Sammo
08-23 03:25 PM
Wow - thanks for all the votes on mine :)
stealthgt
04-18 09:29 PM
I'm in Miami
BPforGC
10-15 12:28 PM
1. It goes to the mail room and stamped on the date it was received.
2. Goes through tagging, "A" number will be assigned, bar code and a cover sheet will be attached.
3. All of your pending petitions such as I-140s, priority date information, finger prints, name check, chargability country information will be loaded into your A-file.
4. USCIS has a system of tracking the A-files of the pending 485s and picks those who satisfies all these conditions for adjudication.
a) I-140 must be approved and no inconsistencies should be found related to your employer letter, residence, etc.
b) Priority date must be current otherwise VISA number file cannot be requested. The date when USCIS got your 485 matters very little here. Guys who sent their 485 after you may get ahead of you.
c) Your finger prints must be there along with medicals. Namecheck may be waived if you are past 180 days.
d) Then, if everything is fine, your file will be allocated to an Officer. Wait! it did not go to him yet. It may take upto 30 days for your file to go to the officer. By that time if priority date goes backward, you are back to square one.
e) Once it reaches the officer's desk, he can take upto 2 weeks to adjudicate it. When he enters your information, A-number and if VISA number is not available, it goes back to "pending VISA number availability" status. You are out of luck. Fortunately, USCIS can track these kind of cases separately and as soon as VISA numbers are available and priority date is current, they will adjudicate your 485.
Its like the flow chart for a COBAL the program, if 'yes' got to step 4, at step 4 "if answer is 'no', go back to step 1 and start over". Its an unending loop and if you can manage 4-5 'yes', you get your card.
So, many things can go wrong for people from India and China due to retrogression and adjudication of 485 is a matter of luck even if your priority date is current. A single issue can derail the whole process. It is also upto officer's discretion if he considers some information not complete and issue a RFE.
Its a messed up system. In my case, USCIS agreed that my work is on national interest and greatly benefit the country and my I-140 was approved under EB2-NIW. However, being from India, I need to wait another 5 years to get my green card. How ridiculous?
God save us.
---------------------------------------------------------------
All at NSC
EB1-EA: I-140 (4/3/2007; RFE-9/2/2008; pending)
EB2-NIW: I-140 (4/4/2007)- approved 8/7/2008
I-485 : 7/24/2007 - Pending
----------------------------------------------------------------
2. Goes through tagging, "A" number will be assigned, bar code and a cover sheet will be attached.
3. All of your pending petitions such as I-140s, priority date information, finger prints, name check, chargability country information will be loaded into your A-file.
4. USCIS has a system of tracking the A-files of the pending 485s and picks those who satisfies all these conditions for adjudication.
a) I-140 must be approved and no inconsistencies should be found related to your employer letter, residence, etc.
b) Priority date must be current otherwise VISA number file cannot be requested. The date when USCIS got your 485 matters very little here. Guys who sent their 485 after you may get ahead of you.
c) Your finger prints must be there along with medicals. Namecheck may be waived if you are past 180 days.
d) Then, if everything is fine, your file will be allocated to an Officer. Wait! it did not go to him yet. It may take upto 30 days for your file to go to the officer. By that time if priority date goes backward, you are back to square one.
e) Once it reaches the officer's desk, he can take upto 2 weeks to adjudicate it. When he enters your information, A-number and if VISA number is not available, it goes back to "pending VISA number availability" status. You are out of luck. Fortunately, USCIS can track these kind of cases separately and as soon as VISA numbers are available and priority date is current, they will adjudicate your 485.
Its like the flow chart for a COBAL the program, if 'yes' got to step 4, at step 4 "if answer is 'no', go back to step 1 and start over". Its an unending loop and if you can manage 4-5 'yes', you get your card.
So, many things can go wrong for people from India and China due to retrogression and adjudication of 485 is a matter of luck even if your priority date is current. A single issue can derail the whole process. It is also upto officer's discretion if he considers some information not complete and issue a RFE.
Its a messed up system. In my case, USCIS agreed that my work is on national interest and greatly benefit the country and my I-140 was approved under EB2-NIW. However, being from India, I need to wait another 5 years to get my green card. How ridiculous?
God save us.
---------------------------------------------------------------
All at NSC
EB1-EA: I-140 (4/3/2007; RFE-9/2/2008; pending)
EB2-NIW: I-140 (4/4/2007)- approved 8/7/2008
I-485 : 7/24/2007 - Pending
----------------------------------------------------------------
franklin
09-23 02:42 AM
FWIW - I never got any copies of receipts, just the numbers, from my attorney
more...
DDash
04-06 03:43 PM
lazycis, jhaalaa, meridiani - Thanks for your inputs...you guys rock. :cool:
I believe Jhaalaa trying to caution me not to take chances and move to another employer, which could potentially cause RFE to my case. If so, thanks for you concern.
Meridiani thanks for the doc. I will read through it.
One more question, when I first filed my LC, I made x dollars, then I got a promotion and now making x+10K. When I move to a new employer, should I make x dollars? or x+10K? or is it okay to make x-10K? :confused:
I believe Jhaalaa trying to caution me not to take chances and move to another employer, which could potentially cause RFE to my case. If so, thanks for you concern.
Meridiani thanks for the doc. I will read through it.
One more question, when I first filed my LC, I made x dollars, then I got a promotion and now making x+10K. When I move to a new employer, should I make x dollars? or x+10K? or is it okay to make x-10K? :confused:
snathan
04-19 12:15 PM
Hi Folks,
My fiancee is a MS student and currently has student loan in India being charged at 13.5%. I am wondering if there is any loan that i can get here with a lower interest rate to repay off the one in india.
I would appreciate any pointers or suggestions here.
If she has a very good credit score, try for 0% balance transfer. But there is 3% transfer fee involved. You normally get 6-12 months time. But in this credit crunch no one is giving. But still there are some cards/banks are giving. It also based on how much she owes... I recently got offer for 1.99% for 8 months.
My fiancee is a MS student and currently has student loan in India being charged at 13.5%. I am wondering if there is any loan that i can get here with a lower interest rate to repay off the one in india.
I would appreciate any pointers or suggestions here.
If she has a very good credit score, try for 0% balance transfer. But there is 3% transfer fee involved. You normally get 6-12 months time. But in this credit crunch no one is giving. But still there are some cards/banks are giving. It also based on how much she owes... I recently got offer for 1.99% for 8 months.
more...
desi3933
02-18 06:21 PM
Are guys nut? Don't you want to watch your child grow?! :confused:
Given your situation, you guys will be staying away from kid for a decade or more. Once your wife delivers the baby in India, file for a baby's green card. For tentative dates on family reunion, please refer family based 2nd preferences at http://travel.state.gov/visa/frvi/bulletin/bulletin_4428.html - lighter note these dates or tentative only not written in stone :D
If I were you, I would not allow your wife to give birth in India and miss watching the child grow.
wandmaker -
Child will be GC holder by birth, if both parents are GC holders. Child must make a trip to US before he/she turns two and trip must be with mother.
Child will, of course, need passport. But no visa.
This is one of the few exceptions when person does not need visa to travel.
Hope it helps.
_________________
Not a legal advise.
Given your situation, you guys will be staying away from kid for a decade or more. Once your wife delivers the baby in India, file for a baby's green card. For tentative dates on family reunion, please refer family based 2nd preferences at http://travel.state.gov/visa/frvi/bulletin/bulletin_4428.html - lighter note these dates or tentative only not written in stone :D
If I were you, I would not allow your wife to give birth in India and miss watching the child grow.
wandmaker -
Child will be GC holder by birth, if both parents are GC holders. Child must make a trip to US before he/she turns two and trip must be with mother.
Child will, of course, need passport. But no visa.
This is one of the few exceptions when person does not need visa to travel.
Hope it helps.
_________________
Not a legal advise.
Jeff Wheeler
11-27 04:36 AM
Hmm... I didn't know about AIR issues you mentioned.. ;( On PC it works great, and people at Adobe (as I can see on videos) use Mac OS as their primary OS.
AIR on Linux is in beta, and it�s no question why. It�s a second-class citizen.
btw considering Mono... We had an ASP.NET app that had to be ported to Linux.. We did it with Mono, but... there were huge problems with memory leaks.. So colleague had to rewrite it completely in PHP.. So, my (bad) experience tells me not to use .NET on Linux... Perhaps they fixed it though? Ugh, somehow I don't believe that Microsoft cares for any other OS but its own.. ?
ASP.NET may be different from normal .NET apps, but there are many first-class C# apps that run in Mono�s runtime environment that can be ported from *nix to even OS X.
I can�t speak for your experiences, but if you rewrote it in PHP, it probably wasn�t intended to a normal GUI app in the first place. PHP is an odd replacement, if so.
AIR on Linux is in beta, and it�s no question why. It�s a second-class citizen.
btw considering Mono... We had an ASP.NET app that had to be ported to Linux.. We did it with Mono, but... there were huge problems with memory leaks.. So colleague had to rewrite it completely in PHP.. So, my (bad) experience tells me not to use .NET on Linux... Perhaps they fixed it though? Ugh, somehow I don't believe that Microsoft cares for any other OS but its own.. ?
ASP.NET may be different from normal .NET apps, but there are many first-class C# apps that run in Mono�s runtime environment that can be ported from *nix to even OS X.
I can�t speak for your experiences, but if you rewrote it in PHP, it probably wasn�t intended to a normal GUI app in the first place. PHP is an odd replacement, if so.
more...
glus
06-28 04:47 PM
O MY GOD !! You are so right............guys.. check out Rajiv Khanna's web site, Check out Sheela Murthy's web site, USCIS.....everyone is saying the same.........we are royally screwed. God Helppppppppppp
You are as stupid as what you wrote.
You are as stupid as what you wrote.
Rockford
07-16 02:57 PM
Guys , read the core update on the home page !!!
more...
gcwait2007
12-25 10:12 PM
If you are stuck in name check over a year and PD was current, you can file WOM. Add the Secretary of State (Rice) as a defendant. Check this order where the court ordered the government to issue visa numbers (!) to long-delayed AOS applicants.
http://immigrationportal.com/showpost.php?p=1838094&postcount=14850
Q2. Yes, see 8 USC 1151, 8 USC 1153. Check this thread for details.
http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/showthread.php?t=16266
Guru Lazycis,
The information posted by you in Immigration Portal is very useful and informative and encouraging. You are a great guy, if u r male. Great lady if u r female. Please accept my salutes and regards.
Thanks a lot.
http://immigrationportal.com/showpost.php?p=1838094&postcount=14850
Q2. Yes, see 8 USC 1151, 8 USC 1153. Check this thread for details.
http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/showthread.php?t=16266
Guru Lazycis,
The information posted by you in Immigration Portal is very useful and informative and encouraging. You are a great guy, if u r male. Great lady if u r female. Please accept my salutes and regards.
Thanks a lot.
sr123
02-11 10:13 AM
As per my understanding, the retrogression problem is due to the lack of suffucient number of visas.This number is specified by the law. Now that is what needs fixing and that has come from legislation from congress(and last I heard courts should not and cannot legislate.)
Courts or judiciary comes in only when the law is not being implemented correctly. So even if the law is lacking in some way the courts have to go by the law. The only cases where courts strike down laws are when they are against the basic structure of the constitution.
So what we need to find out is whether an existing law is being violated, then we have a case otherwise not. I dont think USCIS is violating a law. If anyone else finds information about any violation then we can pursue law suit option.
Courts or judiciary comes in only when the law is not being implemented correctly. So even if the law is lacking in some way the courts have to go by the law. The only cases where courts strike down laws are when they are against the basic structure of the constitution.
So what we need to find out is whether an existing law is being violated, then we have a case otherwise not. I dont think USCIS is violating a law. If anyone else finds information about any violation then we can pursue law suit option.
more...
hebron
08-16 02:50 PM
Hi Hebron,
I will get my money if i complain to DOL. But, do i have to stop working at the same client now. Will there be any problem if i continue working with the same client.
Thanks,
Srikanth
You have a valid H1 with the new employer (client), so there should be nothing wrong working with the client.
Have you or your client signed a contract with the parent company? If you have not signed a contract, there is nothing to worry. I would assume your client may have signed a contract with your parent company(old employer). If that's the case the issue is between you current employer (client) and you parent company (old employer).
You may also want to check with your attorney.
I will get my money if i complain to DOL. But, do i have to stop working at the same client now. Will there be any problem if i continue working with the same client.
Thanks,
Srikanth
You have a valid H1 with the new employer (client), so there should be nothing wrong working with the client.
Have you or your client signed a contract with the parent company? If you have not signed a contract, there is nothing to worry. I would assume your client may have signed a contract with your parent company(old employer). If that's the case the issue is between you current employer (client) and you parent company (old employer).
You may also want to check with your attorney.
IN2US
03-17 11:21 AM
Your flow of logic is correct but you ar ebuilding this palace on soft land...:). Your "numbers" base is way way small... There are thousands of EB2 switch over occured and there are thousands and thousands of applications are waiting in EB2. If you add up thosands and thousands then you can reach million speedly.. right? Only July 2007 filing was around 500000. You just apply crude maths: 500000/3 (Categories) = So EB2 numbers are = 1,66,667.
Now divide 1,66,667/5 ( IN,CHina,MX, Philipines,ROW) = 33333. That is just for July 2007. Now to scare you more let me tell you that there was number around during July 2007 in all immigration boards that around 500000 applications are stuck in the process including Name Check (No claim on accuracy of that number but pretty much bignames were talking about that number so generally you would trust that number.) So now start applying your logic andyou would realize the seriousness of the problem.
no offense but the above doesn't make any sense what so ever, so does majority of your posts.
and stop pretending to be a guru on immigration issues and leave the analysis part to the real experts.
Peace :)
Now divide 1,66,667/5 ( IN,CHina,MX, Philipines,ROW) = 33333. That is just for July 2007. Now to scare you more let me tell you that there was number around during July 2007 in all immigration boards that around 500000 applications are stuck in the process including Name Check (No claim on accuracy of that number but pretty much bignames were talking about that number so generally you would trust that number.) So now start applying your logic andyou would realize the seriousness of the problem.
no offense but the above doesn't make any sense what so ever, so does majority of your posts.
and stop pretending to be a guru on immigration issues and leave the analysis part to the real experts.
Peace :)
more...
hopein07
03-14 12:29 PM
Don't ignore Dubai. It is a boom town and will give red carpet welcome to your wife because she is a US trained doc. I know of a few Indian docs who were on J1 visa and never got waiver jobs went to work in Dubai instead because with US degree they can practise there without any major issues. Dubai is good for IT folks too with the internet city. You may want to google and find more about Dubai's requirements.
arrarrgee
07-17 02:39 PM
I second that...Why should there be a link between his req and his contribution? If we are able to answer/clarify whatever doubt he has..probably he would see the value in continuing with the group and probably contribute too...else no first timers would ever wanna join us
can you please help me link the connection between my request and my contribution to IV? I fail to undersand your point!
can you please help me link the connection between my request and my contribution to IV? I fail to undersand your point!
more...
yanj
12-15 10:13 AM
1 genius said "kaplan doesnt issue I-20's anymore."
so Does anybody know anywhere else can issue I-20 ?
2 Good question : Are you sure than ,while the H1B is being processed ,you can live here legally?
looking for answer ,too. Thanks a lot !
so Does anybody know anywhere else can issue I-20 ?
2 Good question : Are you sure than ,while the H1B is being processed ,you can live here legally?
looking for answer ,too. Thanks a lot !
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)
admin
06-01 04:19 PM
Question for Foks asking for a separate bill : I understand from Admins answer above , this may not be possible now.
My question is , separting this from CIR will QUICKEN the proceedings with respect to our issues?
Question for Admin : Was this poll started by IV?
BTW I have voted in favor of a separate bill assuming it will quicken things. Thanks.
This poll was started by one our forum members and not by the organizing committee.
Repeating my answer, no Senator is even willing to talk to us regarding an alternate bill till the fate of CIR is sealed.
Look at the necessary steps to pass a bill. We need to convince a senator, have the bill analyzed and discussed in the Senate Judiciary Committe, discussed and amended in the Senate Floor, passed in the Senate, convince a bunch of House Reps, get it introduced in the House, discussed in the House Judiciary Committee, discussed in the House, passed in the house. Only after all these steps will it be at the current stage as CIR.
So which Senator do you think will be willing to do all of this and then find that CIR with most of the provisions has already been passed.
My question is , separting this from CIR will QUICKEN the proceedings with respect to our issues?
Question for Admin : Was this poll started by IV?
BTW I have voted in favor of a separate bill assuming it will quicken things. Thanks.
This poll was started by one our forum members and not by the organizing committee.
Repeating my answer, no Senator is even willing to talk to us regarding an alternate bill till the fate of CIR is sealed.
Look at the necessary steps to pass a bill. We need to convince a senator, have the bill analyzed and discussed in the Senate Judiciary Committe, discussed and amended in the Senate Floor, passed in the Senate, convince a bunch of House Reps, get it introduced in the House, discussed in the House Judiciary Committee, discussed in the House, passed in the house. Only after all these steps will it be at the current stage as CIR.
So which Senator do you think will be willing to do all of this and then find that CIR with most of the provisions has already been passed.
reddymjm
05-01 10:01 AM
I had applied for labour in 2001 and also applied for i 140 and i 485 in 2002 .My h1 had exausted 7 years and since my i 94 was becoming in valid i was suggested by my lawyer to either stay here in usa without job and wait till i get the reciept notice and ead from uscis .Since financially my situation was very tight with a baby on the way .i decided to leave for india .Now i am here again since last 4 years .When i was in india i asked my lawyer if we can do any thing like counsalar processing etc (here in this case i had paid huge amount to the lawyer,i was paying for my gc process ).the lawyer told me that nothing can be done as he has withdrawn the i 140 .
Now after 2 years i came (or had to come back) to usa .my new employer started the ggc process this year .Since i needed full information of my previous process to complete the forms i contacted old lawyer .he send me the papers and i was so shocked to see that they did not withdraw any thing my i 140 was approved 4 months after i left and my fingerprinting is due since 2002 .I just wish my lawyer had told me the truth .we could have cp or come back .
it took a day for me to overcome the frustration of what had happened .
and now my major concern is 1.that with one case pending ,i dont know how it is going to effect the new case
2.is there any thing i can do to reopen my old case .
Take a paid consultation with Murthy.com if you can ask for Murthy only.
Good Luck.
Now after 2 years i came (or had to come back) to usa .my new employer started the ggc process this year .Since i needed full information of my previous process to complete the forms i contacted old lawyer .he send me the papers and i was so shocked to see that they did not withdraw any thing my i 140 was approved 4 months after i left and my fingerprinting is due since 2002 .I just wish my lawyer had told me the truth .we could have cp or come back .
it took a day for me to overcome the frustration of what had happened .
and now my major concern is 1.that with one case pending ,i dont know how it is going to effect the new case
2.is there any thing i can do to reopen my old case .
Take a paid consultation with Murthy.com if you can ask for Murthy only.
Good Luck.
Jerry2121
07-06 09:26 PM
Hello ,
Here is a run down on my case:
First I-485 applied in 6/2002,
Fingerprint done, EAD obtained in 2/03
Application withdrawn by spouse due to conviction
Second I-485 applied by my 2nd DW in 7/05
Interview granted in 5/06
Case still pending due name check
GC? till date
Anyone with a similar case and any advice on this case? I've spent about 30K USD on this case on Lawyers and still have NOT got any decision from the USCIS. Now , I'm considering filing a WOM. Whats your take on this? Thanks !
Here is a run down on my case:
First I-485 applied in 6/2002,
Fingerprint done, EAD obtained in 2/03
Application withdrawn by spouse due to conviction
Second I-485 applied by my 2nd DW in 7/05
Interview granted in 5/06
Case still pending due name check
GC? till date
Anyone with a similar case and any advice on this case? I've spent about 30K USD on this case on Lawyers and still have NOT got any decision from the USCIS. Now , I'm considering filing a WOM. Whats your take on this? Thanks !
No comments:
Post a Comment