bp333
02-19 10:50 AM
We (me, my wife and my son) are submitted 485 applications on July 7th to Nebraska service center latter they transferred to Vermont from there it again transferred to Taxes Service. Unfortunately I forgot to write the amount in wordings in my wife's 485 application check so they rejected my wife's application on Oct 9th, they enclosed the letter to re submit the application by using the new fee. We re submitted on Oct 15th by enclose the two checks $325 and $1010 along with the covering letter and the letter what they are given.
Again they rejected the application in Dec 12th by mentioning Visa number is not available for this application. That time my attorney is not there He went to India so no body inform to me. He came back on Jan 28th we re submitted again by explaining all the details, but they reject on Feb 14th mentioning the same reason Visa Number is not available.
I have seen so many people are got their receipt numbers if they re submitted the application for any mistakes. Me my son got the receipt numbers and Fingerprint every thing.
My Attorney is telling we need to wait for PD current. Mine is PD for EB2 India 6/6.
My wife doesn't get her receipt 485 number I am not able to use my EAD.
Can any body suggest how to approach this case? Or is any one face same issue.
Thanks.
If its rejected due to "missing or incorrect fee" you can send the package back with a special cover letter to by-pass the mail room. The letter has to say something in the lines of: "Attention CRU Supervisor, case improperly rejected due to fee".. search for these in google. You will find a template.
Mine was rejected for the same and Supervisor accepted my refile.
Good luck.
Again they rejected the application in Dec 12th by mentioning Visa number is not available for this application. That time my attorney is not there He went to India so no body inform to me. He came back on Jan 28th we re submitted again by explaining all the details, but they reject on Feb 14th mentioning the same reason Visa Number is not available.
I have seen so many people are got their receipt numbers if they re submitted the application for any mistakes. Me my son got the receipt numbers and Fingerprint every thing.
My Attorney is telling we need to wait for PD current. Mine is PD for EB2 India 6/6.
My wife doesn't get her receipt 485 number I am not able to use my EAD.
Can any body suggest how to approach this case? Or is any one face same issue.
Thanks.
If its rejected due to "missing or incorrect fee" you can send the package back with a special cover letter to by-pass the mail room. The letter has to say something in the lines of: "Attention CRU Supervisor, case improperly rejected due to fee".. search for these in google. You will find a template.
Mine was rejected for the same and Supervisor accepted my refile.
Good luck.
wallpaper I+love+you+poems+for+him
katewill
08-24 02:28 PM
i got it. thanks Xu1
according to your info, can i assume:
out of 360K,
270k belongs to EB3
135k still in DBEC (lets say 100K for 2001-02 cases)
135k still in PBEC (lets say 35K pending 2001-02)
so still 135k pending for EB3 for 2001-02.
so what is ratio of big 4 vs. the rest in EB3? any guess?
no one knows monthly BEC approval rate either right?
i am trying to guess how further will it retrogress...(well no one knows but...)
according to your info, can i assume:
out of 360K,
270k belongs to EB3
135k still in DBEC (lets say 100K for 2001-02 cases)
135k still in PBEC (lets say 35K pending 2001-02)
so still 135k pending for EB3 for 2001-02.
so what is ratio of big 4 vs. the rest in EB3? any guess?
no one knows monthly BEC approval rate either right?
i am trying to guess how further will it retrogress...(well no one knows but...)
walking_dude
01-30 11:46 AM
Thanks.
Also, E-mail them the IV Press Release too so that they understand that a whole community is impacted by the issue and there is an organization working on this issue. We are collecting stories from members and can provide to media if they contact us.
Anyone with licence rejection contact - vivek AT ImmigrationVoice DOT org
We want to get our issues covered by media. Everyone please help us get our DL issues covered by them.
Thanks again for doing the right thing.
Emailed Detroit News and Free Press
and NPR(Miradio.org)
Also, E-mail them the IV Press Release too so that they understand that a whole community is impacted by the issue and there is an organization working on this issue. We are collecting stories from members and can provide to media if they contact us.
Anyone with licence rejection contact - vivek AT ImmigrationVoice DOT org
We want to get our issues covered by media. Everyone please help us get our DL issues covered by them.
Thanks again for doing the right thing.
Emailed Detroit News and Free Press
and NPR(Miradio.org)
2011 why i love you poems for him.
mzdial
March 15th, 2004, 01:37 AM
I'm guessing this topic was spurred by my post about the cameras I carry.. :-)
I didn't buy that particular phone for the camera, it was built-in.. Quality isn't great and you know that going in that -- it's a toy.
It does have some nice options on the phone, especially when the phone is reprogrammed. (I have a buddy that works for Motorola up in Chicago.) All the options on the phone are open now on it. That was my particular motivation in the phone. I use the GPRS on the phone to transmit pictures on occasion from my powerbook (plugs in via USB -- works as a GPRS modem or a standard 9600 baud analog modem) .. Very nice. It's got the built-in POP/IMAP message center and all that good stuff too.
I'll take a couple pictures with it and post it here tomorrow when I get a chance.
-- Matt
I didn't buy that particular phone for the camera, it was built-in.. Quality isn't great and you know that going in that -- it's a toy.
It does have some nice options on the phone, especially when the phone is reprogrammed. (I have a buddy that works for Motorola up in Chicago.) All the options on the phone are open now on it. That was my particular motivation in the phone. I use the GPRS on the phone to transmit pictures on occasion from my powerbook (plugs in via USB -- works as a GPRS modem or a standard 9600 baud analog modem) .. Very nice. It's got the built-in POP/IMAP message center and all that good stuff too.
I'll take a couple pictures with it and post it here tomorrow when I get a chance.
-- Matt
more...
arihant
04-12 05:00 PM
I whole heartedly agree that labor substitution elimination makes sense. However, the 45 day proposal built into this rule can be disasterous. I just posted my experience with the 45 day letter from BEC in another thread.
Basically, BEC sent the 45 day letter on March 7th, and my lawyer received it on March 14th. However, it was not brought to the attention of my HR until Apr 10th. A delay of almost a month. When we only have a month and a half to deal with it, such a delay may be disasterous. Granted, that the fault lies entirely with my lawyer, but it just goes to prove that 45 days is too short for something so important! Any number of reasons can create a delay of a few weeks.
If they want to put a limit on it, why don't they set to it to a more reasonable period such as 6 months, or a year. It will be really bad if, after waiting for years for Labor to clear, people are denied GC because they did not apply for the next step within 45 days!
Basically, BEC sent the 45 day letter on March 7th, and my lawyer received it on March 14th. However, it was not brought to the attention of my HR until Apr 10th. A delay of almost a month. When we only have a month and a half to deal with it, such a delay may be disasterous. Granted, that the fault lies entirely with my lawyer, but it just goes to prove that 45 days is too short for something so important! Any number of reasons can create a delay of a few weeks.
If they want to put a limit on it, why don't they set to it to a more reasonable period such as 6 months, or a year. It will be really bad if, after waiting for years for Labor to clear, people are denied GC because they did not apply for the next step within 45 days!
morpheus
04-02 09:59 PM
Great fact sheet. It should list people like Andy Grove, Jerry Yang, and Sergey Brin - Hungarian, Chinese and Russian co-founders of Intel, Yahoo and Google - all immigrants.
more...
Jerrome
02-20 05:47 PM
This will definitly help guys if they see some number crunching like the one i see below.
Category Per Year Quota Per Country Quota Actual Primary Applicant Number of Estimated applicants Number anticipated Years
Percentage Values 7% 48% 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 Total
EB2 40000 2800 1344 1000 1000 5000 10000 10000 16000 43000 31.99404762
EB3 40000 2800 1344 10000 16000 16000 16000 16000 16000 90000 66.96428571
You can also Quote this in the home page of IV for people to see.
Category Per Year Quota Per Country Quota Actual Primary Applicant Number of Estimated applicants Number anticipated Years
Percentage Values 7% 48% 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 Total
EB2 40000 2800 1344 1000 1000 5000 10000 10000 16000 43000 31.99404762
EB3 40000 2800 1344 10000 16000 16000 16000 16000 16000 90000 66.96428571
You can also Quote this in the home page of IV for people to see.
2010 why i love you poems for him.
kaisersose
06-02 03:24 PM
You have a valid point but in worst case scenario, can i use the EAD and handle the RFE at the time of citizen ship... is the RFE during approval of GC or during citizen ship ?
Here is how I see it,
1. You use your EAD and quit your employer.
2. Your H employer cancels your H-1 and therefore the H-4 is cancelled too.
3. When it is time for your wife to apply for AOS, she has show proof that she is legally in the US at that time.
4. But she is no longer in the US legally and so she cannot really apply.
I would not take this route. Instead I suggest you try to get her a different visa (h1, F1, etc) and make her status independent of yours. If not, then you will have to hold on to a H status until her PD becomes current.
Here is how I see it,
1. You use your EAD and quit your employer.
2. Your H employer cancels your H-1 and therefore the H-4 is cancelled too.
3. When it is time for your wife to apply for AOS, she has show proof that she is legally in the US at that time.
4. But she is no longer in the US legally and so she cannot really apply.
I would not take this route. Instead I suggest you try to get her a different visa (h1, F1, etc) and make her status independent of yours. If not, then you will have to hold on to a H status until her PD becomes current.
more...
praveenat11
10-05 12:58 PM
Can anyone say when i am going to get my GC if i filed my application for I-485 in EB1 category in oct 2007
hair why i love you poems for him.
H1B-GC
04-10 04:41 PM
163,000 applns for general and more than 31,200 applns for advanced degree.
How come Freaking 'Loudoggs' say 400K Applications were received by USCIS on his show . Freaking lier.
How come Freaking 'Loudoggs' say 400K Applications were received by USCIS on his show . Freaking lier.
more...
gc_chahiye
07-20 03:54 PM
If I have applied for 485 can I still do that ?
I think you are only supposed to get 1 year extensions if your LC/I-140 was filed atleast 365 days ago, but I have seen atleast two people get 3 year extensions even though they had filed I-485, just because their PD was not current.
Its USCIS discretion or interpretation of their rules. Ask your attorneys to request 3 years when they file.
I am going the other way (just got a 3 year extension approved 2 days before that announcement that dates are current again) and will be filing 485 now.
I think you are only supposed to get 1 year extensions if your LC/I-140 was filed atleast 365 days ago, but I have seen atleast two people get 3 year extensions even though they had filed I-485, just because their PD was not current.
Its USCIS discretion or interpretation of their rules. Ask your attorneys to request 3 years when they file.
I am going the other way (just got a 3 year extension approved 2 days before that announcement that dates are current again) and will be filing 485 now.
hot why i love you poems for him.
pappu
08-14 09:54 AM
The IV Advocacy kit is now available to all donors and state chapter leaders. Please contact your state chapter leaders to get the kit.
more...
house why i love you poems for him.
desi3933
07-20 04:53 PM
I and my spouse both have green card. We have a kid who was born in INDIA. He has not visited USA till now. The kid is about 2 years.
We are planning to bring the kid by end of this year to USA.
So what visa should we apply for him we are not sure :confused:
A friend told that he had a baby born to him in india and came to usa with in the 1st 6 month to USA and since both parents were having green card, at port of entry in USA, the kid also got greencard for 5 years this was couple of years back.
But in my case, the kid is 2 years AND also not sure what is the procedure now. Is it still true by default the kids automatically gets the green card at port of entry (Is there any age limit I hope may be till < 13 yrs) if parents posses valid green card. Please help me in this situation.
Thanks in advance, ;)
Suject to certain conditions, children born abroad to permanent resident mothers are permanent residents. The requirements are that such a child must be brought to the U.S. on the mother's first return trip, and this trip must occur before the child is two years of age. I think, the child in this situation does not need a visa. Please check with your lawyer.
The necessary paperwork is processed at the port of entry, based on the mother's permanent resident status and birth certificate for the child.
____________________
Not a legal advice.
We are planning to bring the kid by end of this year to USA.
So what visa should we apply for him we are not sure :confused:
A friend told that he had a baby born to him in india and came to usa with in the 1st 6 month to USA and since both parents were having green card, at port of entry in USA, the kid also got greencard for 5 years this was couple of years back.
But in my case, the kid is 2 years AND also not sure what is the procedure now. Is it still true by default the kids automatically gets the green card at port of entry (Is there any age limit I hope may be till < 13 yrs) if parents posses valid green card. Please help me in this situation.
Thanks in advance, ;)
Suject to certain conditions, children born abroad to permanent resident mothers are permanent residents. The requirements are that such a child must be brought to the U.S. on the mother's first return trip, and this trip must occur before the child is two years of age. I think, the child in this situation does not need a visa. Please check with your lawyer.
The necessary paperwork is processed at the port of entry, based on the mother's permanent resident status and birth certificate for the child.
____________________
Not a legal advice.
tattoo love poems for him. love poems
pitha
02-27 04:47 PM
It is worse than your estimates below because when green card is issued spouse and children are also counted in the quota unlike the h1 where spouse and children are not counted in the quota. Even if we assume each green card applicat has only one child, there would be 3 visa numbers used for each GC applicant. Going by that India has a demand for 150K GC as per the perm statistics but it gets only about 10000 per year. At this rate people from India who applied for GC in 06 and 07 would have to wait about 15 years and 30 years respectively to get the GC!!!!!!!!
About 25,000 PERM labors were approved in 2007 for Indian nationals. Assuming a 2.5:1 ratio of 'GC filed:Labor approved', implies that each year 62,500 GC are demanded by Indians under EB. Since only 10,000 are available (across all EB classes), this implies each year a backlog of 50,000 cases is created for Indians.
Since PD are essentially retrogressed from Nov. 2005, we can assume that since then another 100,000 Indians have joined the GC backlog. It can also be assumed that between 2001 and Nov. 2005 there must be another (atleast) 50,000 waiting for GC.
Assuming these numbers are correct, a person filing for labor today is looking to wait for atleast 15 years before getting a GC (150,000/10,000).
As for those wth PD prior to Nov. 2005 - well..... probably anywhere between 1 to 5 years .....
Comments on the analysis.........?
About 25,000 PERM labors were approved in 2007 for Indian nationals. Assuming a 2.5:1 ratio of 'GC filed:Labor approved', implies that each year 62,500 GC are demanded by Indians under EB. Since only 10,000 are available (across all EB classes), this implies each year a backlog of 50,000 cases is created for Indians.
Since PD are essentially retrogressed from Nov. 2005, we can assume that since then another 100,000 Indians have joined the GC backlog. It can also be assumed that between 2001 and Nov. 2005 there must be another (atleast) 50,000 waiting for GC.
Assuming these numbers are correct, a person filing for labor today is looking to wait for atleast 15 years before getting a GC (150,000/10,000).
As for those wth PD prior to Nov. 2005 - well..... probably anywhere between 1 to 5 years .....
Comments on the analysis.........?
more...
pictures why i love you poems for him.
jediknight
09-16 02:05 PM
It's time to tell CNN not to give a platform for racists.
Drop Dobbs: Halt the Hate (http://www.dropdobbs.com/)
Please sign the petition
Take Action (http://www.dropdobbs.com/take-action/)
"Drop Dobbs": CNN Pressured To Give Up Controversial Host (VIDEO) (http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/09/16/drop-dobbs-cnn-pressured_n_288506.html)
Please also post this to other web forums, facebook, twitter and send emails to your friends and colleagues asking them to sign the petition.
- JK
Drop Dobbs: Halt the Hate (http://www.dropdobbs.com/)
Please sign the petition
Take Action (http://www.dropdobbs.com/take-action/)
"Drop Dobbs": CNN Pressured To Give Up Controversial Host (VIDEO) (http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/09/16/drop-dobbs-cnn-pressured_n_288506.html)
Please also post this to other web forums, facebook, twitter and send emails to your friends and colleagues asking them to sign the petition.
- JK
dresses why i love you poems for him.
Aah_GC
05-30 03:46 PM
Also when quitting what is the must-have documents we need to secure before leaving employer X.
Can someone please reply on this
If you can get your hands on photocopies of Labor certificate, that would be awesome. Otherwise, make sure you at least have the following -
1. Experience letter (with last day of attendance)
2. I140 receipt
3. I485 receipt
4. Paystubs for 6 months of employment post I1485 receive date
You are good to go from there.
Can someone please reply on this
If you can get your hands on photocopies of Labor certificate, that would be awesome. Otherwise, make sure you at least have the following -
1. Experience letter (with last day of attendance)
2. I140 receipt
3. I485 receipt
4. Paystubs for 6 months of employment post I1485 receive date
You are good to go from there.
more...
makeup Sexy I Love You Poems
mbartosik
11-19 12:14 PM
For Nebraska:
https://egov.uscis.gov/cris/jsps/Processtimes.jsp?SeviceCenter=NSC
For Texas:
https://egov.uscis.gov/cris/jsps/Processtimes.jsp?SeviceCenter=TSC
Summary for I485:
Nebraska has processed most applications that it has had for 7 months (filed on or before April 14 2007).
Texas has processed most applications that it has had for 6 months.
Since 6 months is the target, Texas can be considered to be caught up, and Nebraska will likely have caught up next month.
For I485 that makes the visa bulletin the main issue.
https://egov.uscis.gov/cris/jsps/Processtimes.jsp?SeviceCenter=NSC
For Texas:
https://egov.uscis.gov/cris/jsps/Processtimes.jsp?SeviceCenter=TSC
Summary for I485:
Nebraska has processed most applications that it has had for 7 months (filed on or before April 14 2007).
Texas has processed most applications that it has had for 6 months.
Since 6 months is the target, Texas can be considered to be caught up, and Nebraska will likely have caught up next month.
For I485 that makes the visa bulletin the main issue.
girlfriend short love quotes short.
Iamthejuggler
03-03 10:16 AM
It says traditional and scanned, or vector, so i assume PS is fine as long it's vector art.
hairstyles love you poems for him. i love
thomachan72
06-18 07:25 AM
But for filing the 485 (US green cared last stage) you need to be physically present within the US and it will be difficult to comute across the border at this stage. This is a very complicated issue and you can never predict the outcome. However, apply both and stay in canada now. Try to complete the 2 year requirement in canada and then you can move back to the US and file the 485. Another thing I heard is if a canadian company hires you and places you in a US location, you can stay in the US and claim years of residence towards the canadian PR, because you are being paid in canada (something like that). If that works then at the same time your LC can be done here. then if dates are current 140 and 485 filed concurrently.
Anyway lot of us might be thinking about this approach and lets wait for more replies and more clarity.
Anyway lot of us might be thinking about this approach and lets wait for more replies and more clarity.
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)
Madhuri
04-06 10:05 PM
Is the bill really dead? There is a different news on Yahoo.
Can anybody explain?
Can anybody explain?
No comments:
Post a Comment