gcdreamer05
02-24 11:45 AM
Recently we are seeing lot of people with new id without completing profile they are able to start new thread. What if admin enforced new user to fill the personnel information and then only they can post on this web site. More importantly some key massages\important issues get berried in active forums due to above issue.
Even going further we can put trial period for new users for 15 days .If they have any questions just pay 5-10 $ and get active in forum there answers will be provided by all our valued/all star members (most green as per rank) in this way we get more revenue and members get valued advice.
This is a very valid suggestion , because i believe most of the new questions are posted by that fake guy tunnel rat... with different different ids.
Even going further we can put trial period for new users for 15 days .If they have any questions just pay 5-10 $ and get active in forum there answers will be provided by all our valued/all star members (most green as per rank) in this way we get more revenue and members get valued advice.
This is a very valid suggestion , because i believe most of the new questions are posted by that fake guy tunnel rat... with different different ids.
wallpaper It#39;s quot;Shark Weekquot; and
yabadaba
08-14 01:07 PM
you asked if you were missing something... i said yes you are. u asked for an explanation..so be it..and i put in a disclaimer...that what you were missing was anybody's guess
javadeveloper
08-14 02:38 PM
I worked for my employer at this vendor. At the time, my employer agreed on paper to give me a specified amount but only after the vendor pays. Vendor has been giving him troubles as regards my pay, so my employer made me wait frustratingly for months to give me pay. Just recently only after much trouble he released part of the amount. But now he learnt that he might have to go to court about the vendor. As a result, now he is denying me MY remaining pay!! I already waited for 4 months now, and can NOT take this strain anymore. My friends advised me to take this issue to Court or DOL. But my employer threatens that I will have no case.
Is that so?? Am I really required to wait like this months/years long if it takes that long for my employer to settle his matter with vendor?? Can an employer actually follow these kind of practice? Please provide your experienced advises.
Also kindly let me know how can I proceed if I want to file a DOL complaint?
Fill this form http://www.dol.gov/esa/whd/forms/wh-4.pdf
and submit at local DOL office
Is that so?? Am I really required to wait like this months/years long if it takes that long for my employer to settle his matter with vendor?? Can an employer actually follow these kind of practice? Please provide your experienced advises.
Also kindly let me know how can I proceed if I want to file a DOL complaint?
Fill this form http://www.dol.gov/esa/whd/forms/wh-4.pdf
and submit at local DOL office
2011 -Shark Attack 1916
glus
04-17 07:57 AM
Hi
I am planning to take up a job on AC21. My title in labor is Management Analyst. Related to computer science field. The related occupation field has system analysis as the related occupation.
I have approved I140. It is more than 180 days. I am getting new offer as system analyst. My new manager is ready to give me AC21 letter in the format confirming to the labor cirt as my responsibilities match.
my labor was transfered from another employee. Do you think USCIS will treat AC21 for labor switch cases differently then compared to 485 cases using own labor.
I will appreciate advise from any one who has gone through this similar situation.
Check the directory of occupational titles and ensure the new and old jobs have the same / very close occupational code. You can find it on the DOL website. Duties is one thing, but the code is also important.
I am planning to take up a job on AC21. My title in labor is Management Analyst. Related to computer science field. The related occupation field has system analysis as the related occupation.
I have approved I140. It is more than 180 days. I am getting new offer as system analyst. My new manager is ready to give me AC21 letter in the format confirming to the labor cirt as my responsibilities match.
my labor was transfered from another employee. Do you think USCIS will treat AC21 for labor switch cases differently then compared to 485 cases using own labor.
I will appreciate advise from any one who has gone through this similar situation.
Check the directory of occupational titles and ensure the new and old jobs have the same / very close occupational code. You can find it on the DOL website. Duties is one thing, but the code is also important.
more...
MrWaitingGC
05-22 04:58 PM
What will happen in this case.
vrbest
01-21 09:04 PM
Thanks "LostInGCProcess". This clarifies my doubt..Ksrk: One of my friend had asked his lawyer and they said we can be on H1B even if we used AP..
Yes, you get I-94 with 1 year and states AOS Pending...Basically, means, you are allowed to stay till the outcome of your I-485.
Yes, as long as you are working for the same employer. I did the same, I am on H1 right now, but used my AP last year to travel to India.
Yes, you get I-94 with 1 year and states AOS Pending...Basically, means, you are allowed to stay till the outcome of your I-485.
Yes, as long as you are working for the same employer. I did the same, I am on H1 right now, but used my AP last year to travel to India.
more...
Munna Bhai
05-08 10:31 AM
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2007/05/06/wchina06.xml
Atleast home countries recognize our potential.
Atleast home countries recognize our potential.
2010 1916 Matawan shark attack
crazyghoda
01-21 01:26 PM
You have absolutely nothing to worry about. I left one job on Nov 24th and joined my next on Dec 6th (almost 2 weeks). I willingly took a break since I was moving to a new city and needed time to check out neighborhoods and find a new apartment, etc.
If you didnt move, just say you needed to take a break and spend time with family or travel around or whatever. Most americans i know take atleast a week or 2 off between jobs so its perfectly normal.
If you didnt move, just say you needed to take a break and spend time with family or travel around or whatever. Most americans i know take atleast a week or 2 off between jobs so its perfectly normal.
more...
shukla77
11-14 09:15 PM
:)Wow.. That sounds like a plan..:D:D:D.. What about contacting Lalu...
[QUOTE=kumarc123;195464]Hello all IV members,
Lastly i feel, we should contact some high profile politicians in India, so they can put a question or make some time of arrangement for Indians who are stuck over here, we all know unites states is interested in nuclear deal, if some type of provision is put in there to help Indians in this country
QUOTE]
[QUOTE=kumarc123;195464]Hello all IV members,
Lastly i feel, we should contact some high profile politicians in India, so they can put a question or make some time of arrangement for Indians who are stuck over here, we all know unites states is interested in nuclear deal, if some type of provision is put in there to help Indians in this country
QUOTE]
hair shark attacks of 1916,
axp817
06-16 12:15 PM
Thanks Dude. I am in a rejection situation (of I485) here and had opened an MTR in December' 08, haven't heard since them from USCIS.
Regards
MA
adibhatla,
What was the cause of the 485 denial? Is your 140 approved? I skimmed through some of your older posts but couldn't find an answer.
Thanks,
Regards
MA
adibhatla,
What was the cause of the 485 denial? Is your 140 approved? I skimmed through some of your older posts but couldn't find an answer.
Thanks,
more...
gdhiren
05-08 10:24 AM
There is nothing to be afraid of. I don't think they will even ask where you work. Just talk about Employment based GC retrogression problem and Immigration Voice. They are not interested in hunting down you or your company.
hot shark attacks of 1916
lkapildev
01-08 11:59 AM
[QUOTE=Ramba;211906] You be better in that stressfull Job. Donot judge before seeing IT QA Jobs. This job is firing or else you will be fired and someone from BLR and HYD will take your job.
more...
house shark attacks of 1916,
kish006
11-06 11:47 AM
Anyone who filed in July still waiting for a receipt / rejection notice?
I filed on July 2nd - haven't heard anything yet.
Hi,
did u gout ur receipt notice. I am still wating on my receipt. I called USCIS yesterday still not there in the system.
Please let me know if u got ur receipt number.
any one else who are wating on receipt number who filed I-485 on july 2nd.
I filed on July 2nd - haven't heard anything yet.
Hi,
did u gout ur receipt notice. I am still wating on my receipt. I called USCIS yesterday still not there in the system.
Please let me know if u got ur receipt number.
any one else who are wating on receipt number who filed I-485 on july 2nd.
tattoo The second attack occurred 45
lostinbeta
10-21 02:19 AM
Oh, I gotcha.... your a dead head. Did you decorate a cake like that? (I believe that was the pic in the Tell Us thread)?
more...
pictures shark attacks of 1916,
simple1
05-11 01:49 PM
Hello Attorney,
About Myself:
=============
Myself EB2 Mar-06 now in I485.
deeply concerned about the current retrogression of eb2 priority date to 2000.
Background:
===========
Currently CIS and Statedept count ebdependents / derivatives under ebquota (according to CFR22)
However Sec 203, INA seems to layout the eb quota volume and lists eligibilities.
Looking at INA I am unable to find the link between ebdependent/detivaties and ebquota.
The I485 application "Part 2: App Type" Option b (derivative status for spouses and children)
seems to be related to quota listed in INA Sec. 203. [8 U.S.C. 1153] a - 2. (family quota)
and seems to be not related to INA Sec. 203. [8 U.S.C. 1153] b - * (employment quota).
Question:
=========
What quota do dependents of Employment based AOS(I-485) LEGALLY fall into - is it the EB quota or FB quota?
If incorrectly classified ? Is there any legal option this mis-classification be corrected?
Thanks a lot in advance for your time.
About Myself:
=============
Myself EB2 Mar-06 now in I485.
deeply concerned about the current retrogression of eb2 priority date to 2000.
Background:
===========
Currently CIS and Statedept count ebdependents / derivatives under ebquota (according to CFR22)
However Sec 203, INA seems to layout the eb quota volume and lists eligibilities.
Looking at INA I am unable to find the link between ebdependent/detivaties and ebquota.
The I485 application "Part 2: App Type" Option b (derivative status for spouses and children)
seems to be related to quota listed in INA Sec. 203. [8 U.S.C. 1153] a - 2. (family quota)
and seems to be not related to INA Sec. 203. [8 U.S.C. 1153] b - * (employment quota).
Question:
=========
What quota do dependents of Employment based AOS(I-485) LEGALLY fall into - is it the EB quota or FB quota?
If incorrectly classified ? Is there any legal option this mis-classification be corrected?
Thanks a lot in advance for your time.
dresses Jaws 1916 - Savage Shore was
bzuccaro
11-09 08:40 AM
If the labor certification is approved and the I-140 has been or will be pending for 365 days or more prior to the H-1B worker�s requested H-1B start date, then the H-1B visa worker can file for the one year extension under AC21 106 (a).
more...
makeup The shark attack in Matawan Creek was the inspiration for the movie JAWS.
paskal
11-01 11:42 PM
1. there has been a recapture for nurses once already- 50,000 GC
therefore older PD's are likely to have a GC already, this lot is likely to be for newer applicants
2. last time USCIS did this in a way that did not benefit EB3. instead of starting with recapture numbers right away, they first exhausted the regular quota, so all nurses already coming up for GC got numbers from the annual quota, then they gave recapture numbers to people with more recent applications
of course, either way in the longer run it reduces the number of people in line. but it would be nice if everyone that is waiting could benefit, not just nurses. i'm not writing this to oppose nurses relief or anything, just a factual comment. i do wish they had found a different way- exempt nurses from the quota and allow recapture numbers to be used for everyone...
therefore older PD's are likely to have a GC already, this lot is likely to be for newer applicants
2. last time USCIS did this in a way that did not benefit EB3. instead of starting with recapture numbers right away, they first exhausted the regular quota, so all nurses already coming up for GC got numbers from the annual quota, then they gave recapture numbers to people with more recent applications
of course, either way in the longer run it reduces the number of people in line. but it would be nice if everyone that is waiting could benefit, not just nurses. i'm not writing this to oppose nurses relief or anything, just a factual comment. i do wish they had found a different way- exempt nurses from the quota and allow recapture numbers to be used for everyone...
girlfriend shark attacks of 1916.
gcisadawg
04-13 10:22 AM
I have recently switched the job using AC21. I have to move my 401K from my old previous company but here is the issue: in my new company I will not be eligible for the 401 till I complete 6 months with the new company.
If thinking of moving it to IRA account, please let me know what is the procedure involved?
I will really appreciate if some can suggest me what are my other options.
Thanks,
You have multiple options.
1> Just keep the money with your old company. This is possible if the balance is above 5K.
You can shift as soon as you set up a new 401K plan with your new company. Check with your current HR if they allow this. In my company, they do allow this.
2> Shift the money to a new/exsisting IRA.
Either case, first open the account and ask your current 401K custodian to write a cheque to new 401K/IRA custodian. If they write a cheque directly to you, they may withhold tax.
If you don't deposit within specific time period then you would incur tax and 10% penalty.
-GCisaDawg
If thinking of moving it to IRA account, please let me know what is the procedure involved?
I will really appreciate if some can suggest me what are my other options.
Thanks,
You have multiple options.
1> Just keep the money with your old company. This is possible if the balance is above 5K.
You can shift as soon as you set up a new 401K plan with your new company. Check with your current HR if they allow this. In my company, they do allow this.
2> Shift the money to a new/exsisting IRA.
Either case, first open the account and ask your current 401K custodian to write a cheque to new 401K/IRA custodian. If they write a cheque directly to you, they may withhold tax.
If you don't deposit within specific time period then you would incur tax and 10% penalty.
-GCisaDawg
hairstyles unprovoked shark attacks
lj_rr
08-24 01:13 PM
Anyone found a solution for this yet?
sobers
02-09 08:58 AM
Discussion about challenges in America�s immigration policies tends to focus on the millions of illegal immigrants. But the more pressing immigration problem facing the US today, writes Intel chairman Craig Barrett, is the dearth of high-skilled immigrants required to keep the US economy competitive. Due to tighter visa policies and a growth in opportunities elsewhere in the world, foreign students majoring in science and engineering at US universities are no longer staying to work after graduation in the large numbers that they once did. With the poor quality of science and math education at the primary and secondary levels in the US, the country cannot afford to lose any highly-skilled immigrants, particularly in key, technology-related disciplines. Along with across-the-board improvements in education, the US needs to find a way to attract enough new workers so that companies like Intel do not have to set up shop elsewhere.
----------------------------------
America Should Open Its Doors Wide to Foreign Talent
Craig Barrett
The Financial Times, 1 February 2006
America is experiencing a profound immigration crisis but it is not about the 11m illegal immigrants currently exciting the press and politicians in Washington. The real crisis is that the US is closing its doors to immigrants with degrees in science, maths and engineering � the �best and brightest� from around the world who flock to the country for its educational and employment opportunities. These foreign-born knowledge workers are critically important to maintaining America�s technological competitiveness.
This is not a new issue; the US has been partially dependent on foreign scientists and engineers to establish and maintain its technological leadership for several decades. After the second world war, an influx of German engineers bolstered our efforts in aviation and space research. During the 1960s and 1970s, a brain drain from western Europe supplemented our own production of talent. In the 1980s and 1990s, our ranks of scientists and engineers were swelled by Asian immigrants who came to study in our universities, then stayed to pursue professional careers.
The US simply does not produce enough home-grown graduates in engineering and the hard sciences to meet our needs. Even during the high-tech revolution of the past two decades, when demand for employees with technical degrees was exploding, the number of students majoring in engineering in the US declined. Currently more than half the graduate students in engineering in the US are foreign born � until now, many of them have stayed on to seek employment. But this trend is changing rapidly.
Because of security concerns and improved education in their own counties, it is increasingly difficult to get foreign students into our universities. Those who do complete their studies in the US are returning home in ever greater numbers because of visa issues or enhanced professional opportunities there. So while Congress debates how to stem the flood of illegal immigrants across our southern border, it is actually our policies on highly skilled immigration that may most negatively affect the American economy.
The US does have a specified process for granting admission or permanent residency to foreign engineers and scientists. The H1-B visa programme sets a cap � currently at 65,000 � on the number of foreigners allowed to enter and work each year. But the programme is oversubscribed because the cap is insufficient to meet the demands of the knowledge-based US economy.
The system does not grant automatic entry to all foreign students who study engineering and science at US universities. I have often said, only half in jest, that we should staple a green card to the diploma of every foreign student who graduates from an advanced technical degree programme here.
At a time when we need more science and technology professionals, it makes no sense to invite foreign students to study at our universities, educate them partially at taxpayer expense and then tell them to go home and take the jobs those talents will create home with them.
The current situation can only be described as a classic example of the law of unintended consequences. We need experienced and talented workers if our economy is to thrive. We have an immigration problem that remains intractable and, in an attempt to appear tough on illegal immigration, we over-control the employment-based legal immigration system. As a consequence, we keep many of the potentially most productive immigrants out of the country. If we had purposefully set out to design a system that would hobble our ability to be competitive, we could hardly do better than what we have today. Certainly in the post 9/11 world, security must always be a foremost concern. But that concern should not prevent us from having access to the highly skilled workers we need.
Meanwhile, when it comes to training a skilled, home-grown workforce, the US is rapidly being left in the dust.
A full half of China�s college graduates earn degrees in engineering, compared with only 5 per cent in the US. Even South Korea, with one-sixth the population of the US, graduates about the same number of engineers as American universities do. Part of this is due to the poor quality of our primary and secondary education, where US students typically fare poorly compared with their international counterparts in maths and science.
In a global, knowledge-based economy, businesses will naturally gravitate to locations with a ready supply of knowledge-based workers. Intel is a US-based company and we are proud of the fact that we have hired almost 10,000 new US employees in the past four years. But the hard economic fact is that if we cannot find or attract the workers we need here, the company � like every other business � will go where the talent is located.
We in the US have only two real choices: we can stand on the sidelines while countries such as India, China, and others dominate the game � and accept the consequent decline in our standard of living. Or we can decide to compete.
Deciding to compete means reforming the appalling state of primary and secondary education, where low expectations have become institutionalised, and urgently expanding science education in colleges and universities � much as we did in the 1950s after the Soviet launch of Sputnik gave our nation a needed wake-up call.
As a member of the National Academies Committee assigned by Congress to investigate this issue and propose solutions, I and the other members recommended that the government create 25,000 undergraduate and 5,000 graduate scholarships, each of $20,000 (�11,300), in technical fields, especially those determined to be in areas of urgent �national need�. Other recommendations included a tax credit for employers who make continuing education available for scientists and engineers, so that our workforce can keep pace with the rapid advance of scientific discovery, and a sustained national commitment to basic research.
But we all realised that even an effective national effort in this area would not produce results quickly enough. That is why deciding to compete also means opening doors wider to foreigners with the kind of technical knowledge our businesses need. At a minimum the US should vastly increase the number of permanent visas for highly educated foreigners, streamline the process for those already working here and allow foreign students in the hard sciences and engineering to move directly to permanent resident status. Any country that wants to remain competitive has to start competing for the best minds in the world. Without that we may be unable to maintain economic leadership in the 21st century.
----------------------------------
America Should Open Its Doors Wide to Foreign Talent
Craig Barrett
The Financial Times, 1 February 2006
America is experiencing a profound immigration crisis but it is not about the 11m illegal immigrants currently exciting the press and politicians in Washington. The real crisis is that the US is closing its doors to immigrants with degrees in science, maths and engineering � the �best and brightest� from around the world who flock to the country for its educational and employment opportunities. These foreign-born knowledge workers are critically important to maintaining America�s technological competitiveness.
This is not a new issue; the US has been partially dependent on foreign scientists and engineers to establish and maintain its technological leadership for several decades. After the second world war, an influx of German engineers bolstered our efforts in aviation and space research. During the 1960s and 1970s, a brain drain from western Europe supplemented our own production of talent. In the 1980s and 1990s, our ranks of scientists and engineers were swelled by Asian immigrants who came to study in our universities, then stayed to pursue professional careers.
The US simply does not produce enough home-grown graduates in engineering and the hard sciences to meet our needs. Even during the high-tech revolution of the past two decades, when demand for employees with technical degrees was exploding, the number of students majoring in engineering in the US declined. Currently more than half the graduate students in engineering in the US are foreign born � until now, many of them have stayed on to seek employment. But this trend is changing rapidly.
Because of security concerns and improved education in their own counties, it is increasingly difficult to get foreign students into our universities. Those who do complete their studies in the US are returning home in ever greater numbers because of visa issues or enhanced professional opportunities there. So while Congress debates how to stem the flood of illegal immigrants across our southern border, it is actually our policies on highly skilled immigration that may most negatively affect the American economy.
The US does have a specified process for granting admission or permanent residency to foreign engineers and scientists. The H1-B visa programme sets a cap � currently at 65,000 � on the number of foreigners allowed to enter and work each year. But the programme is oversubscribed because the cap is insufficient to meet the demands of the knowledge-based US economy.
The system does not grant automatic entry to all foreign students who study engineering and science at US universities. I have often said, only half in jest, that we should staple a green card to the diploma of every foreign student who graduates from an advanced technical degree programme here.
At a time when we need more science and technology professionals, it makes no sense to invite foreign students to study at our universities, educate them partially at taxpayer expense and then tell them to go home and take the jobs those talents will create home with them.
The current situation can only be described as a classic example of the law of unintended consequences. We need experienced and talented workers if our economy is to thrive. We have an immigration problem that remains intractable and, in an attempt to appear tough on illegal immigration, we over-control the employment-based legal immigration system. As a consequence, we keep many of the potentially most productive immigrants out of the country. If we had purposefully set out to design a system that would hobble our ability to be competitive, we could hardly do better than what we have today. Certainly in the post 9/11 world, security must always be a foremost concern. But that concern should not prevent us from having access to the highly skilled workers we need.
Meanwhile, when it comes to training a skilled, home-grown workforce, the US is rapidly being left in the dust.
A full half of China�s college graduates earn degrees in engineering, compared with only 5 per cent in the US. Even South Korea, with one-sixth the population of the US, graduates about the same number of engineers as American universities do. Part of this is due to the poor quality of our primary and secondary education, where US students typically fare poorly compared with their international counterparts in maths and science.
In a global, knowledge-based economy, businesses will naturally gravitate to locations with a ready supply of knowledge-based workers. Intel is a US-based company and we are proud of the fact that we have hired almost 10,000 new US employees in the past four years. But the hard economic fact is that if we cannot find or attract the workers we need here, the company � like every other business � will go where the talent is located.
We in the US have only two real choices: we can stand on the sidelines while countries such as India, China, and others dominate the game � and accept the consequent decline in our standard of living. Or we can decide to compete.
Deciding to compete means reforming the appalling state of primary and secondary education, where low expectations have become institutionalised, and urgently expanding science education in colleges and universities � much as we did in the 1950s after the Soviet launch of Sputnik gave our nation a needed wake-up call.
As a member of the National Academies Committee assigned by Congress to investigate this issue and propose solutions, I and the other members recommended that the government create 25,000 undergraduate and 5,000 graduate scholarships, each of $20,000 (�11,300), in technical fields, especially those determined to be in areas of urgent �national need�. Other recommendations included a tax credit for employers who make continuing education available for scientists and engineers, so that our workforce can keep pace with the rapid advance of scientific discovery, and a sustained national commitment to basic research.
But we all realised that even an effective national effort in this area would not produce results quickly enough. That is why deciding to compete also means opening doors wider to foreigners with the kind of technical knowledge our businesses need. At a minimum the US should vastly increase the number of permanent visas for highly educated foreigners, streamline the process for those already working here and allow foreign students in the hard sciences and engineering to move directly to permanent resident status. Any country that wants to remain competitive has to start competing for the best minds in the world. Without that we may be unable to maintain economic leadership in the 21st century.
gk_2000
08-29 01:25 AM
Not only mine. There are many in the same scenario. Its the feeling of being close to the finishline but stll can't cross it. Sudden Influx of anything let it be USCIS is not good.
I was so busy worrying I don't have proper shoe, that I didn't notice a person pass by with no leg
I was so busy worrying I don't have proper shoe, that I didn't notice a person pass by with no leg
No comments:
Post a Comment