g1FTP
06-16 03:27 PM
I hope that you are more qualified than I am and I am not going to waste your time or my time contesting it. However, you could be a little more humble. I would also like to point out that your high qualifications may be failing you in your critical and deductive reasoning. Refer to the highlighted portion of your quote. If I may reason on an analogous note, you are saying that the current IIT JEE examination lets in a few people who aren't qualified. So by making the examination more tougher, it has more chances of letting in unqualified people. Needless to say, I am stumped.
I am waiting in the line as well for GC or to be sent back home and personally, I want everyone to get their GC and don't agree with dilipcr. Kind of off-topic but I made this observation:
IMHO simsachu's reasoning is sound.
Your example is not the same as simsachu's. simsachu assumes there are way more "bad" fish compared to the good one's in the population. Hence you need to catch more fish to come across a "good" one.
You assume the opposite (there are very few bad fish) and hence come to the conclusion that catching more fish would net you more bad fish (but way more "good" fish as well) as well. But given your assumption, it is puzzling why you want to have lesser number of GC's (if indeed that is what you are advocating, I haven't read all the messages in the thread) when you assume there are way more "good" candidates than bad.
I am waiting in the line as well for GC or to be sent back home and personally, I want everyone to get their GC and don't agree with dilipcr. Kind of off-topic but I made this observation:
IMHO simsachu's reasoning is sound.
Your example is not the same as simsachu's. simsachu assumes there are way more "bad" fish compared to the good one's in the population. Hence you need to catch more fish to come across a "good" one.
You assume the opposite (there are very few bad fish) and hence come to the conclusion that catching more fish would net you more bad fish (but way more "good" fish as well) as well. But given your assumption, it is puzzling why you want to have lesser number of GC's (if indeed that is what you are advocating, I haven't read all the messages in the thread) when you assume there are way more "good" candidates than bad.
wallpaper Inspirational Quotes Qiqi Emma
docp
06-03 06:04 PM
this article says and I quote:
"Mr. Oppenheim stated that immigrant visa applications at U.S. consulates abroad are down seven percent from FY2008. India will use all the visa numbers that are available to its nationals this fiscal year. This is due, in part, to huge increases in the usage of EB4 and EB5 categories. Applicants from India have used twice the number of visas estimated for FY2009"
now the only category indians could have used up more numbers is EB1, as that is the only category which is current. and this means that india's normal share about 9600 per year, so an extra 9600 EB1 were issued to india, which sounds improbable. this also contradicts what is said in the next paragraph about EB1 usage.
"Mr. Oppenheim expects that all EB1 visa numbers will be used before the end of FY2009. This may result in the establishment of a cutoff date for the EB1 categories for India and China, beginning in August or September 2009. Usage in the EB1 worldwide category (listed as "all chargeability areas except those listed") is also higher than expected. This may lead to imposition of a cutoff date toward the end of FY2009"
it can not have gone to EB2 because as Mr. Oppenheimer puts it
"The EB2 category worldwide is also expected to be over-subscribed and will exhaust all allocated visa numbers before the end of FY2009. To date, Mr. Oppenheim estimates that 3,200 EB2 India visa numbers have been used in FY2009. The high usage in the EB1 category has prevented the usual trickle of visas to the EB2 category"
so i dont know what he is trying to say when india has used twice the limit in 2009..i would really appreciate any input.
ALso can somebody please explain this sentence as well
"He stated that, due to the dramatic increase in employment-based filings visa cutoff dates for FY2010 will be much more limited to ensure that there will be a steady supply of visa numbers available throughout the year"
However a later report from USCIS says there is a drastic reductionin I 140 apps,
also just today AILA released that DOL is processing JULY 2008 PERM cases, so where is this demand by increased filings that Mr. Oppenheimer talking about coming from.
I am totally confused. senior members please analyze
"Mr. Oppenheim stated that immigrant visa applications at U.S. consulates abroad are down seven percent from FY2008. India will use all the visa numbers that are available to its nationals this fiscal year. This is due, in part, to huge increases in the usage of EB4 and EB5 categories. Applicants from India have used twice the number of visas estimated for FY2009"
now the only category indians could have used up more numbers is EB1, as that is the only category which is current. and this means that india's normal share about 9600 per year, so an extra 9600 EB1 were issued to india, which sounds improbable. this also contradicts what is said in the next paragraph about EB1 usage.
"Mr. Oppenheim expects that all EB1 visa numbers will be used before the end of FY2009. This may result in the establishment of a cutoff date for the EB1 categories for India and China, beginning in August or September 2009. Usage in the EB1 worldwide category (listed as "all chargeability areas except those listed") is also higher than expected. This may lead to imposition of a cutoff date toward the end of FY2009"
it can not have gone to EB2 because as Mr. Oppenheimer puts it
"The EB2 category worldwide is also expected to be over-subscribed and will exhaust all allocated visa numbers before the end of FY2009. To date, Mr. Oppenheim estimates that 3,200 EB2 India visa numbers have been used in FY2009. The high usage in the EB1 category has prevented the usual trickle of visas to the EB2 category"
so i dont know what he is trying to say when india has used twice the limit in 2009..i would really appreciate any input.
ALso can somebody please explain this sentence as well
"He stated that, due to the dramatic increase in employment-based filings visa cutoff dates for FY2010 will be much more limited to ensure that there will be a steady supply of visa numbers available throughout the year"
However a later report from USCIS says there is a drastic reductionin I 140 apps,
also just today AILA released that DOL is processing JULY 2008 PERM cases, so where is this demand by increased filings that Mr. Oppenheimer talking about coming from.
I am totally confused. senior members please analyze
Milind123
07-24 07:33 PM
Good luck buddy. Well said.
2011 The minute I saw him I fell in
GCwaitforever
02-14 03:22 PM
http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/showpost.php?p=223326&postcount=124
See the Judge ruling from Lazycis post regarding namecheck. USCIS has an obligation to use the numbers to the fullest extent.
See the Judge ruling from Lazycis post regarding namecheck. USCIS has an obligation to use the numbers to the fullest extent.
more...
_TrueFacts
09-04 11:09 AM
YSR is far better than Chandrababu Naidu(Iron Leg) and Balakrishna
Comparing people on levels of corruption is an excuse to accept some one new. By the way you forgot..YSR did a graduate to a higher level killings, land grabbing, distribution of wealth, free Vatican trips.
Comparing people on levels of corruption is an excuse to accept some one new. By the way you forgot..YSR did a graduate to a higher level killings, land grabbing, distribution of wealth, free Vatican trips.
vivekm1309
05-10 07:15 PM
Australia is backup option for me. For various personal reasons-I didn't chose Canada.
Cons of immigration to Canada
-Weather
-Dependency on US
-not very diverse society
Pros of Australia
-Weather
-Trading partners with N America,Europe,Asia
-Very very diverse society with east europeans,south east asians
As for job scene,I am thinking that both are almost same, but in Australia,indian firms have a major presence.It is cheaper to open an office in Melbourne than in Bangalore!.
Thanks for the details ...can suggest how can immigration to Austrailia be applied ?
Thanks
Cons of immigration to Canada
-Weather
-Dependency on US
-not very diverse society
Pros of Australia
-Weather
-Trading partners with N America,Europe,Asia
-Very very diverse society with east europeans,south east asians
As for job scene,I am thinking that both are almost same, but in Australia,indian firms have a major presence.It is cheaper to open an office in Melbourne than in Bangalore!.
Thanks for the details ...can suggest how can immigration to Austrailia be applied ?
Thanks
more...
dilipcr
06-11 11:49 PM
People need to understand that you need to give some to win some. I would like to propose to IV a kind of proposal that would be a win win for both the immigrants and the US.
1. It is meaningless to fight for the rights of ALL the visa holders. Any such attempts would always be resisted by the anti immigrant lobby.
2. Acknowledge their fundamental point of view that jobs are being stolen due to wage destruction and perpetual visa fraud by these outsourcing companies. Of course resist all these racist BS types. They are the just the noise in the immigration debate.
My Proposal
1. Support the Grassley bill in its entirety. If you notice it is those outsourcing companies that are making all the noise but not the genuine companies that use H1B for innovation purposes. These outsourcing neither follow the rules or spirit of the H1B/L1 visas nor provide much of innovation to the market place. There is no point in expecting them to police themselves. We have tried this and they are not here to play by the rules.
2. In fact, provide the concessions to eliminate the H1/L1 visas for these outsourcers. In return, request visa number recapture for the H1Bs who are employed directly by the companies. I strongly believe that if you are a H1B employed directly by the company (not outsourcing cos), it is unlikely that you would be underskilled or underpaid. A few minor expections may be there but we can safely ignore these exceptions.
3. Again, people may argue that some of the consultants are highly skilled too. If that were the case, they would have been or would be hired into a permenant position soon once the Grassley bill passes. No company would like to let go of a good performer irrespective of whether they are permenant employees or contractors.
If you notice, some people echo the sentiment that the Grassley bill would lead to more offshoring. That in my opinion is absolute BS. Only low level jobs would be offshored and in my opinion a h1b visa should not be used for these low level jobs. The high skilled jobs would always stay here and they would not be under wage pressure. The best and the fittest would survive and get the same.
I strongly believe that by providing these concessions, atleast the skilled immigrants would be sparred the trauma of this mindless wait for a GC. I wish to reiterate here that I am neither anti immigration nor anti any ethnicity. I am simply trying to reiterate that we need to lose some to win some. There is no point in the Indian style of negotiations of win all or win none. Let us adapt to the give some take some style of concession building. In this process, it is okay to give up on the interests of those blood sucking outsourcers. For this, I am willing to provide financial, logistical and intellectual support.
By following this route, we prevent wage destruction which is what the anti immigrant lobby is clamouring about. It is a win win for all and a lose situation for the blood suckers
1. It is meaningless to fight for the rights of ALL the visa holders. Any such attempts would always be resisted by the anti immigrant lobby.
2. Acknowledge their fundamental point of view that jobs are being stolen due to wage destruction and perpetual visa fraud by these outsourcing companies. Of course resist all these racist BS types. They are the just the noise in the immigration debate.
My Proposal
1. Support the Grassley bill in its entirety. If you notice it is those outsourcing companies that are making all the noise but not the genuine companies that use H1B for innovation purposes. These outsourcing neither follow the rules or spirit of the H1B/L1 visas nor provide much of innovation to the market place. There is no point in expecting them to police themselves. We have tried this and they are not here to play by the rules.
2. In fact, provide the concessions to eliminate the H1/L1 visas for these outsourcers. In return, request visa number recapture for the H1Bs who are employed directly by the companies. I strongly believe that if you are a H1B employed directly by the company (not outsourcing cos), it is unlikely that you would be underskilled or underpaid. A few minor expections may be there but we can safely ignore these exceptions.
3. Again, people may argue that some of the consultants are highly skilled too. If that were the case, they would have been or would be hired into a permenant position soon once the Grassley bill passes. No company would like to let go of a good performer irrespective of whether they are permenant employees or contractors.
If you notice, some people echo the sentiment that the Grassley bill would lead to more offshoring. That in my opinion is absolute BS. Only low level jobs would be offshored and in my opinion a h1b visa should not be used for these low level jobs. The high skilled jobs would always stay here and they would not be under wage pressure. The best and the fittest would survive and get the same.
I strongly believe that by providing these concessions, atleast the skilled immigrants would be sparred the trauma of this mindless wait for a GC. I wish to reiterate here that I am neither anti immigration nor anti any ethnicity. I am simply trying to reiterate that we need to lose some to win some. There is no point in the Indian style of negotiations of win all or win none. Let us adapt to the give some take some style of concession building. In this process, it is okay to give up on the interests of those blood sucking outsourcers. For this, I am willing to provide financial, logistical and intellectual support.
By following this route, we prevent wage destruction which is what the anti immigrant lobby is clamouring about. It is a win win for all and a lose situation for the blood suckers
2010 Hello How Are You
Macaca
06-26 07:54 PM
The assessment is correct. The Visa Bulletin is published by the 15th. of every month by DOS. So, by July 15, whatever number of applications, USCIS receives, they have to count them and send the numbers to DOS. DOS then have to do their math and come up with August 2007 numbers, but August 2007 Visa Bulletin has to be published by July 15.
DOS allocates GC numbers to USCIS adjustment cases only as the point of approval is reached. DOS can set/move/retrogress PD based on info provided by USCIS about number of cases at point of approval.
USCIS is not able to provide a good estimate of this number because
it can not calculate this number based on USCISs workload, and
it does not know the number of cases DOL will send to them. DOL again can not calculate the number of cases (it will send to USCIS) based on DOLs worload.
The following are from page 35 and beginning of page 36
The key to addressing this management issue at USCIS is to understand the dynamic interplay of priority dates and shifting workloads of three departments, and to know with greater precision and accuracy the size and details of USCIS� workloads.
The tri-agency meetings seek to expand inter-agency communication regarding expected new demands and surges, workflows, and priority dates. During the meetings, there is an examination of the case management systems and data collection processes used to assess workflows through each entity, particularly USCIS.
Although USCIS stated in its 2006 Annual Report Response (at p. 8) that it provides detailed data to DOS, the tri-agency group identified gaps in USCIS� data.
DOS allocates GC numbers to USCIS adjustment cases only as the point of approval is reached. DOS can set/move/retrogress PD based on info provided by USCIS about number of cases at point of approval.
USCIS is not able to provide a good estimate of this number because
it can not calculate this number based on USCISs workload, and
it does not know the number of cases DOL will send to them. DOL again can not calculate the number of cases (it will send to USCIS) based on DOLs worload.
The following are from page 35 and beginning of page 36
The key to addressing this management issue at USCIS is to understand the dynamic interplay of priority dates and shifting workloads of three departments, and to know with greater precision and accuracy the size and details of USCIS� workloads.
The tri-agency meetings seek to expand inter-agency communication regarding expected new demands and surges, workflows, and priority dates. During the meetings, there is an examination of the case management systems and data collection processes used to assess workflows through each entity, particularly USCIS.
Although USCIS stated in its 2006 Annual Report Response (at p. 8) that it provides detailed data to DOS, the tri-agency group identified gaps in USCIS� data.
more...
Rb_newsletter
01-21 06:15 PM
I got the below email from multiple friends. I don't know what is the source, who wrote this analysis because there is no links. I did NOT mean to spread the fear. Just sharing the contents unaltered.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
However, this is how many could read RECENT (Jan 8, 2010) actions / announcement by USCIS towards Consulting companies, which engages or merely places their employees at the client sites for various projects.
� No new H1B application will be approved, as per the new guidelines provided USCIS on Jan 08, 2010 memorandum � for 3rd Party Consulting company.
� No new H1B extension/stamping will be approved, as per the new guidelines provided USCIS on Jan 08, 2010 memorandum � for 3rd Party Consulting company.
� If an employee has H1B approved or extension approved, and if he/she comes back to US from a vacation or from an emergency, he/she would be deported back to his/her home country from the Port of Entry (PoE) � for 3rd Party Consulting company.
Why?
Because of 2 recent events:
1) USCIS gave new memorandum (which is now guidelines for USCIS professionals working on the H1B petitions/extensions) on Jan 08th, 2010. (Attached the PDF file for the memorandum).
2) Recently (Jan 2010) several H1B Employees were sent back (in some forum, its mentioned � all of them) to their home country from Newark, NJ and JFK, NY Port of Entry � these were the H1B employees, who went to spend Christmas/New Year vacation to their home countries.
What does the memorandum mention, specifically, about 3rd Party Consulting companies?
Link to the memorandum (PDF attached) � http://www.uscis.gov/USCIS/Laws/Memoranda/2010/H1B%20Employer-Employee%20Memo010810.pdf
Employer-Employee Relationship:
As per the memorandum, some previous H1B Law defines, the definition of an �US Employer�. Somewhere in that definition (Page 2 of memo), it mentions the word �Employer-Employee relationship�. Till now, it seems that there was no clear guidance on what kind of relationship was considered having Employer-Employee relationship. So, it was being, probably, interpreted independently or ambiguously. Now, on Jan 8th, 2010, USCIS has published this memorandum for TRAINING USCIS OFFICIALS about understanding, Employer-Employee relationship. The memorandum seems to have been prepared with a clear understanding about it, along with the specific EXAMPLES.
Memorandum has given few specific examples, which would QUALIFY for having Employer-Employee relationship, on Page 4-5 of the Memo � including the nature of the job/business. On Page 5-6, memorandum gives few specific examples, which would NOT QUALIFY for having Employer-Employee relationship. Third Party Placement / �Job-Shop� (better version of �Body-shop�, probably) is NOT QUALIFIED for meeting Employer-Employee Relationships � meaning, 3rd Party placement (which most of the small consulting companies do) doesn�t meet H1B requirement, as defined by the law � meaning for this job, the new H1B or Extension or Stamping petitions CANNOT be approved!! Period !!
This is how memorandum has identified 3rd Party Placements and in Bold letters, why it disqualifies for the H1B petitions (comments are in Red):
�The petitioner is a computer consulting company (which is what all small consulting do). The petitioner has contract with numerous outside companies in which it supplies these companies with employee to fulfill specific staffing needs. The specific positions are not outlined in the contract between the petitioner and the third-party company but are staffed on an as-needed basis (this is nothing but, Service Agreement between the petitioner and the mid-vendor!). The beneficiary is a computer analyst (which is what many small consulting company�s employee are). The beneficiary has been assigned to work for the third-party company to fill a core position to maintain the third-party company�s payroll (this nothing but, Mid-Vendor�s or so-called Prime-Vendor�s or Consulting Partner�s Revenue). Once placed at the client company, the beneficiary reports to a manager who works for the third-party company (as it happens, when Consulting partner hires employee as a contractor). The beneficiary does not report to the petitioner for work assignments, and all work assignments are determined by the third-party company (petitioner just runs pay-rolls!). The petitioner does not control how the beneficiary will complete daily tasks, and no propriety information of the petitioner is used by the beneficiary to complete any work assignments (petitioner just runs pay-rolls!). The beneficiary�s end-product, the payroll (payroll of mid-vendor/prime vendor/consulting partner), is not in any way related to the petitioner�s line of business, which is computer consulting. The beneficiary�s progress reviews are completed by the client company, not the petitioner (petitioner just runs pay-rolls!). [Petitioner Has No Right to Control; No Exercise of Control].�
Right to Control:
Supreme Court has stated the definition of Employer-Employee Relationship (Page 3 of Memo), and there it was mentioned to have �Right to Control� over the work of the employee by the employer. From the entire memo, it sounds that Right control is well-established, ONLY WHEN, at least one supervisor from the petitioner�s company works with the beneficiary at the end-client site, and supervises beneficiary�s day-to-day work. So, big Consulting companies such as Wipro, Infosys, Accenture, Deloitte etc. will be good, as they would meet �Right to Control� and that way, they will satisfy H1B requirement by law, and their petitions for similar 3rd party consulting work, will be APPROVED, but not in case of, small consulting companies!! This is because, big consulting companies such as Accenture � have their entire or partial team � along with managers etc. � working at the same client site, where the beneficiary would be working, so they could supervise their work and so exercise control over their work etc., but that cannot be the case with the small consulting � because, their actual business has been, so far, to place employees and run pay-roll � not to get the client projects!
Why one could think that there are slim chances for this memorandum to get reversed in favor of small consulting companies?
This memorandum took care of big consulting companies such as Wipro, Infosys, Cognizant, Accenture etc. � meaning, these companies and their employees are NOT impacted. They can travel freely to-and-fro their home country etc. Since, big companies are not impacted, there will not be any big lobbying or oppositions to this memorandum, per say!! There don�t seem to be a platform for small consulting companies to gather and lobby, plus most the small consulting may not get involved, with fear of exposing themselves more to other issues!! So, it might be east to assume that this memorandum is permanent and not temporary. The recent deportation also indicates that the changes like this memorandum is for serious, not just the warning!
How this memorandum relates to the recent deportation events from NY and NJ airports?
There seems to be an anticipated link between these 2 events � Memorandum and recent Deportations � kind of an indication about the current level of government scrutiny and seriousness of the H1B program. Hence, there have been advices by others that � each employer and employee should operate by strictly following the H1B program requirements.
Link to Murthy.com front page posting about this � MurthyDotCom : NewsFlash! Note to H1Bs Traveling to U.S., Working for Consulting Companies (http://www.murthy.com/nflash/nf_h1conc.html)
What one could predict as happening sooner (trend)?
� Since, it seems big consulting companies (having their own consulting projects)/full-time end-clients and their beneficiaries are not impacted with these changes � there could be trend � employee moving from small companies to big companies for a better shelter for full-time positions � especially, when small consulting company�s immediate preventions / actions to this memo cannot ensure safety.
� Big consulting companies could buy small consulting companies or small consulting companies could sell their companies to big consulting companies (having their own consulting projects), to save their employee�s future/transition etc.
Good Luck my Friends....!!
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
However, this is how many could read RECENT (Jan 8, 2010) actions / announcement by USCIS towards Consulting companies, which engages or merely places their employees at the client sites for various projects.
� No new H1B application will be approved, as per the new guidelines provided USCIS on Jan 08, 2010 memorandum � for 3rd Party Consulting company.
� No new H1B extension/stamping will be approved, as per the new guidelines provided USCIS on Jan 08, 2010 memorandum � for 3rd Party Consulting company.
� If an employee has H1B approved or extension approved, and if he/she comes back to US from a vacation or from an emergency, he/she would be deported back to his/her home country from the Port of Entry (PoE) � for 3rd Party Consulting company.
Why?
Because of 2 recent events:
1) USCIS gave new memorandum (which is now guidelines for USCIS professionals working on the H1B petitions/extensions) on Jan 08th, 2010. (Attached the PDF file for the memorandum).
2) Recently (Jan 2010) several H1B Employees were sent back (in some forum, its mentioned � all of them) to their home country from Newark, NJ and JFK, NY Port of Entry � these were the H1B employees, who went to spend Christmas/New Year vacation to their home countries.
What does the memorandum mention, specifically, about 3rd Party Consulting companies?
Link to the memorandum (PDF attached) � http://www.uscis.gov/USCIS/Laws/Memoranda/2010/H1B%20Employer-Employee%20Memo010810.pdf
Employer-Employee Relationship:
As per the memorandum, some previous H1B Law defines, the definition of an �US Employer�. Somewhere in that definition (Page 2 of memo), it mentions the word �Employer-Employee relationship�. Till now, it seems that there was no clear guidance on what kind of relationship was considered having Employer-Employee relationship. So, it was being, probably, interpreted independently or ambiguously. Now, on Jan 8th, 2010, USCIS has published this memorandum for TRAINING USCIS OFFICIALS about understanding, Employer-Employee relationship. The memorandum seems to have been prepared with a clear understanding about it, along with the specific EXAMPLES.
Memorandum has given few specific examples, which would QUALIFY for having Employer-Employee relationship, on Page 4-5 of the Memo � including the nature of the job/business. On Page 5-6, memorandum gives few specific examples, which would NOT QUALIFY for having Employer-Employee relationship. Third Party Placement / �Job-Shop� (better version of �Body-shop�, probably) is NOT QUALIFIED for meeting Employer-Employee Relationships � meaning, 3rd Party placement (which most of the small consulting companies do) doesn�t meet H1B requirement, as defined by the law � meaning for this job, the new H1B or Extension or Stamping petitions CANNOT be approved!! Period !!
This is how memorandum has identified 3rd Party Placements and in Bold letters, why it disqualifies for the H1B petitions (comments are in Red):
�The petitioner is a computer consulting company (which is what all small consulting do). The petitioner has contract with numerous outside companies in which it supplies these companies with employee to fulfill specific staffing needs. The specific positions are not outlined in the contract between the petitioner and the third-party company but are staffed on an as-needed basis (this is nothing but, Service Agreement between the petitioner and the mid-vendor!). The beneficiary is a computer analyst (which is what many small consulting company�s employee are). The beneficiary has been assigned to work for the third-party company to fill a core position to maintain the third-party company�s payroll (this nothing but, Mid-Vendor�s or so-called Prime-Vendor�s or Consulting Partner�s Revenue). Once placed at the client company, the beneficiary reports to a manager who works for the third-party company (as it happens, when Consulting partner hires employee as a contractor). The beneficiary does not report to the petitioner for work assignments, and all work assignments are determined by the third-party company (petitioner just runs pay-rolls!). The petitioner does not control how the beneficiary will complete daily tasks, and no propriety information of the petitioner is used by the beneficiary to complete any work assignments (petitioner just runs pay-rolls!). The beneficiary�s end-product, the payroll (payroll of mid-vendor/prime vendor/consulting partner), is not in any way related to the petitioner�s line of business, which is computer consulting. The beneficiary�s progress reviews are completed by the client company, not the petitioner (petitioner just runs pay-rolls!). [Petitioner Has No Right to Control; No Exercise of Control].�
Right to Control:
Supreme Court has stated the definition of Employer-Employee Relationship (Page 3 of Memo), and there it was mentioned to have �Right to Control� over the work of the employee by the employer. From the entire memo, it sounds that Right control is well-established, ONLY WHEN, at least one supervisor from the petitioner�s company works with the beneficiary at the end-client site, and supervises beneficiary�s day-to-day work. So, big Consulting companies such as Wipro, Infosys, Accenture, Deloitte etc. will be good, as they would meet �Right to Control� and that way, they will satisfy H1B requirement by law, and their petitions for similar 3rd party consulting work, will be APPROVED, but not in case of, small consulting companies!! This is because, big consulting companies such as Accenture � have their entire or partial team � along with managers etc. � working at the same client site, where the beneficiary would be working, so they could supervise their work and so exercise control over their work etc., but that cannot be the case with the small consulting � because, their actual business has been, so far, to place employees and run pay-roll � not to get the client projects!
Why one could think that there are slim chances for this memorandum to get reversed in favor of small consulting companies?
This memorandum took care of big consulting companies such as Wipro, Infosys, Cognizant, Accenture etc. � meaning, these companies and their employees are NOT impacted. They can travel freely to-and-fro their home country etc. Since, big companies are not impacted, there will not be any big lobbying or oppositions to this memorandum, per say!! There don�t seem to be a platform for small consulting companies to gather and lobby, plus most the small consulting may not get involved, with fear of exposing themselves more to other issues!! So, it might be east to assume that this memorandum is permanent and not temporary. The recent deportation also indicates that the changes like this memorandum is for serious, not just the warning!
How this memorandum relates to the recent deportation events from NY and NJ airports?
There seems to be an anticipated link between these 2 events � Memorandum and recent Deportations � kind of an indication about the current level of government scrutiny and seriousness of the H1B program. Hence, there have been advices by others that � each employer and employee should operate by strictly following the H1B program requirements.
Link to Murthy.com front page posting about this � MurthyDotCom : NewsFlash! Note to H1Bs Traveling to U.S., Working for Consulting Companies (http://www.murthy.com/nflash/nf_h1conc.html)
What one could predict as happening sooner (trend)?
� Since, it seems big consulting companies (having their own consulting projects)/full-time end-clients and their beneficiaries are not impacted with these changes � there could be trend � employee moving from small companies to big companies for a better shelter for full-time positions � especially, when small consulting company�s immediate preventions / actions to this memo cannot ensure safety.
� Big consulting companies could buy small consulting companies or small consulting companies could sell their companies to big consulting companies (having their own consulting projects), to save their employee�s future/transition etc.
Good Luck my Friends....!!
hair Poems | Quotes 2011
andymajumder
06-02 03:54 PM
I am the one , who proposed this idea, and people tend to disagree.
I am again saying , the only solution is a lawsuit.
Its possible we will not win such a lawsuit....I am not a lawyer, and often things which seem discriminatory to the common man, cannot be proved so in the court of law.
Yet, such a lawsuit could get some publicity and at least highlight the baltantly unfair laws against certain groups people based on country of birth in the EB category.
I am again saying , the only solution is a lawsuit.
Its possible we will not win such a lawsuit....I am not a lawyer, and often things which seem discriminatory to the common man, cannot be proved so in the court of law.
Yet, such a lawsuit could get some publicity and at least highlight the baltantly unfair laws against certain groups people based on country of birth in the EB category.
more...
cal_dood
07-24 07:55 PM
No offense buddy. I am sure these are all valid points. We've all had similar experiences.
But I always find it ironical...you read blogs on cnn-ibn by Indians, who say 'I'll leave this country if Sonia Gandhi becomes PM/ if Mayawati becomes PM/fill in the blanks". Then you read posts here about people ready to go back to India, or go to Canada. The funniest ones are who say "I love my India" and then start a thread about how to emigrate to Canada/UK/Australia/NZ. So basically it is "anywhere but India" ?
It's always a tough decision to emigrate to another country. I wonder if people also take into consideration the politics in US, the war, the biased media in this country when making this decision - or is it just about $$$$ ?
Its not the question of economy alone. When deciding to go back. Its a question about convenience.
a) I don't want to stand in line to pay my Electric/Telephone/House Tax/Income Tax/Train Ticket/Air Ticket/Bus Ticket/Children Admission-donations/Petrol Line/LP Gas Line/Restaurant Line/Chola Bhatura Line/Samosa Line/RTO Office line/Registration line/License Line/Stock Buy line/Stock Sell Line/Bank Deposit Line/Bank Draft Line/Fixed Deposit Line/Kisaan Vikas Patra Line/Registered/Speed post Line/Blue Dart Line/Company registration line/College admission line/College fee line/University degree line/Interview Line/Booking a Car line/Beer Whisky Line/Canteen Line.
Half the country stands in line, the other half manages the line. Neither has any civic sense.
b) I don't want to bribe babus who manage above lines to get ahead in line.
d) I don't want power failures/cooler failures/ac failures/broken roads/or other catastrophic system failures.
e) I dont want fake or mixed eating oil / flour / milk / cheese / butter / peppers / lentils / rice
f) I don't want dangerous chemical fertilizers in my produce (slow killers - massive kidney failure rate in India for past 10 years)
g) I don't want to teach my children dishonesty and tricks of survival/street smartness (in ref to corruption in India) which don't add any value to their personality.
h) The only reason I would wanna go back is for my immediate family and friends. Thats the only thing I miss when it comes to India.
I wouldn't go back and I believe even MK Gandhi himself would'nt leave from Africa for India in todays times.
Also Its the enemy within (corruption) which can cause great harm and we have that kind of enemy now. You can never ever change the attitudes which people carry in India without another revolution.
I am sure I can come up with a huge list of positives too, They will sound very good and will give me a great feeling of fake National Pride.
Now go ahead and kill me for saying all the above.!!
But I always find it ironical...you read blogs on cnn-ibn by Indians, who say 'I'll leave this country if Sonia Gandhi becomes PM/ if Mayawati becomes PM/fill in the blanks". Then you read posts here about people ready to go back to India, or go to Canada. The funniest ones are who say "I love my India" and then start a thread about how to emigrate to Canada/UK/Australia/NZ. So basically it is "anywhere but India" ?
It's always a tough decision to emigrate to another country. I wonder if people also take into consideration the politics in US, the war, the biased media in this country when making this decision - or is it just about $$$$ ?
Its not the question of economy alone. When deciding to go back. Its a question about convenience.
a) I don't want to stand in line to pay my Electric/Telephone/House Tax/Income Tax/Train Ticket/Air Ticket/Bus Ticket/Children Admission-donations/Petrol Line/LP Gas Line/Restaurant Line/Chola Bhatura Line/Samosa Line/RTO Office line/Registration line/License Line/Stock Buy line/Stock Sell Line/Bank Deposit Line/Bank Draft Line/Fixed Deposit Line/Kisaan Vikas Patra Line/Registered/Speed post Line/Blue Dart Line/Company registration line/College admission line/College fee line/University degree line/Interview Line/Booking a Car line/Beer Whisky Line/Canteen Line.
Half the country stands in line, the other half manages the line. Neither has any civic sense.
b) I don't want to bribe babus who manage above lines to get ahead in line.
d) I don't want power failures/cooler failures/ac failures/broken roads/or other catastrophic system failures.
e) I dont want fake or mixed eating oil / flour / milk / cheese / butter / peppers / lentils / rice
f) I don't want dangerous chemical fertilizers in my produce (slow killers - massive kidney failure rate in India for past 10 years)
g) I don't want to teach my children dishonesty and tricks of survival/street smartness (in ref to corruption in India) which don't add any value to their personality.
h) The only reason I would wanna go back is for my immediate family and friends. Thats the only thing I miss when it comes to India.
I wouldn't go back and I believe even MK Gandhi himself would'nt leave from Africa for India in todays times.
Also Its the enemy within (corruption) which can cause great harm and we have that kind of enemy now. You can never ever change the attitudes which people carry in India without another revolution.
I am sure I can come up with a huge list of positives too, They will sound very good and will give me a great feeling of fake National Pride.
Now go ahead and kill me for saying all the above.!!
hot this the quotes that i want to
vbkris77
09-17 11:13 AM
When it took about 2 years spill over visas (2008 and 2009) for the EB2 India dates to move from April 2004 to Jan 2005, I am sure you could estimate how long it would take to cross a year.
On a ballpark, EB2-I has demand for about 50K immigrant visa numbers. Last year we got 25K. I am assuming we are going to get the same number this year too. So that cleared entire 2004.
Next year the situation may be different, because demand from other countries is less, So we could see a bigger leap and might put us in early 2006 by end of FY10. FY11 may not be that nice when economy starts improving. We could be back to square one.
Bottomline, Without a recapture, EB2I/C will not make much progress. EB3-Worldwide is only a place holder in the very long line.
IV members need to concentrate on the recapture, filing AOS after I140 is approved, visa stamping within USA to make our life easy.
On a ballpark, EB2-I has demand for about 50K immigrant visa numbers. Last year we got 25K. I am assuming we are going to get the same number this year too. So that cleared entire 2004.
Next year the situation may be different, because demand from other countries is less, So we could see a bigger leap and might put us in early 2006 by end of FY10. FY11 may not be that nice when economy starts improving. We could be back to square one.
Bottomline, Without a recapture, EB2I/C will not make much progress. EB3-Worldwide is only a place holder in the very long line.
IV members need to concentrate on the recapture, filing AOS after I140 is approved, visa stamping within USA to make our life easy.
more...
house This time next week I will be
h1techSlave
01-19 01:37 PM
You have made a good point. When you think about it, the lawyers are the only winners in the immigration mess.
I just heard from attorney there are lot of debate going on in AILA and they are trying to stop this memo from being implemented...they are the one going to lose more business then the body shops....
I just heard from attorney there are lot of debate going on in AILA and they are trying to stop this memo from being implemented...they are the one going to lose more business then the body shops....
tattoo Love Quotes The Boyfriend
gc_check
06-15 01:45 PM
Luck does plays in big role in EB Immigration.
Prior to PERM, people applied from one of the States that were processing fast got the GC within couple years. People mainly from NY,NJ,CA,TX,OH and few others were those unlucky ones who had to go through back log elimination center with very old PD's. All, dates were current till Dec 31,2004 and most people who were able to get Labor approval prior to date were able to file 485 prior to this date and most got GC's. But BEC was slow in the beginning, they had this 45 day letter, etc... and by the time, labor approvals started from BEC, priority dates were already retrogressed. Still most people if not all got their GC's. They are still a significant numbers with PD's from 01,02 and 03 waiting in EB3 category and a few in EB2. Since late 2000 and 2001 were not a nice year for s/w sector, i believe a greater number of people were forced to change employment and without a approved I-140 they were not able to carry their PD. Also few folks stuck with a pending AOS somehow got lucky in July.
There are multiple form posts with reference to Oppenheim statements and I quote the link from Murthy website
http://www.murthy.com/news/n_ebvisa.html
I believe the significant % of numbers of pending application in EB2 would be with a PERM labor and all are with PD with March 2005 or later and few with traditional labor process. Assume 90% of applicants with PD earlier than 2003 should have got their GC's and if not will soon. EB3 would have a mix of folks waiting as many people are with PD 2004 or later and when dates were current, none bothered about the category in which GC/ labor was filed. EB3, had not gotten any unused visa from other categories and given the current scenario, it does not look bright either, unless EB2 is current, numbers don't trickle down to EB3 and EB3 ROW itself is in severe demand. I do know few unlucky friends of mine with EB3 PD of 2004 or earlier still waiting to file AOS.
We all know, till Sept 09, nothing would change. Come Oct 2009, with FY10 visas, at least pre-prem EB2 folks have a better change but for EB3, unless you are 2001 / 2002 chance are very little in FY10 and folks with PD03 and sooner can cautiously bet on FY11, unless there is some congressional intervention, the only option is to wait...
But if we can get one or two small relief, if not a complete solution to the entire mess, legislative solution like Not counting dependent (On average each primary application consume 2-3 visa numbers based on history), re-capture unused numbers, waive per country limit for n number of years or exclude people with PD older than 5 years and already in US (just an example) or exclude people who already have 40 credits points with SSA (At least these people have contributed to the country significantly ~10 yrs and already consider they are part of this society ) might help.
Also, lately there seems to be a lot of venting out in the forums rather than having a constructive debate / discussion. Also just talking does not translate to results.
It is practically not possible for all to be actively involved in works IV core is doing (appreciate them) for various reasons but small or big at the least, a one time contribution from all who have not done so far might help these folks who dedicate their time and energy and result in a relief for all. Change doesn't come @ ease. I am not active either, but from time to time, I try to do the small part I can. Given the dynamic environment we are in, we need to do something today or it is too late.... This forum has 30,000 + members and $10 per individual could translate to 300K that can be put to good use. Nothing is free in this world.
Prior to PERM, people applied from one of the States that were processing fast got the GC within couple years. People mainly from NY,NJ,CA,TX,OH and few others were those unlucky ones who had to go through back log elimination center with very old PD's. All, dates were current till Dec 31,2004 and most people who were able to get Labor approval prior to date were able to file 485 prior to this date and most got GC's. But BEC was slow in the beginning, they had this 45 day letter, etc... and by the time, labor approvals started from BEC, priority dates were already retrogressed. Still most people if not all got their GC's. They are still a significant numbers with PD's from 01,02 and 03 waiting in EB3 category and a few in EB2. Since late 2000 and 2001 were not a nice year for s/w sector, i believe a greater number of people were forced to change employment and without a approved I-140 they were not able to carry their PD. Also few folks stuck with a pending AOS somehow got lucky in July.
There are multiple form posts with reference to Oppenheim statements and I quote the link from Murthy website
http://www.murthy.com/news/n_ebvisa.html
I believe the significant % of numbers of pending application in EB2 would be with a PERM labor and all are with PD with March 2005 or later and few with traditional labor process. Assume 90% of applicants with PD earlier than 2003 should have got their GC's and if not will soon. EB3 would have a mix of folks waiting as many people are with PD 2004 or later and when dates were current, none bothered about the category in which GC/ labor was filed. EB3, had not gotten any unused visa from other categories and given the current scenario, it does not look bright either, unless EB2 is current, numbers don't trickle down to EB3 and EB3 ROW itself is in severe demand. I do know few unlucky friends of mine with EB3 PD of 2004 or earlier still waiting to file AOS.
We all know, till Sept 09, nothing would change. Come Oct 2009, with FY10 visas, at least pre-prem EB2 folks have a better change but for EB3, unless you are 2001 / 2002 chance are very little in FY10 and folks with PD03 and sooner can cautiously bet on FY11, unless there is some congressional intervention, the only option is to wait...
But if we can get one or two small relief, if not a complete solution to the entire mess, legislative solution like Not counting dependent (On average each primary application consume 2-3 visa numbers based on history), re-capture unused numbers, waive per country limit for n number of years or exclude people with PD older than 5 years and already in US (just an example) or exclude people who already have 40 credits points with SSA (At least these people have contributed to the country significantly ~10 yrs and already consider they are part of this society ) might help.
Also, lately there seems to be a lot of venting out in the forums rather than having a constructive debate / discussion. Also just talking does not translate to results.
It is practically not possible for all to be actively involved in works IV core is doing (appreciate them) for various reasons but small or big at the least, a one time contribution from all who have not done so far might help these folks who dedicate their time and energy and result in a relief for all. Change doesn't come @ ease. I am not active either, but from time to time, I try to do the small part I can. Given the dynamic environment we are in, we need to do something today or it is too late.... This forum has 30,000 + members and $10 per individual could translate to 300K that can be put to good use. Nothing is free in this world.
more...
pictures Love Quotes The Boyfriend
Amma
05-12 01:01 AM
Friends,
The ongoing war between Srilanka and LTTE has grand Indian design and help to Srilanka.
To defeat the so called terrorist organisation LTTE, the whole world is helping Srilanka.
Sonia Gandhi want to avenge the death of her husband.She won't mind killing of thousands of innocent civilians to satisfy her loss in her family. The able primeminister Manmohan singh also became and acting like dumb puppet in this issue.The so called world tamil leader Karunanidhi also joining with Sonia and ditching srilankan tamils.
Two sikhs killed our primeminister Indira. Did we start killing sikhs enmass like the slaughtering of innocent civilians in Srilanka ?.Instead we made Manmohansingh as our primeminister and we are proud of him. That is the real Indian spirit.
LTTE is the creation due to discrimination of Srilankan's Singala only policy.Srilankan tamils fight for their just right in non-violent way initially.When that non-violence activities were crushed by Srilankan government , the disillusioned tamil youths took arms.
Though LTTE did many atrocities, the Srilankan government is not Buddha. They killed many, raped many and encroached the traditional tamil lands.
Even if the present war won by Srilanka government, that country is not going to have peace. Even if Prabakaran and LTTE perished in this war , there will be more Prabakarans will emerge. The seeds are being sown by srilankan government atrocities.
Nelson Mandela was once declared as terrorist by US government.Bagatsingh declared as terrorist by the British.
Time only will tell who is a terrorist and who is a freedom fighter.
Proud to be an Indian but ashamed by senseless acts of Sonia and company.
The ongoing war between Srilanka and LTTE has grand Indian design and help to Srilanka.
To defeat the so called terrorist organisation LTTE, the whole world is helping Srilanka.
Sonia Gandhi want to avenge the death of her husband.She won't mind killing of thousands of innocent civilians to satisfy her loss in her family. The able primeminister Manmohan singh also became and acting like dumb puppet in this issue.The so called world tamil leader Karunanidhi also joining with Sonia and ditching srilankan tamils.
Two sikhs killed our primeminister Indira. Did we start killing sikhs enmass like the slaughtering of innocent civilians in Srilanka ?.Instead we made Manmohansingh as our primeminister and we are proud of him. That is the real Indian spirit.
LTTE is the creation due to discrimination of Srilankan's Singala only policy.Srilankan tamils fight for their just right in non-violent way initially.When that non-violence activities were crushed by Srilankan government , the disillusioned tamil youths took arms.
Though LTTE did many atrocities, the Srilankan government is not Buddha. They killed many, raped many and encroached the traditional tamil lands.
Even if the present war won by Srilanka government, that country is not going to have peace. Even if Prabakaran and LTTE perished in this war , there will be more Prabakarans will emerge. The seeds are being sown by srilankan government atrocities.
Nelson Mandela was once declared as terrorist by US government.Bagatsingh declared as terrorist by the British.
Time only will tell who is a terrorist and who is a freedom fighter.
Proud to be an Indian but ashamed by senseless acts of Sonia and company.
dresses My invisible oyfriend…
admin
12-31 07:22 PM
Very good find logiclife. Hope we can get such good points across to our legislators.
more...
makeup lt;3 i live with my oyfriend,
coopheal
06-11 09:32 AM
Can someone put the numbers for EB2 similar to already entered EB3 numbers on wiki
EB3 numbers - EB3 Movement Tracking - Immigration Wiki (http://immigrationvoice.org/wiki/index.php/EB3_Movement_Tracking)
EB2 numbers (needed) - EB2-I USCIS Data - Immigration Wiki (http://immigrationvoice.org/wiki/index.php/EB2-I_USCIS_Data)
EB3 numbers - EB3 Movement Tracking - Immigration Wiki (http://immigrationvoice.org/wiki/index.php/EB3_Movement_Tracking)
EB2 numbers (needed) - EB2-I USCIS Data - Immigration Wiki (http://immigrationvoice.org/wiki/index.php/EB2-I_USCIS_Data)
girlfriend love miss you quotes for
samay
07-28 04:09 PM
Hello All,
I travelled by car to Quebec-Canada and came back to US thru vermont on AP since my H4 visa stamping has expired. I was given an I-94A which has no expiry date and also is says single use. They didn't take my old I-94 and issued me a new one with no expiry date. Can any one please tell me if they had the same expirenece or should i contact the Immigrations and ask them to issues a new I-94?
I read through a couple of forums and know that all were issued an I-94 with 1 year expiry date. What is the significance of that Date? I am asking this because we cannot travel on the same AP since the AP will expire in 1 year from the date of issue and hece we cannot use the AP even though the I-94 has 1 year validity.
Hope some one can throw some light on this.I
AP's are generally issued for multiple trips. I am little confused by your question. Could you please specify why is it that you think that you cannot use the AP again.
I travelled by car to Quebec-Canada and came back to US thru vermont on AP since my H4 visa stamping has expired. I was given an I-94A which has no expiry date and also is says single use. They didn't take my old I-94 and issued me a new one with no expiry date. Can any one please tell me if they had the same expirenece or should i contact the Immigrations and ask them to issues a new I-94?
I read through a couple of forums and know that all were issued an I-94 with 1 year expiry date. What is the significance of that Date? I am asking this because we cannot travel on the same AP since the AP will expire in 1 year from the date of issue and hece we cannot use the AP even though the I-94 has 1 year validity.
Hope some one can throw some light on this.I
AP's are generally issued for multiple trips. I am little confused by your question. Could you please specify why is it that you think that you cannot use the AP again.
hairstyles love quotes and graphics,
rajsenthil
09-03 09:56 AM
Why do u feel sad if people support SRK?
Bcos it sounds odd to highlight and support the shadow hero.
And why do u compare SRK to YSR?
Both are not related to our immigration issue but discussed here.
Don't demonize people just because just because they voice their opinions.
I did not demonize anyone. If you feel that way, that is not my problem.
Bcos it sounds odd to highlight and support the shadow hero.
And why do u compare SRK to YSR?
Both are not related to our immigration issue but discussed here.
Don't demonize people just because just because they voice their opinions.
I did not demonize anyone. If you feel that way, that is not my problem.
tikka
07-04 12:18 PM
http://digg.com/politics/U_S_Withdraws_Offer_of_60_000_Job_Based_Visas_Ange ring_Immigration_Lawyer/who
http://digg.com/politics/Rep_Lofgren_Issues_Statement_on_Updated_Visa_Bulle tin
http://digg.com/politics/USCIS_Visa_scandal
http://digg.com/politics/Rep_Lofgren_Issues_Statement_on_Updated_Visa_Bulle tin
http://digg.com/politics/USCIS_Visa_scandal
ghouse1742
07-16 11:36 AM
Dear Lawyer,
I have applied for my renewal of EAD. Please let me know if I have answered the following correct and if there is anything I can do to rectify if you think these are not the right answers. Thanks in advance for your help,
For question 14, Manner of last entry: " Paroled (AOS) " because that is what will be stamped in my passport and I94 after my entry into US.
For question 15, Current Immigration status: " H1B Worker " because my H1B is valid till 2010 and I never used my EAD or received my green card.
I have applied for my renewal of EAD. Please let me know if I have answered the following correct and if there is anything I can do to rectify if you think these are not the right answers. Thanks in advance for your help,
For question 14, Manner of last entry: " Paroled (AOS) " because that is what will be stamped in my passport and I94 after my entry into US.
For question 15, Current Immigration status: " H1B Worker " because my H1B is valid till 2010 and I never used my EAD or received my green card.
No comments:
Post a Comment