trucks55
06-04 03:46 PM
I had recent gt my in-laws visa stamped at chennai consulate, i has send my 3 months bank statements from my online statements..
hope this help you ...
hope this help you ...
wallpaper Lowes.com Paint Visualizer
Queen Josephine
May 23rd, 2005, 07:38 PM
Bob, Exmoor I'm saving for a vacation trip (considering it would take me a day to just get there!)
Now Red Rock, well, I can do that in a day! (Actually, I have been there before and I can tell you those rocks are enormous)
Now Red Rock, well, I can do that in a day! (Actually, I have been there before and I can tell you those rocks are enormous)
cahaba
04-14 12:31 AM
Thanks all for your responses.
I will get the ONET job codes and post them over here.
Also, how do you guys feel about the self employed option? My friend or his spouse can start a company (LLC) and he can part-time and remotely work on some projects while pursuing his current Marketing Manager job. Does anybody have experience or know somebody who has used the self-employed option.
Thanks.
I will get the ONET job codes and post them over here.
Also, how do you guys feel about the self employed option? My friend or his spouse can start a company (LLC) and he can part-time and remotely work on some projects while pursuing his current Marketing Manager job. Does anybody have experience or know somebody who has used the self-employed option.
Thanks.
2011 Valspar Paints, Valspar Paint
Edison99
09-23 06:57 AM
What a foresight�
Corporations save more than 10K.. It doesn't work..
Average cost of employment in US for high tech is around 90$ per hour and social security
percentage is 6%, So the max is less than 10K per year or less than 0.5 USD per hour.
These companies actually pay far less than 90$ for offshore resources..
Since it really doesn't work, it has high chances of passage into bill :rolleyes: and president will promptly sign it before this session recesses.. :cool:
It will also be passed in an unanimous consent by both parties..
Corporations save more than 10K.. It doesn't work..
Average cost of employment in US for high tech is around 90$ per hour and social security
percentage is 6%, So the max is less than 10K per year or less than 0.5 USD per hour.
These companies actually pay far less than 90$ for offshore resources..
Since it really doesn't work, it has high chances of passage into bill :rolleyes: and president will promptly sign it before this session recesses.. :cool:
It will also be passed in an unanimous consent by both parties..
more...
prem_goel
01-29 11:02 AM
My sister got her H-1B in 2008 but didn't work for her employer due to health problems. After about 3 to 4 months she left for India and recovered. Over there she joined a multi-national who sent her on B1 this year. (She already had traveled on B1 from a very old employer and used that).
Now after coming here on B1, she has a job offer from an Indian MNC. My understanding is that the MNC will have to file two petitions:
1. A Change of Status from B1 to H1B
2. A I-129 requesting H-1B (or H-1B transfer)
Question -
a) Can she start working for the Indian MNC after filing both of these two, or will we have to wait for both approvals?
b) Do we require paystubs from the original H-1B employer from 2008 for H-1B transfer? My understanding is that paystubs are usually required to establish one is currently in status, but she is on B1 right now and not H1B.
Attorneys, please advise.
Much thanks in advance,
P
Now after coming here on B1, she has a job offer from an Indian MNC. My understanding is that the MNC will have to file two petitions:
1. A Change of Status from B1 to H1B
2. A I-129 requesting H-1B (or H-1B transfer)
Question -
a) Can she start working for the Indian MNC after filing both of these two, or will we have to wait for both approvals?
b) Do we require paystubs from the original H-1B employer from 2008 for H-1B transfer? My understanding is that paystubs are usually required to establish one is currently in status, but she is on B1 right now and not H1B.
Attorneys, please advise.
Much thanks in advance,
P
smuggymba
10-06 04:06 PM
My friend (same person as ronhira, same tone and lang always...anyway)
I'm from india just in the process of starting my labor on H1-B for the alst 4.5 years. You say I'm an anti-immigrant....based on what? I can't waste my time with you.
Please have fun in issuing toll alerts. ppl like me will still respond if I can help. I have received tremendous help from here and other forums also and I will reply if I can asnwer any question. Have fun.
smuggymba, every one knows you are an anti immigrant. dont waste time here with fake posts.
Why should I make the fact gaps public and train anti immigrants like you ?
I'm from india just in the process of starting my labor on H1-B for the alst 4.5 years. You say I'm an anti-immigrant....based on what? I can't waste my time with you.
Please have fun in issuing toll alerts. ppl like me will still respond if I can help. I have received tremendous help from here and other forums also and I will reply if I can asnwer any question. Have fun.
smuggymba, every one knows you are an anti immigrant. dont waste time here with fake posts.
Why should I make the fact gaps public and train anti immigrants like you ?
more...
knnmbd
07-14 01:48 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.
2 to 3 years is just wishful thinking. This is a permanent problem that we are faced with. Not to mention all the delays at the AOS stage including FBI checks and all that jazz. The only hope is the SKIL bill. WE NEED THIS MORE THAN ANY THING ELSE. I think we are at the cross-roads and this bill will well determine our future in this country
2 to 3 years is just wishful thinking. This is a permanent problem that we are faced with. Not to mention all the delays at the AOS stage including FBI checks and all that jazz. The only hope is the SKIL bill. WE NEED THIS MORE THAN ANY THING ELSE. I think we are at the cross-roads and this bill will well determine our future in this country
2010 ValsparPaintChipsBarney.jpg
Radhika
07-09 01:12 PM
upgraded on June25 to PP got status changed on 30th. Received approval notice by attorney on July 6th
more...
dc4opera
05-18 11:27 PM
I need some advice from the people on this board.
My labor certification was recently approved via PERM. My employer will soon be signing the paperwork to file the I-140 with INS. My contract with him expires in February 2007, and he wants me to continue working for him beyond that. I, however, have expressed my desire NOT to stay with him any longer than I need to. Obviously, I will need to stay until 6 months have passed from the filing of my I-485 for portability to kick in.
Because of this, he wants me to WAIT until January 2007 to file my I-485. This way he is assured that I will be working for him until June 2007. My question is, does he have any right to coerce me to wait until January 2007 to file the I-485?
I initially agreed to this delay in filing because I was under the impression that BOTH the I-140 and I-485 were to be filed by the employer, and that I-485 processing took about 6 months. Now that I have learned that the I-485 is to be filed by me and that I-485 processing can take more than a year, are there any downsides to me filing the I-485 earlier than January 2007 WITHOUT MY EMPLOYER KNOWING?
I realize that "honesty is the best policy" but the situation is truly untenable for me and I feel that he is purposely delaying the processing of my INS papers to keep me at his mercy. Another factor to consider is that the lawyer we will be using for the I-140 will be the same one who will file my I-485. Can I invoke attorney-client privilege with regards to the I-485 so that they cannot tell my employer that I filed it earlier than he wanted? For that matter, can I use a different lawyer to file the I-485 that the one who filed the I-140?
Any opinions and suggestions regarding this matter will be greatly appreciated. Thank you very much and good luck to all!
My labor certification was recently approved via PERM. My employer will soon be signing the paperwork to file the I-140 with INS. My contract with him expires in February 2007, and he wants me to continue working for him beyond that. I, however, have expressed my desire NOT to stay with him any longer than I need to. Obviously, I will need to stay until 6 months have passed from the filing of my I-485 for portability to kick in.
Because of this, he wants me to WAIT until January 2007 to file my I-485. This way he is assured that I will be working for him until June 2007. My question is, does he have any right to coerce me to wait until January 2007 to file the I-485?
I initially agreed to this delay in filing because I was under the impression that BOTH the I-140 and I-485 were to be filed by the employer, and that I-485 processing took about 6 months. Now that I have learned that the I-485 is to be filed by me and that I-485 processing can take more than a year, are there any downsides to me filing the I-485 earlier than January 2007 WITHOUT MY EMPLOYER KNOWING?
I realize that "honesty is the best policy" but the situation is truly untenable for me and I feel that he is purposely delaying the processing of my INS papers to keep me at his mercy. Another factor to consider is that the lawyer we will be using for the I-140 will be the same one who will file my I-485. Can I invoke attorney-client privilege with regards to the I-485 so that they cannot tell my employer that I filed it earlier than he wanted? For that matter, can I use a different lawyer to file the I-485 that the one who filed the I-140?
Any opinions and suggestions regarding this matter will be greatly appreciated. Thank you very much and good luck to all!
hair Paint Colors: So this is our
GCwaitforever
02-27 03:46 PM
I will offer a different perspective. There are IT packages for every application nowadays. If you have expertize in your own field (Bio Engineering or Finance for example), try to think of unmet needs in your functional expertize areas and come up with a software product. That will be the best use of your knowledge. And do not forget IV, when your product becomes a big hit and you become a millionaire.;)
more...
swartzphotography
November 24th, 2005, 11:03 PM
well the short answer is i like the light picture better. now i am sure that is not all your after is which one but also why. to me the photo is just jumping out at me more dark images have there place but for this particular type of image i think the lighter pictures lend better to flowers
hot Help Me Paint Lucy#39;s Room
c9411010
08-04 03:29 PM
guys many of us are considering going back to india.. any idea on whether those who have 40 credits will be eligible for social security from india...
also any adivice o what is the best way to transfer 401 to india.. withdraw immeditately or wait till 591/2 years..
also any adivice o what is the best way to transfer 401 to india.. withdraw immeditately or wait till 591/2 years..
more...
house wallpaper Valspar Paint launch
zCool
12-04 02:42 AM
You were supposed to get 92$ / hr for a LC you applied for in 2001??
exactly what is it that you do/did?
exactly what is it that you do/did?
tattoo metal paint colors
pappu
11-06 05:45 PM
This is exactly the piece-meal approach/bill that several people wanted to support.
But i think IV core is backing CIR.
My 2 cents - CIR ain't happening this year (its almost mid-nov now and health care hasn't even been debated on the floor yer). Even enxt year is a long shot.
Need to back this bill.
Do not misrepresent IV's position.
IV supports every bill that can get relief to our community. However if the sponsor of the bill is not going to take the bill further or the leadership is not going to take it up, there is no chance for the bill at this time. Some bills are simply placeholder bills or introduced to state a lawmaker's position on an issue. At this time the political situation is favoring CIR and nothing else. However much you try and ask them to try piecemeal approach, the inclination is to pursue CIR. This situation can change with time and piecemeal approach may be pursued if CIR fails. Please continue to watch the political analysis and news to know how everything is moving or being influenced by other issues like healthcare.
But i think IV core is backing CIR.
My 2 cents - CIR ain't happening this year (its almost mid-nov now and health care hasn't even been debated on the floor yer). Even enxt year is a long shot.
Need to back this bill.
Do not misrepresent IV's position.
IV supports every bill that can get relief to our community. However if the sponsor of the bill is not going to take the bill further or the leadership is not going to take it up, there is no chance for the bill at this time. Some bills are simply placeholder bills or introduced to state a lawmaker's position on an issue. At this time the political situation is favoring CIR and nothing else. However much you try and ask them to try piecemeal approach, the inclination is to pursue CIR. This situation can change with time and piecemeal approach may be pursued if CIR fails. Please continue to watch the political analysis and news to know how everything is moving or being influenced by other issues like healthcare.
more...
pictures images Valspar paint colors.
posmd
06-08 07:45 PM
Guys,
I have approved EB3 LC and approved I 140 with PD JAN 2002. My wife has approved EB2 LC (Perm) and Approved I 140 with PD JAN 2006
As we represent one family can't my wife use my PD and apply I 485 under EB2.
for example If husband is born in a retrogressed country and wife in a non retrogressed country in that case, husband gets a free ride !
Why not in this case ? Just curious !
Faced with this same predicament. The truth is the US immigration rules were not made to cater for this era of fast paced change and lifestyles.
When the current EB rules were fashioned, mostly in the early 1960s most families had one working household and were generally migrating in the very highest skills level. Opportunities in the high skilled fields were also not as prevalent as they are today. US was not the knowledge economy it is today.
In the same sense people if they would migrate did so just once in their lifetime, nowadays people often shift 3 places sometimes even more. Hence your citizenship does not count, only your birth place. Imagine the insanity in a scenario that you are from antigua and you are born in India while your father was serving as the consul general there. If fate and destiny have you wishing to immigrate to the US now in the EB2 category then you would have to have a PD of Jan 2003 as opposed to current.
Many such combinations are possible, but in my humble view all this country quota stuff for EB based immigration is ridiculous and worse yet when it takes no acccount of population size. Clearly they ought to be more discerning in who they allow in via EB immigration by tightening the regulations as they stand currently, but this insane quota is off base in todays world.
A quota system for family or any other type of immigration is more reasonable, but once it is deemed you are immigrating based on your skills why should something else matter in this land of opportunity where every man is considered equal and is said to rise or fall on his ability and nothing else. Perhaps others know the answer to this but it befuddles me and makes me realise how antequated the rules really are.
I have approved EB3 LC and approved I 140 with PD JAN 2002. My wife has approved EB2 LC (Perm) and Approved I 140 with PD JAN 2006
As we represent one family can't my wife use my PD and apply I 485 under EB2.
for example If husband is born in a retrogressed country and wife in a non retrogressed country in that case, husband gets a free ride !
Why not in this case ? Just curious !
Faced with this same predicament. The truth is the US immigration rules were not made to cater for this era of fast paced change and lifestyles.
When the current EB rules were fashioned, mostly in the early 1960s most families had one working household and were generally migrating in the very highest skills level. Opportunities in the high skilled fields were also not as prevalent as they are today. US was not the knowledge economy it is today.
In the same sense people if they would migrate did so just once in their lifetime, nowadays people often shift 3 places sometimes even more. Hence your citizenship does not count, only your birth place. Imagine the insanity in a scenario that you are from antigua and you are born in India while your father was serving as the consul general there. If fate and destiny have you wishing to immigrate to the US now in the EB2 category then you would have to have a PD of Jan 2003 as opposed to current.
Many such combinations are possible, but in my humble view all this country quota stuff for EB based immigration is ridiculous and worse yet when it takes no acccount of population size. Clearly they ought to be more discerning in who they allow in via EB immigration by tightening the regulations as they stand currently, but this insane quota is off base in todays world.
A quota system for family or any other type of immigration is more reasonable, but once it is deemed you are immigrating based on your skills why should something else matter in this land of opportunity where every man is considered equal and is said to rise or fall on his ability and nothing else. Perhaps others know the answer to this but it befuddles me and makes me realise how antequated the rules really are.
dresses Valspar Paints
Sheila Danzig
07-26 07:30 AM
3+3 are routinely accepted. I would be shocked if this is the reason. You should know the reason very soon. I know it is very hard to wait, but there is no choice.
In my case, it was B.Sc + M.C.A (3 + 3) years education and applied it on EB2 Category. I know of a lot of cases with M.C.A approved on EB2 category. So, I am not sure if this would be reason for it.
In my case, it was B.Sc + M.C.A (3 + 3) years education and applied it on EB2 Category. I know of a lot of cases with M.C.A approved on EB2 category. So, I am not sure if this would be reason for it.
more...
makeup valspar paint colors.
ramakrishna_ram
06-14 01:48 PM
Hi Friends,
This is first time I am posting this topic here. Please excuse me if this is wrong post or question at this time.
Today my sister got a phone call from a Detective saying that she is suspecting on Jewelery theft from a neighborhood. We shocked for getting that type of call. The person who complainted is close to my family. He is also Indian and from same region. Recently he moved from my city. He lost couple of jewelery items this year.
My sister is very good and try to help most of the people nearby. The detective said that investigation is going on for this issue. We are so worrying on this issue.
We know she is genuine and did not do anything but my question is any problem in green card process?.
How to prove my sister is not commited such kind of activity. Please try to help me on this
Thanks
Ramkrishna
This is first time I am posting this topic here. Please excuse me if this is wrong post or question at this time.
Today my sister got a phone call from a Detective saying that she is suspecting on Jewelery theft from a neighborhood. We shocked for getting that type of call. The person who complainted is close to my family. He is also Indian and from same region. Recently he moved from my city. He lost couple of jewelery items this year.
My sister is very good and try to help most of the people nearby. The detective said that investigation is going on for this issue. We are so worrying on this issue.
We know she is genuine and did not do anything but my question is any problem in green card process?.
How to prove my sister is not commited such kind of activity. Please try to help me on this
Thanks
Ramkrishna
girlfriend Valspar Paint Color Chip
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)
hairstyles dresses Valspar Paint valspar
suresh_la
12-01 04:31 PM
Hi Gurus
Here is my senario
I am in my 6th year of H1 which expires in Aug 2007.
I have my Labor (PERM) and I140 aprroved from my current employer.
I would like to tranfer my H1 to different employer .
can we apply for tranfer and 3 year extension of h1 to new employer with approved current labor(PERM) and 140(approved)
or should I need to tranfer my h1 forst and wait till FEB 2007 to apply my extension with approved labor(PERM) and 140 (approved ) from my current employer.
I really need your advise on this issue.
please help on this gurus.
Thanks
Here is my senario
I am in my 6th year of H1 which expires in Aug 2007.
I have my Labor (PERM) and I140 aprroved from my current employer.
I would like to tranfer my H1 to different employer .
can we apply for tranfer and 3 year extension of h1 to new employer with approved current labor(PERM) and 140(approved)
or should I need to tranfer my h1 forst and wait till FEB 2007 to apply my extension with approved labor(PERM) and 140 (approved ) from my current employer.
I really need your advise on this issue.
please help on this gurus.
Thanks
royus77
07-17 10:29 PM
Hi,
My I-140 approved in TSC( premium processing)
My Attorney sent my I-485 on July 2 to TSC
my labor approved from Wisconsin
but I read somewhere all applications needs to go to NSC , is it true?
I greatly appreciate your help
You are fine. I 485 should go where I 140 was approved.USCIS will internally transfer the applications until Aug 30 if they were sent to wrong processng center( Check the accuracy of date)
http://www.uscis.gov/files/pressrele...ling062107.pdf
My I-140 approved in TSC( premium processing)
My Attorney sent my I-485 on July 2 to TSC
my labor approved from Wisconsin
but I read somewhere all applications needs to go to NSC , is it true?
I greatly appreciate your help
You are fine. I 485 should go where I 140 was approved.USCIS will internally transfer the applications until Aug 30 if they were sent to wrong processng center( Check the accuracy of date)
http://www.uscis.gov/files/pressrele...ling062107.pdf
intheyan
08-20 02:34 PM
The same here. The primary got approved and the dependent is still pending.
No comments:
Post a Comment