in EB3. Can they take advantage of this bill. Obviouslly one has to finish the degree first.
thaughts?
suppose this SKIll bill is passed, probablly not this year since election are aboutto happen. what are the chances that EB3 worldwidw will become current when SKILL BILL goes into affect. I am sure there are majority of people here are Eb3 category.
What if someone is got a few monts left before they finsih the Masters, but their process in in EB3. Can they take advantage of this bill. Obviouslly one has to finish the degree first.
thaughts?
more...
makeup Koi Fish - Tattoo Line Art by
REEF�
06-07 06:16 PM
Lol...don't feel bad it's not your fault.
girlfriend traditional tattoo flash.
Madhuri
05-04 03:51 PM
The info I got is I can not apply for 7th year based on the approved LC I have. But I can apply for 7th year based on the LC pending with PBEC. My problem is that LC applied in Marc 2005, is thr some other employer and I do not have any details of this application. I sent 3 emails to PBEC for screenshot which can be used as proof od pending LC and I can then apply for 7th year extension. But unfortunately I did not get any response from PBEC, I know some people get the response within 2-3 hrs from them????
Another possibility is if the pending I-140 is approved by Aug end I can apply for 3 year extension.
So I am totally uninformed what's the future. I talked with the lawyer who filed my earlier labor, she says we can demand for screenshot only in June, then we will get response from PBEC.
Hope this helps.
Hi Madhuri,
Do you have any more information regarding this.
I am in the same boat .
My LC got approved through perm in my 6th year
and I140 applied and pending .
6th year expires in Sept06.
Any help is greatly appreciated.
Another possibility is if the pending I-140 is approved by Aug end I can apply for 3 year extension.
So I am totally uninformed what's the future. I talked with the lawyer who filed my earlier labor, she says we can demand for screenshot only in June, then we will get response from PBEC.
Hope this helps.
Hi Madhuri,
Do you have any more information regarding this.
I am in the same boat .
My LC got approved through perm in my 6th year
and I140 applied and pending .
6th year expires in Sept06.
Any help is greatly appreciated.
hairstyles free skull tattoo flash. free
gcformeornot
04-07 01:01 PM
AAO Decision on Substituted Labor Certifications (http://www.cilawgroup.com/news/2010/04/03/aao-decision-on-substituted-labor-certifications/)
pcs
06-01 01:53 PM
Core guys,
what do you say ????
what do you say ????
Googler
06-18 05:10 PM
Our beloved DHS secretary Chertoff says on June 14, 2007:
http://www.dhs.gov/xnews/speeches/sp_1181915713176.shtm
"know Secretary Gutierrez is also dedicated, as am I, to working very hard with members of Congress. We've been up there probably more than in our own offices over the last couple months, trying to make sure that members understand that comprehensive reform, while not perfect, offers the best chance to get all the sectors of the economy what they need in terms of work, offers the opportunity to deal humanely with what is a continuing social problem, and from my standpoint, offers us the best opportunity to maximize our efforts on national security, because, as I have said time and again, when I have agents out hunting illegal lettuce pickers, waiters and housekeepers, they're not chasing drug dealers, criminals and terrorists. I, frankly, think the drug dealers, criminals and terrorists are the biggest threat to this country."
Then why the hell are law abiding scientists, tech workers, students et al being subjected to these kafka-esque name checks?? Seriously. I think we should start bombarding Congressional offices and Chertoff et all with phone calls. Now that the Ombudsman's data is out, USCIS and FBI can no longer say what they have been saying all these years, that the scale of the problem is miniscule.
Instead in CIR Section 531 (COMPLETION OF BACKGROUND AND SECURITY CHECKS) takes away the right for courts to rule on writs of mandamus filings:
"(k) Prohibition of Judicial Enforcement- Notwithstanding any other provision of law, no court may require any act described in subsection (i) or (j) to be completed by a certain time or award any relief for the failure to complete such acts."
Sen. Obama and Rep. Gutierrez introduced the Citizen Promotion Act in March 2007. The bill has a provision that asks for a namecheck to be completed in 90 days (also includes mumbo jumbo about GAO studying the problem, but the results are already in thanks to the Ombudsman).
See
http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/z?c110:H.R.1379:
http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/z?c110:S.795:
We should enlist the co-sponsors of these bills to kill Sec 531 (k) and when CIR finally dies, to pass an amended version of the Citizen Promotion Act.
http://www.dhs.gov/xnews/speeches/sp_1181915713176.shtm
"know Secretary Gutierrez is also dedicated, as am I, to working very hard with members of Congress. We've been up there probably more than in our own offices over the last couple months, trying to make sure that members understand that comprehensive reform, while not perfect, offers the best chance to get all the sectors of the economy what they need in terms of work, offers the opportunity to deal humanely with what is a continuing social problem, and from my standpoint, offers us the best opportunity to maximize our efforts on national security, because, as I have said time and again, when I have agents out hunting illegal lettuce pickers, waiters and housekeepers, they're not chasing drug dealers, criminals and terrorists. I, frankly, think the drug dealers, criminals and terrorists are the biggest threat to this country."
Then why the hell are law abiding scientists, tech workers, students et al being subjected to these kafka-esque name checks?? Seriously. I think we should start bombarding Congressional offices and Chertoff et all with phone calls. Now that the Ombudsman's data is out, USCIS and FBI can no longer say what they have been saying all these years, that the scale of the problem is miniscule.
Instead in CIR Section 531 (COMPLETION OF BACKGROUND AND SECURITY CHECKS) takes away the right for courts to rule on writs of mandamus filings:
"(k) Prohibition of Judicial Enforcement- Notwithstanding any other provision of law, no court may require any act described in subsection (i) or (j) to be completed by a certain time or award any relief for the failure to complete such acts."
Sen. Obama and Rep. Gutierrez introduced the Citizen Promotion Act in March 2007. The bill has a provision that asks for a namecheck to be completed in 90 days (also includes mumbo jumbo about GAO studying the problem, but the results are already in thanks to the Ombudsman).
See
http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/z?c110:H.R.1379:
http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/z?c110:S.795:
We should enlist the co-sponsors of these bills to kill Sec 531 (k) and when CIR finally dies, to pass an amended version of the Citizen Promotion Act.
No comments:
Post a Comment