dtekkedil
07-06 03:57 PM
We need some powerful press release for this Gandhigiri
Working on it... have faith!
Working on it... have faith!
wallpaper night elf (from world of
kittu1991
05-01 03:17 PM
Wow..... Now there is a new thread for donors only to discuss the same thing. If you want to discuss further donate and be a donor.
bobzibub
07-08 12:13 AM
It gets interesting. Doesn't it? Even if the court agrees that this is a fiasco and would like to compensate the beneficiaries by allowing us to file for 485, it would be in direct violation of the law that " there must be a number available on the day of filing ".We don't have any numbers. Do we? My point is, will a judicial system go out of the box and allow us to file when there are no visa numbers available? The only way is get numbers and make every one file and the only way for that is to undo what the USCIS has done in the last 2 weeks of June. Just my thoughts. I am ready to take anything positive out of this because I have least hopes pegged on the law suit.
If there must be a number at the day of filing, who's responsibility is it to manage that then? The applicant's? I filed my eb-485 based upon *their* indication that there were numbers available. I relied upon them in good faith that there were. Now I understand that they did their best to use them up as soon as they issued the visa bulletin--probably because the July 485s would not be at the higher fee schedule.
I think a judge would have no option but to allow the filings. It is not that allowing the 485s to stand would break the "numbers must be available" law. That law has already been broken, when they put Cs all over the visa bulletin.
Cheers,
-b
If there must be a number at the day of filing, who's responsibility is it to manage that then? The applicant's? I filed my eb-485 based upon *their* indication that there were numbers available. I relied upon them in good faith that there were. Now I understand that they did their best to use them up as soon as they issued the visa bulletin--probably because the July 485s would not be at the higher fee schedule.
I think a judge would have no option but to allow the filings. It is not that allowing the 485s to stand would break the "numbers must be available" law. That law has already been broken, when they put Cs all over the visa bulletin.
Cheers,
-b
2011 Nothing can beat my Night elf
grimreaper
11-18 11:55 AM
Dear XXX
Thank you for contacting me with your position regarding immigration. It is good to learn the views of my friends and neighbors in northern California, and I appreciate having your input.
Current estimates suggest that there may be as many as twelve million undocumented immigrants in our country. A balanced approach to immigration reform is needed to contain and reverse this trend. Any solution must protect the United States economy, meet our homeland security needs, and reduce the backlog and wait times associated with legitimate applications for legal entry.
Our economy relies upon hard working people to perform every type of work, from back-breaking farm labor to high tech jobs, and America has always welcomed workers, foreign and domestic, who endeavor to advance the U.S. economy. It is simply not realistic to expect our economy to continue prospering without providing some mechanism for legal temporary workers to continue their efforts.
That is why I am a cosponsor of the AgJOBS bill. Our national economic survival relies on retaining the agricultural labor force while bringing workers out from the shadows, a goal the AgJOBS bill helps meet. However, I also believe we should significantly enhance the American labor market by placing a priority on educating U.S. students and training American workers instead of fostering a reliance on foreign workers. Businesses seeking to hire a temporary professional worker should pledge that they have made a good-faith effort to hire U.S. workers first and that the temporary professional worker will not displace a U.S. worker. I believe that these provisions can be met without stifling business and economic growth.
In addition, true border security can come only from the increased use of manpower and effective technology together with an efficient and judicious legal immigration application process. The indefinite state of limbo in which many applicants for legal American immigration status find themselves is a part of the problem that we can control. By allocating more resources to efficiently process applications, we can significantly cut wait times for applicants and reduce the influx of undocumented immigrants. As Congress considers future immigration legislation, I will factor your recommendations into my decision making.
Thank you again for sharing your views. I am proud to serve California's Eleventh District, and I am committed to working hard for you. If you would like more information about the issues I am working on in Congress, I encourage you to visit my website at Congressman Jerry McNerney (http://www.mcnerney.house.gov).
Sincerely,
Jerry McNerney
Member of Congress
Thank you for contacting me with your position regarding immigration. It is good to learn the views of my friends and neighbors in northern California, and I appreciate having your input.
Current estimates suggest that there may be as many as twelve million undocumented immigrants in our country. A balanced approach to immigration reform is needed to contain and reverse this trend. Any solution must protect the United States economy, meet our homeland security needs, and reduce the backlog and wait times associated with legitimate applications for legal entry.
Our economy relies upon hard working people to perform every type of work, from back-breaking farm labor to high tech jobs, and America has always welcomed workers, foreign and domestic, who endeavor to advance the U.S. economy. It is simply not realistic to expect our economy to continue prospering without providing some mechanism for legal temporary workers to continue their efforts.
That is why I am a cosponsor of the AgJOBS bill. Our national economic survival relies on retaining the agricultural labor force while bringing workers out from the shadows, a goal the AgJOBS bill helps meet. However, I also believe we should significantly enhance the American labor market by placing a priority on educating U.S. students and training American workers instead of fostering a reliance on foreign workers. Businesses seeking to hire a temporary professional worker should pledge that they have made a good-faith effort to hire U.S. workers first and that the temporary professional worker will not displace a U.S. worker. I believe that these provisions can be met without stifling business and economic growth.
In addition, true border security can come only from the increased use of manpower and effective technology together with an efficient and judicious legal immigration application process. The indefinite state of limbo in which many applicants for legal American immigration status find themselves is a part of the problem that we can control. By allocating more resources to efficiently process applications, we can significantly cut wait times for applicants and reduce the influx of undocumented immigrants. As Congress considers future immigration legislation, I will factor your recommendations into my decision making.
Thank you again for sharing your views. I am proud to serve California's Eleventh District, and I am committed to working hard for you. If you would like more information about the issues I am working on in Congress, I encourage you to visit my website at Congressman Jerry McNerney (http://www.mcnerney.house.gov).
Sincerely,
Jerry McNerney
Member of Congress
more...
zoooom
07-19 07:22 PM
Done...
I am not sure what our target is but I have mentioned that I will monitor this thread for 2 days and depending on the number of people interested, we can set the limit and per person contribution. Lemme you if you have a better idea.
BTW I pledge $100
I am not sure what our target is but I have mentioned that I will monitor this thread for 2 days and depending on the number of people interested, we can set the limit and per person contribution. Lemme you if you have a better idea.
BTW I pledge $100
kaisersose
07-20 08:43 AM
A $100 from me too
more...
venky08
12-18 06:59 PM
They say that you become what you think most of the time. Do you really think good things about yourself? Try to develop a habit to see silver lining to anything in life...it will take you a long way not only with GC stuff but other issues which we have to deal with day to day.
Cheers!
Cheers!
2010 Cheap WoW Accounts Level 85
ski_dude12
08-25 07:42 PM
Not my case. It is being actively being processed. That was the reply I got to the SR I opened.
What about ur case? Is that assigned to an officer as well?
What about ur case? Is that assigned to an officer as well?
more...
Leo07
11-17 07:54 PM
just
1,747 Letters and Emails Sent So Far
:(
1,747 Letters and Emails Sent So Far
:(
hair Cheap WoW Accounts Level 85
dkshitij
11-19 10:21 AM
Could we please change the Advocacy title? When I share the page on facebook, only the word Advocacy shows up. I would rather see this when I link it.
Action Alert
DREAM Act: Help the Legal Immigrants
Get involved, Act Now
Contact Members of Congress to request inclusion of ammendments in the DREAM act for Legal Immigrants.
Also the spelling of amendments is wrong there as you can see above. Thanks!
Action Alert
DREAM Act: Help the Legal Immigrants
Get involved, Act Now
Contact Members of Congress to request inclusion of ammendments in the DREAM act for Legal Immigrants.
Also the spelling of amendments is wrong there as you can see above. Thanks!
more...
mbawa2574
09-07 12:08 PM
Did ur packet was received by R.Williams ?
hot Buying WoW Account Level 80
akashya
07-06 03:51 PM
I won't be amazed if I see Gandhigiri on Comedy Central Tuesday night.These two shows have huge fan following among youth.
PS: DO NOT start a rumor that daily show or colbert are covering this event.
PS: DO NOT start a rumor that daily show or colbert are covering this event.
more...
house world of warcraft blood elf
iptel
05-24 07:22 PM
Immigration Voice strongly opposes the bill S 1348 in its current form and requests congress to amend this bill and treat the legal skilled immigrants at parity with undocumented immigrants, future guest-workers and pending family-based applicants.
Are we sure that we are refering to right bill S 1348 by Harry Reid seems to be pro-High skilled immigrant
http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/bdquery/z?d110:s.01348:
The text of part of legistlation is as follows
(b) Employment-Based Immigrants- Section 201(d) (8 U.S.C. 1151(d)) is amended to read as follows:
`(d) Worldwide Level of Employment-Based Immigrants-
`(1) IN GENERAL- Subject to paragraph (2), the worldwide level of employment-based immigrants under this subsection for a fiscal year is equal to the sum of--
`(A)(i) 450,000, for each of the fiscal years 2008 through 2017; or
`(ii) 290,000, for fiscal year 2018 and each subsequent fiscal year;
`(B) the difference between the maximum number of visas authorized to be issued under this subsection during the previous fiscal year and the number of visas issued during the previous fiscal year; and
`(C) the difference between--
`(i) the maximum number of visas authorized to be issued under this subsection during fiscal years 2001 through 2005 and the number of visa numbers issued under this subsection during those fiscal years; and
`(ii) the number of visas calculated under clause (i) that were issued after fiscal year 2005
Are we sure that we are refering to right bill S 1348 by Harry Reid seems to be pro-High skilled immigrant
http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/bdquery/z?d110:s.01348:
The text of part of legistlation is as follows
(b) Employment-Based Immigrants- Section 201(d) (8 U.S.C. 1151(d)) is amended to read as follows:
`(d) Worldwide Level of Employment-Based Immigrants-
`(1) IN GENERAL- Subject to paragraph (2), the worldwide level of employment-based immigrants under this subsection for a fiscal year is equal to the sum of--
`(A)(i) 450,000, for each of the fiscal years 2008 through 2017; or
`(ii) 290,000, for fiscal year 2018 and each subsequent fiscal year;
`(B) the difference between the maximum number of visas authorized to be issued under this subsection during the previous fiscal year and the number of visas issued during the previous fiscal year; and
`(C) the difference between--
`(i) the maximum number of visas authorized to be issued under this subsection during fiscal years 2001 through 2005 and the number of visa numbers issued under this subsection during those fiscal years; and
`(ii) the number of visas calculated under clause (i) that were issued after fiscal year 2005
tattoo World of Warcraft: Faction
chanduv23
06-23 06:36 AM
Those who think, their employer is OK - be extra extra cautious. Never, never believe employers. Bottom line is, employers will not care for u, if they know u r gonna benefit out of this, they will do everything they can to avoid this. Most desi employers indulge in sweet talks. Talks will be extremely sweet. Just like how they talk to u before u join the company.
GC filing is a carrot that employers thrive on. They will do anything to aqvoid this situation.
Remember, your problems are not over after filing 485 also. The so called prospective employers who always told u, "I will hire you, if you have a GC or EAD" will now give some other excuse. Basically they want to put u in a position where u have less chances of bargain, thats the whole deal.
Lotsa people go by self employment after filing for EAD (Dunno how - maybe some IV members can explain this) and still do contracting and safely see themselves through their GC.
So basically, we are on our own here. For those dealing with desi employers - I can tell u one thing. U can handle the situation with sweet talk and some diplomacy - desi employers have their own fears. But those dealing with American employers - be extra careful - HR personnel etc... who have sympathy for layed off workers etvc... will try to screw u big time on ur back. If they decide to screw u - they will do it big time and none of ur diplomacy will work there - believe me, I gone through this.
Be smart - stay on top of things, don't waste time and get things done in all possible ways. Get employer letter in whatever way u can. (If you have a letterhead - u know what I am saying ....)
GC filing is a carrot that employers thrive on. They will do anything to aqvoid this situation.
Remember, your problems are not over after filing 485 also. The so called prospective employers who always told u, "I will hire you, if you have a GC or EAD" will now give some other excuse. Basically they want to put u in a position where u have less chances of bargain, thats the whole deal.
Lotsa people go by self employment after filing for EAD (Dunno how - maybe some IV members can explain this) and still do contracting and safely see themselves through their GC.
So basically, we are on our own here. For those dealing with desi employers - I can tell u one thing. U can handle the situation with sweet talk and some diplomacy - desi employers have their own fears. But those dealing with American employers - be extra careful - HR personnel etc... who have sympathy for layed off workers etvc... will try to screw u big time on ur back. If they decide to screw u - they will do it big time and none of ur diplomacy will work there - believe me, I gone through this.
Be smart - stay on top of things, don't waste time and get things done in all possible ways. Get employer letter in whatever way u can. (If you have a letterhead - u know what I am saying ....)
more...
pictures World of Warcraft -Chemical
ashatara78
05-01 03:21 PM
It is a good point that some people have brought up and I am sure IV core will evaluate it to see if it will help more people or less.
However.........
I strongly believe that family should be together. Whatever GC and other immigration issues we have, one should strive for keeping the family together at all times. Missing out on even a few years of togetherness with your spouse and kids is not worth it.
Even in the current system where dependents come under EB quota, I have known people where one spouse got the GC and the other one had to wait for many years because of a name check or something. But the current laws (EAD/AP etc) made sure that atleast the family was not broken up.
If we are looking for a change or correction of law, we need to make sure that the new law has NO kinks that hinder family staying together. If primary applicant gets a GC and the spouse is still waiting for 5 more years (it is possible), then the primary applicant can get citizenship and apply for a new GC for the secondary. Like I said - This situation is possible even in the current system.
As long as kinks are discussed with the lawyers and smoothened out to preserve family togetherness, it should be fine.
However.........
I strongly believe that family should be together. Whatever GC and other immigration issues we have, one should strive for keeping the family together at all times. Missing out on even a few years of togetherness with your spouse and kids is not worth it.
Even in the current system where dependents come under EB quota, I have known people where one spouse got the GC and the other one had to wait for many years because of a name check or something. But the current laws (EAD/AP etc) made sure that atleast the family was not broken up.
If we are looking for a change or correction of law, we need to make sure that the new law has NO kinks that hinder family staying together. If primary applicant gets a GC and the spouse is still waiting for 5 more years (it is possible), then the primary applicant can get citizenship and apply for a new GC for the secondary. Like I said - This situation is possible even in the current system.
As long as kinks are discussed with the lawyers and smoothened out to preserve family togetherness, it should be fine.
dresses Night Elf Druid Cat Form
StarSun
02-09 10:53 AM
Your transaction ID for this payment is: 32R78275M69540623.
donated $50
I will be in India around that time so cannot attend the campaign in person.
All the best to IV .. hope we get the justice ASAP.
Thank you psaxena for your donations. Please talk to members from your state and encourage them to participate.
donated $50
I will be in India around that time so cannot attend the campaign in person.
All the best to IV .. hope we get the justice ASAP.
Thank you psaxena for your donations. Please talk to members from your state and encourage them to participate.
more...
makeup Male Night Elf Sentinel
pappu
10-08 02:50 PM
Nothing is as easy as it seems. Even for a small ask item, there is a lot we have to invest. If people show up for chapter meetings, come for lobby day and rally, contribute and volunteer for the cause.. then we can increase our chances of success.
I looked at the profiles of people on this thread and a lot have not even completed their profile information. While we want IV to do things for us, we do not want to do what IV asks us to do. One cannot expect to get things done by anonymously posting a want list and expecting others to do the job for them.
If anyone wants their ideas to be the agenda of IV, they must come forward and get active in the state chapter. Through state chapters you will know the updates and have an opportunity to help, suggest and even lead your ideas in IV.
I looked at the profiles of people on this thread and a lot have not even completed their profile information. While we want IV to do things for us, we do not want to do what IV asks us to do. One cannot expect to get things done by anonymously posting a want list and expecting others to do the job for them.
If anyone wants their ideas to be the agenda of IV, they must come forward and get active in the state chapter. Through state chapters you will know the updates and have an opportunity to help, suggest and even lead your ideas in IV.
girlfriend http://www.wow-loot.com/Priest
GCStatus
09-14 04:05 AM
Thanks for starting the thread. I share your grief and agree that we gotta do something. As much as I agree that we have to fight for our rights, I am not too sure if suing is the best option.
Again, if you all decide too, I will be more than glad to contribute my 100 but do we have enough ground to ask the questions in such 'blunt' manner? As much as you and I believe that our lives are completely topsy-turvied by these arcane policies, would some one arguing against our claim say that we are still entitled to do what we were allowed here to do. The employment visa allows us to work in a certain kind of job and nothing is hampering that aspect. Yes, it screws up promotions, displaces your plans to stay and has ill-effects both at a personal as well as professional levels but still..
If we have to sue, I think the ground work one has to do is immense. Find significant amounts of data from USCIS in terms of how random their approvals are and how it affects you after we all paid monies expecting a totally different pattern. If this can be accomplished, we could sue them probably for their lack of customer service, by-passing their guidelines on a consistent basis and thus hampering the lives of several people who were here for example in 2001, etc. I strongly believe data is our best friend (worst too, as it is personal data that we probably might not be entitled to even enquire..)
Again, I am no lawyer. I am sort of playing devil's advocate and just thinking through the obvious rebuttals. If we were too get enough data, combining that with active media publicity and some innovative ideas (flowers/clocks/watches whatever) or getting the businesses to acknowledge, then we may see certain changes.
I don't mean to damper your spirits by any sort. I certainly like the 'return my money if you fail to live by your own guidelines'.
Just the fact that, they keep going back from Current to Unavailable to 2006 to 2003 to etc, we have right to sue. Reasons below.
Financial loss.
Loss of business opportunity
Mental stress
Lack of moblility
List can go on.
Again, if you all decide too, I will be more than glad to contribute my 100 but do we have enough ground to ask the questions in such 'blunt' manner? As much as you and I believe that our lives are completely topsy-turvied by these arcane policies, would some one arguing against our claim say that we are still entitled to do what we were allowed here to do. The employment visa allows us to work in a certain kind of job and nothing is hampering that aspect. Yes, it screws up promotions, displaces your plans to stay and has ill-effects both at a personal as well as professional levels but still..
If we have to sue, I think the ground work one has to do is immense. Find significant amounts of data from USCIS in terms of how random their approvals are and how it affects you after we all paid monies expecting a totally different pattern. If this can be accomplished, we could sue them probably for their lack of customer service, by-passing their guidelines on a consistent basis and thus hampering the lives of several people who were here for example in 2001, etc. I strongly believe data is our best friend (worst too, as it is personal data that we probably might not be entitled to even enquire..)
Again, I am no lawyer. I am sort of playing devil's advocate and just thinking through the obvious rebuttals. If we were too get enough data, combining that with active media publicity and some innovative ideas (flowers/clocks/watches whatever) or getting the businesses to acknowledge, then we may see certain changes.
I don't mean to damper your spirits by any sort. I certainly like the 'return my money if you fail to live by your own guidelines'.
Just the fact that, they keep going back from Current to Unavailable to 2006 to 2003 to etc, we have right to sue. Reasons below.
Financial loss.
Loss of business opportunity
Mental stress
Lack of moblility
List can go on.
hairstyles Logo, cool world papercraft
delhiguy79
07-25 12:52 PM
Its better to use rental car, as i did landing on june30, 2008 and the canadian customs asked me to either transfer the car or take it back to USA.
so were u able to do landing? if yes, then how u did?
so were u able to do landing? if yes, then how u did?
newuser
05-23 07:37 AM
I am about to e-mail to the Senators based on the new letter.
Folks, but I have a simple question. Is the following provision addressed by IV when contacting the Senators or not ?
Placement of employees at client site(Consulting business practices): Under the proposed bill one cannot place H1B employees at another employer�s site (common in consulting business) whether you are H1B-dependent-employer or not. Today, the law places that restriction only on H1B-dependent-employers. This proposed law applies that restriction of outplacement on all employers across the board.
Folks, but I have a simple question. Is the following provision addressed by IV when contacting the Senators or not ?
Placement of employees at client site(Consulting business practices): Under the proposed bill one cannot place H1B employees at another employer�s site (common in consulting business) whether you are H1B-dependent-employer or not. Today, the law places that restriction only on H1B-dependent-employers. This proposed law applies that restriction of outplacement on all employers across the board.
techskill
08-18 01:08 PM
I think IV core shud take the matter with USCIS or the concerned people.
No comments:
Post a Comment