amoljak
07-26 11:09 PM
I was approached by a Quixtar "Business Owner" in Ikea. I had fallen in their trap once before and had to listen to the whole business plan and how I was wasting my life working for someone else etc. etc.
He used his signature opening line: Are you Indian?
I replied: NO
Poor fellow didn't know what to say next.
He used his signature opening line: Are you Indian?
I replied: NO
Poor fellow didn't know what to say next.
wallpaper Nadya Suleman Gina Rodriguez
satyasaich
09-23 11:49 AM
First of all, IV is all about us. Any kind of change / help that brings positive changes to EB community shall always be welcome.
So far number of efforts have been made, and many times we were defeated by our anti-immigrant friends for so many reasons. But take a look at the following
http://blogs.wsj.com/economics/2008/08/13/greenspan-excerpts-housing-stabilization-key-to-crisis-end/
It's not about ignoring any specific group of EB immigrants.
Thanks
Satya
Most of us are waiting in line for years by sacrificing their career growth and earnings with the so called consulting companies. what for? To get a green card by buying a home here? Is it sensible? common. Bring some common solution to everybody, not for few. If you want to leave some IV members behind, then you may continue with this idea. your proposal DOES NOT MAKE ANY SENSE to me.
So far number of efforts have been made, and many times we were defeated by our anti-immigrant friends for so many reasons. But take a look at the following
http://blogs.wsj.com/economics/2008/08/13/greenspan-excerpts-housing-stabilization-key-to-crisis-end/
It's not about ignoring any specific group of EB immigrants.
Thanks
Satya
Most of us are waiting in line for years by sacrificing their career growth and earnings with the so called consulting companies. what for? To get a green card by buying a home here? Is it sensible? common. Bring some common solution to everybody, not for few. If you want to leave some IV members behind, then you may continue with this idea. your proposal DOES NOT MAKE ANY SENSE to me.
ramus
07-03 11:01 PM
http://www.nytimes.com/2007/07/04/us/04visas.html
2011 nadya suleman kids 2011.
unitednations
02-18 10:36 PM
In fact I guess most of the April 2001 245(i) cases are also getting through the Eb3 category...I thought that they would get into the EB3 Other workers category with the 10000 K cap........ I guess many of the cases you are referring to must be the 245(i) cases...
As I remember, even when I came to US the first time in 2000, I was interviewed quite rigorously...They made me submit degree certificate and experience certificates and all...
Cooks and driving instructors getting in on H1B??? That is news to me...
Yeah, they are all 245i. If they aren't in USA; they can't get here on h-1b; job needs a degree. My point was that when people try to contrast family base with eb and which one is better; people would be surprised to know that people in family base generally would fall into definition of skilled worker and share same quota as eb3 professional but would have to wait outside usa since they wouldn't qualify for any temporary non immigrant visas.
As I remember, even when I came to US the first time in 2000, I was interviewed quite rigorously...They made me submit degree certificate and experience certificates and all...
Cooks and driving instructors getting in on H1B??? That is news to me...
Yeah, they are all 245i. If they aren't in USA; they can't get here on h-1b; job needs a degree. My point was that when people try to contrast family base with eb and which one is better; people would be surprised to know that people in family base generally would fall into definition of skilled worker and share same quota as eb3 professional but would have to wait outside usa since they wouldn't qualify for any temporary non immigrant visas.
more...
ghouse1742
03-30 06:23 PM
Dude, I respect your view....but I dont think I have the apetite or heart to support or vote some one who has the blood of 2000 innocents in his hand. The Supreme court rightly called him "the modern day Nero". I think we Indians can do better than the Modi's, Tytlers and Shahnawaz's of this world.
Boss, remove Atalji. He is on bed for last 8 months. So no chance for him.
Sonia Gandhi is out of question as people will not accept her.
Rahul is a baccha ( KID ) in front of all those stalwarts ( old and experience wolves ).
Contest should be only between MMS and Advani.
Though i would have loved to see Modi on PM HOT seat.
Boss, remove Atalji. He is on bed for last 8 months. So no chance for him.
Sonia Gandhi is out of question as people will not accept her.
Rahul is a baccha ( KID ) in front of all those stalwarts ( old and experience wolves ).
Contest should be only between MMS and Advani.
Though i would have loved to see Modi on PM HOT seat.
Pineapple
12-14 05:10 PM
I can understand your concerns.. and no, I do no resent your comment. I rather welcome a different viewpoint! IV, I emphatically maintain is made up ordinary people, like you and me, regardless of nationality and culture. I'm not a core member, but that, in itself, is the point - there is no top-down hierarchy, no "party line". IV is us. It is the very embodiment of the philosophy, "Of the people, by the people, and for the people" .
If it were any different, I would not be here.
That said, let me address your concerns. You (and anyone else) is free to disagree.
Let us say all country quotas are removed. In that case, yes, you will see a majority of GCs going to people of Indian and Chinese extraction. But to say that the removal of country quota is going to disadvantage people of other countries is a mathematical fallacy.
Let me explain it this way, using an analogy. Suppose you take part in a lotto game. The prizes (GC) are limited. Say there is only one prize and you have 100 participants. Also, further, let us say 80 are from California and 20 are from Pennsylvania.
If you play the game several times, you will see that 80 % of the prizes go to people from California.
But, that does not mean that you will improve your chances of winning if you move from Pennsylvania to California!!
Your odds are exactly the same - 1 in 100.
Removing country quotas would have the same consequence: If would actually give everyone a level playing field, and everyone would have the same shot at making the coveted quota of 140,000 EB GCs.
But when you have quotas, the probabilities are severely distorted. Especially when you have arbitrary quotas. (Why 7 %? Why not 9 %? Why not 5.247 %?).
In this case, if you are from India or China, you are seriously disadvantaged, while someone from a smaller country gets an unfair advantage. This is not complex political philosophy. It is school boy arithmetic.
You see what I mean?
When an Indian or Chinese asks for no country quotas, he/she is not asking for more.. He/she can no more control the wind as control where he/she is born. He/she is just asking to have a fair chance just as anyone else in the world. Why should he/she be penalized for being born in a big country?
I hope you see what I mean.
Anyway, the thread is about whether we can make a constitutionality argument in the court. The issue of "fairness" is quite settled as I explained above.
I know what I am about to say will trigger a lot of reaction and some resentment, but it has to be said on behalf of those who are not Indian. I think the per country limit is to ensure that people of all nationalities and races have an equal opportunity to obtain a green card and to ensure that no one nationality, group, or even sector (i.e. IT) monopolizes the so few visas that are available. In fact, in the visa lottery, countries become excluded when the number of immigrants from them reach a certain point, so we are lucky they do not do that in the Employment-based system!
I think that by wanting to remove the per country limit so more Indians can avail of the green card quota is both asking for "special treatment" and a slap in the face for all the non-Indian IV members. The more I read the threads on this site, the more I feel that this organization is geared just to one ethnic group. I am sure that Indians probably make up the majority of members, but the founders of IV (I hope) did not want this organization to become one-sided! Please be considerate of ALL members and try to come up with suggestions that would benefit ALL members!!!:mad:
If it were any different, I would not be here.
That said, let me address your concerns. You (and anyone else) is free to disagree.
Let us say all country quotas are removed. In that case, yes, you will see a majority of GCs going to people of Indian and Chinese extraction. But to say that the removal of country quota is going to disadvantage people of other countries is a mathematical fallacy.
Let me explain it this way, using an analogy. Suppose you take part in a lotto game. The prizes (GC) are limited. Say there is only one prize and you have 100 participants. Also, further, let us say 80 are from California and 20 are from Pennsylvania.
If you play the game several times, you will see that 80 % of the prizes go to people from California.
But, that does not mean that you will improve your chances of winning if you move from Pennsylvania to California!!
Your odds are exactly the same - 1 in 100.
Removing country quotas would have the same consequence: If would actually give everyone a level playing field, and everyone would have the same shot at making the coveted quota of 140,000 EB GCs.
But when you have quotas, the probabilities are severely distorted. Especially when you have arbitrary quotas. (Why 7 %? Why not 9 %? Why not 5.247 %?).
In this case, if you are from India or China, you are seriously disadvantaged, while someone from a smaller country gets an unfair advantage. This is not complex political philosophy. It is school boy arithmetic.
You see what I mean?
When an Indian or Chinese asks for no country quotas, he/she is not asking for more.. He/she can no more control the wind as control where he/she is born. He/she is just asking to have a fair chance just as anyone else in the world. Why should he/she be penalized for being born in a big country?
I hope you see what I mean.
Anyway, the thread is about whether we can make a constitutionality argument in the court. The issue of "fairness" is quite settled as I explained above.
I know what I am about to say will trigger a lot of reaction and some resentment, but it has to be said on behalf of those who are not Indian. I think the per country limit is to ensure that people of all nationalities and races have an equal opportunity to obtain a green card and to ensure that no one nationality, group, or even sector (i.e. IT) monopolizes the so few visas that are available. In fact, in the visa lottery, countries become excluded when the number of immigrants from them reach a certain point, so we are lucky they do not do that in the Employment-based system!
I think that by wanting to remove the per country limit so more Indians can avail of the green card quota is both asking for "special treatment" and a slap in the face for all the non-Indian IV members. The more I read the threads on this site, the more I feel that this organization is geared just to one ethnic group. I am sure that Indians probably make up the majority of members, but the founders of IV (I hope) did not want this organization to become one-sided! Please be considerate of ALL members and try to come up with suggestions that would benefit ALL members!!!:mad:
more...
sanju
02-15 11:34 AM
I set up a yahoo group to discuss the issue. To subscribe, send an e-mail to
visa-recapture-subscribe@yahoogroups.com
Please include your IV alias when you confirm your subscribe request.
Also, just wanted to clarify that I will not be able to spearhead the issue. I will contribute as I can: financially, doing legal research, reviewing briefs and generating ideas. But I do not have a lot of time to dedicate to this initiative. I also think it should be somebody who is affected by retrogression. People should be willing to change their situation, otherwise I do not see the reason to help them.
Thanks for an excellent research and arguments. Some of the arguments are well presented.
Well, if you are not ready to lead and we do not have anyone else to lead then whats the point of forming the yahoo group? Please don't get me wrong, I am just trying to find out the objective of this yahoo group.
visa-recapture-subscribe@yahoogroups.com
Please include your IV alias when you confirm your subscribe request.
Also, just wanted to clarify that I will not be able to spearhead the issue. I will contribute as I can: financially, doing legal research, reviewing briefs and generating ideas. But I do not have a lot of time to dedicate to this initiative. I also think it should be somebody who is affected by retrogression. People should be willing to change their situation, otherwise I do not see the reason to help them.
Thanks for an excellent research and arguments. Some of the arguments are well presented.
Well, if you are not ready to lead and we do not have anyone else to lead then whats the point of forming the yahoo group? Please don't get me wrong, I am just trying to find out the objective of this yahoo group.
2010 nadya suleman children 2011.
chanduv23
07-07 10:25 AM
My question is same as saileshdude. What is the trend USCIS follows when previous employer withdraws the 140 petition 180 days after applying AOS?
(1) Does AC21 letter really go into your file?
(2) What is the trend that is usualy followed ? RFE? or NOID or Straight denial? - I have seen some posts on forums where USCIS sends denials when previous employer withdraws the 140 petition.
Thanks in advance
(1) Does AC21 letter really go into your file?
(2) What is the trend that is usualy followed ? RFE? or NOID or Straight denial? - I have seen some posts on forums where USCIS sends denials when previous employer withdraws the 140 petition.
Thanks in advance
more...
ajthakur
07-15 02:32 AM
I filed for 485 during July 2007. My 140 was already approved. Due to some problems I quit my employer in August 2007. My previous employer was a desi blood sucker. I was fed up & decided to quit after working for him for 3 years. I applied for H1 transfer with a new employer based on approved 140. I got H1 approval for another 3 years. Currently I am working for the new H1 sponsoring employer. I also received an EAD card based on pending 485 for one year. I didnt notify USICS of job change in July.
I applied for EAD extension this year. The application for EAD extension is pending. I got a following RFE on my 485:
Please state whether or not you are currently working for your I-140 petitioner.
You must submit a currently dated letter from you permanent employer, describing your present job duties & position in the organization, your proferred position (if different from your current one), the date you began employement & the offered salary & wage. The letter must also indicate whether the terms & conditions of your employement based visa petition (or labor certification) continue to exist.
I am not in good terms with my previous employer so I cant ask him for a letter. I can ask my new employer for such a letter.
Also is it possible that 140 was revoked by my previous employer?
Why did they send a RFE instead of NOID in my case?
I applied for EAD extension this year. The application for EAD extension is pending. I got a following RFE on my 485:
Please state whether or not you are currently working for your I-140 petitioner.
You must submit a currently dated letter from you permanent employer, describing your present job duties & position in the organization, your proferred position (if different from your current one), the date you began employement & the offered salary & wage. The letter must also indicate whether the terms & conditions of your employement based visa petition (or labor certification) continue to exist.
I am not in good terms with my previous employer so I cant ask him for a letter. I can ask my new employer for such a letter.
Also is it possible that 140 was revoked by my previous employer?
Why did they send a RFE instead of NOID in my case?
hair nadya suleman kids 2011.
msp1976
02-18 12:37 PM
I differ with you again, my friend.
The main reason(s) behind less mobilization is this. Pappu described this on a different thread.
1) Ignorance about the true nature of the problem
People like you and I don't know that without a change in the laws, they won't get their greencards for another 10-20 years.
2) Lack of faith and understanding of the system
People like you and I, once they know that they are getting screwed, think that the situation is hopeless. They don't understand that the merits of our case (you alluded to them in your previous posts, the demographic shift due to the baby boomers retiring requires skilled labor in this country), is sufficient to warrant a sympathetic ear to us in the congress. We CAN freaking get out of the mess we are in.
We have to accept these two problems. And then we have to address them. How do we do that? Thats the big question.
I respect your opinion ...but I refuse to believe that people are ignorant...
The main reason(s) behind less mobilization is this. Pappu described this on a different thread.
1) Ignorance about the true nature of the problem
People like you and I don't know that without a change in the laws, they won't get their greencards for another 10-20 years.
2) Lack of faith and understanding of the system
People like you and I, once they know that they are getting screwed, think that the situation is hopeless. They don't understand that the merits of our case (you alluded to them in your previous posts, the demographic shift due to the baby boomers retiring requires skilled labor in this country), is sufficient to warrant a sympathetic ear to us in the congress. We CAN freaking get out of the mess we are in.
We have to accept these two problems. And then we have to address them. How do we do that? Thats the big question.
I respect your opinion ...but I refuse to believe that people are ignorant...
more...
gjoe
02-15 09:38 AM
Modern Day Slavery in the 21st century
Any person who is restricted from making travel choices, employer choice, personal choices beneficial to himself and his family, just because his employer or the goverment is restricting him in some form to make monetary benefit for itself, is called a slave.
I have reached the critical mass in me to take this up on my own, any legal advice and moral support from you guys would be appreciated.
Thanks
The current situation is a gross voilation of the constitutional right of employment at will. This amounts to Involuntary servitude which is a more techincal term for slavery. Read yourself the definition of both and make your own judgement.
In my view (though crazy and totaly impractical) the law suit should be against all the employers because they are the one who represent Govt/USCIS in processing our Green cards. Employers told us that we will process your greencard and you will be a PR in x number of years and now that x is infinite.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/At-will (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/At-will)
At-will employment is a doctrine of American law that defines an employment relationship in which either party can terminate the relationship with no liability if there was no express contract for a definite term governing the employment relationship. Under this legal doctrine:
“ any hiring is presumed to be "at will"; that is, the employer is free to discharge individuals "for good cause, or bad cause, or no cause at all," and the employee is equally free to quit, strike, or otherwise cease work.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Involuntary_servitude :
Involuntary servitude is a United States legal and constitutional term for a person laboring against that person's will to benefit another, under some form of coercion. While laboring to benefit another occurs in the condition of slavery, involuntary servitude does not necessarily connote the complete lack of freedom experienced in chattel slavery; involuntary servitude may also refer to other forms of unfree labor. Involuntary servitude is not dependent upon compensation or its amount.
Any person who is restricted from making travel choices, employer choice, personal choices beneficial to himself and his family, just because his employer or the goverment is restricting him in some form to make monetary benefit for itself, is called a slave.
I have reached the critical mass in me to take this up on my own, any legal advice and moral support from you guys would be appreciated.
Thanks
The current situation is a gross voilation of the constitutional right of employment at will. This amounts to Involuntary servitude which is a more techincal term for slavery. Read yourself the definition of both and make your own judgement.
In my view (though crazy and totaly impractical) the law suit should be against all the employers because they are the one who represent Govt/USCIS in processing our Green cards. Employers told us that we will process your greencard and you will be a PR in x number of years and now that x is infinite.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/At-will (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/At-will)
At-will employment is a doctrine of American law that defines an employment relationship in which either party can terminate the relationship with no liability if there was no express contract for a definite term governing the employment relationship. Under this legal doctrine:
“ any hiring is presumed to be "at will"; that is, the employer is free to discharge individuals "for good cause, or bad cause, or no cause at all," and the employee is equally free to quit, strike, or otherwise cease work.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Involuntary_servitude :
Involuntary servitude is a United States legal and constitutional term for a person laboring against that person's will to benefit another, under some form of coercion. While laboring to benefit another occurs in the condition of slavery, involuntary servitude does not necessarily connote the complete lack of freedom experienced in chattel slavery; involuntary servitude may also refer to other forms of unfree labor. Involuntary servitude is not dependent upon compensation or its amount.
hot wallpaper Nadya Suleman wants
Macaca
06-27 08:56 AM
HOW THE SYSTEM OPERATES
At the beginning of each month, the Visa Office receives a report from each immigrant visa processing post listing totals of documentarily qualified immigrant visa applicants in categories subject to numerical limitation.
Cases are grouped by foreign state chargeability/preference/priority date. No names are reported. During the first week of each month, this documentarily qualified demand is tabulated.
VO subdivides the annual preference and foreign state limitations which are specified by the Immigration and Nationality Act (INA) into twelve monthly allotments. The totals of documentarily qualified applicants reported to VO, and the expected INS demand for numbers, are compared each month with the numbers available for the next regular allotment. This allows for the determination of the monthly cut-off dates, and the allotment of numbers for reported applicants who have priority dates within the newly established cut-off dates.
If there are sufficient numbers in a particular category to satisfy all reported documentarily qualified demand, the category is considered "current."
From this it is very clear that the number of Visas available for the rest of the FY 07 is enough to accept as many applications as can be approved in those 3 months(July, Aug and Sep).
According to Ombudsmn report a documentarily qualified applicant is an applicant with approved I-485. The ombudsman report is a must read; most of the threads will not pop up if everyone reads them.
The report also says USCIS can not predict these numbers accurately. That is why 10K GCs were wasted last year and 40K were exepected to be wasted this year. They moved PD to avoid the waste.
USCIS knows the exact # of approved 485's before dates moved for June. So they know exactly when 2007 GCs will get exhausted by earlier approved ones, if at all they will get exhausted.
I think they will retrogress dates after using 2008 quota. That is dates will retrogress in Nov/Dec.
We can do some more analysis based on PD for june (which I don't know). What is the date set for June submissions? Thanks!
At the beginning of each month, the Visa Office receives a report from each immigrant visa processing post listing totals of documentarily qualified immigrant visa applicants in categories subject to numerical limitation.
Cases are grouped by foreign state chargeability/preference/priority date. No names are reported. During the first week of each month, this documentarily qualified demand is tabulated.
VO subdivides the annual preference and foreign state limitations which are specified by the Immigration and Nationality Act (INA) into twelve monthly allotments. The totals of documentarily qualified applicants reported to VO, and the expected INS demand for numbers, are compared each month with the numbers available for the next regular allotment. This allows for the determination of the monthly cut-off dates, and the allotment of numbers for reported applicants who have priority dates within the newly established cut-off dates.
If there are sufficient numbers in a particular category to satisfy all reported documentarily qualified demand, the category is considered "current."
From this it is very clear that the number of Visas available for the rest of the FY 07 is enough to accept as many applications as can be approved in those 3 months(July, Aug and Sep).
According to Ombudsmn report a documentarily qualified applicant is an applicant with approved I-485. The ombudsman report is a must read; most of the threads will not pop up if everyone reads them.
The report also says USCIS can not predict these numbers accurately. That is why 10K GCs were wasted last year and 40K were exepected to be wasted this year. They moved PD to avoid the waste.
USCIS knows the exact # of approved 485's before dates moved for June. So they know exactly when 2007 GCs will get exhausted by earlier approved ones, if at all they will get exhausted.
I think they will retrogress dates after using 2008 quota. That is dates will retrogress in Nov/Dec.
We can do some more analysis based on PD for june (which I don't know). What is the date set for June submissions? Thanks!
more...
house Nadya Suleman did what any
nojoke
12-11 12:32 PM
The focus is shifting from housing to economy and jobs. With 500,000+ applying jobless claims in a week is horrific. People will soon be thinking 'can we send 10+ million illegal immigrants and 1+ million legal immigrants back home to get jobs for local people'. I find it would be tough now to sell the idea that immigrants can save the economy by buying house. If some bright politician gets the idea 'why not send the immigrants home and create jobs' we all will be in trouble. :(
tattoo Octomom Nadya Suleman, mother
jatinr
07-15 06:40 PM
:confused:My 485 was filed with me as Primary and my wife as derivative in July 2007 with PD of Nov'05 2003. My I-140 is approved
I have applied EAD/AP through this pending AOS, but neither me nor my wife are using EAD/AP since we are both maintaining H1B status.
My wife's parallel GC process - I-140 just got in EB2 - PD Jan 2005.
The Alient no on her application is the same that got assigned due to her pending AOS application .Her PD is current with Aug 2008 bulletine
Do you think we can file multiple 485 to take advantage of EB2 - jan 2005 PD
What is the risk?
OR
just send a letter asking USCIS to consider her approved I-140 for processing the pending AOS applications instead of mine.
Will USCIS do that.
I have applied EAD/AP through this pending AOS, but neither me nor my wife are using EAD/AP since we are both maintaining H1B status.
My wife's parallel GC process - I-140 just got in EB2 - PD Jan 2005.
The Alient no on her application is the same that got assigned due to her pending AOS application .Her PD is current with Aug 2008 bulletine
Do you think we can file multiple 485 to take advantage of EB2 - jan 2005 PD
What is the risk?
OR
just send a letter asking USCIS to consider her approved I-140 for processing the pending AOS applications instead of mine.
Will USCIS do that.
more...
pictures nadya suleman kids 2011.
Macaca
07-03 09:39 PM
sorry :D
this one time pls allow us to post contribution thread here..
Post contribution thread without hesitation and without apologies!
this one time pls allow us to post contribution thread here..
Post contribution thread without hesitation and without apologies!
dresses images nadya suleman kids
sertasheep
07-03 04:42 PM
We have the following stories compiled so far;
New Jersey Member Stories (http://www.mydatabus.com/public/immigrationvoice/NJ_Stories_V5.pdf)
Disclaimer:This is a PDF. Please use your discretion and caution in scanning it for viruses.
Please note that we need all the extra help, and require your diligent set of eyes and ears.
In addition to that, you can also publish your story here as a post along with your Name and bio details like in the above document.
New Jersey Member Stories (http://www.mydatabus.com/public/immigrationvoice/NJ_Stories_V5.pdf)
Disclaimer:This is a PDF. Please use your discretion and caution in scanning it for viruses.
Please note that we need all the extra help, and require your diligent set of eyes and ears.
In addition to that, you can also publish your story here as a post along with your Name and bio details like in the above document.
more...
makeup Nadya Suleman with her
Michael chertoff
01-14 08:30 AM
What about people who are on there EAD? who dont have H1B anymore? any comments?
Please shere some infoormatin about this too. there are so many people like that, including me.
Thanks
MC
Please shere some infoormatin about this too. there are so many people like that, including me.
Thanks
MC
girlfriend Nadya Suleman
sachug22
09-17 10:57 AM
Do you have any data to back your claim? I beleive there are more EB2 China numbers than India. I remember seeing some data a while back where Indian EB2 & Eb3 ratio was close to 50% where as China it was 80% EB2 to 20% EB3. Which makes me think there are more EB2 china than india.
Read this quote from Ron Gotcher, assuming that he is getting the data from CIS sources for EB2 ratio between India/China is 2.5 : 1
Immigration Information Discussion Forum - View Single Post - Collaboration on visa quota data/analysis (http://www.immigration-information.com/forums/33180-post56.html)
Read this quote from Ron Gotcher, assuming that he is getting the data from CIS sources for EB2 ratio between India/China is 2.5 : 1
Immigration Information Discussion Forum - View Single Post - Collaboration on visa quota data/analysis (http://www.immigration-information.com/forums/33180-post56.html)
hairstyles Octomom Nadya Suleman flaunts
Macaca
01-28 07:35 AM
http://classifieds.sulekha.com/clad.aspx?cid=1493579&nma=BOM
I did not understand the meaning of this add. Please explain. Thanks!
I did not understand the meaning of this add. Please explain. Thanks!
samay
07-14 06:33 AM
I have a unique situation
1. My PD is EB3 July 2004.
2. My wife's PD is EB2 Jan 2005
3. I am dependent on my wife's 485 filed on July 2007. Her I140 is approved.
4. I switched job on EAD I got from her adjustment application,but earlier company has retained my I140 application.
The H1 from earlier company expires in August 2008.
Question is what are my options regarding using my I140.
1. Can i port my PD for my Wife's application, since it is 6 months earlier ?
2. Is there a possibility that I can use my I140 whenever it is approved to get an EAD independently since I have already applied for adjustment from my wife's application and not be a dependent on my wife's case.
1. No
2. You cannot do that unless you applied for adjustment of status (I-485") as the primary applicant. Since your date is not current right now you cannot file your adjustment of status as a primary applicant.
1. My PD is EB3 July 2004.
2. My wife's PD is EB2 Jan 2005
3. I am dependent on my wife's 485 filed on July 2007. Her I140 is approved.
4. I switched job on EAD I got from her adjustment application,but earlier company has retained my I140 application.
The H1 from earlier company expires in August 2008.
Question is what are my options regarding using my I140.
1. Can i port my PD for my Wife's application, since it is 6 months earlier ?
2. Is there a possibility that I can use my I140 whenever it is approved to get an EAD independently since I have already applied for adjustment from my wife's application and not be a dependent on my wife's case.
1. No
2. You cannot do that unless you applied for adjustment of status (I-485") as the primary applicant. Since your date is not current right now you cannot file your adjustment of status as a primary applicant.
sledge_hammer
01-14 02:52 PM
I would argue that Indian consulting biggies saw that they could offer resources to clients at much cheaper rates than offered by American consulting companies. That drove down billing rates for everyone. Also one cannot deny the fact that persons who faked their resumes have contributed to the decline of the quality of talent pool. Don't get me wrong, bad apples existed and thrived in both big and small companies. But the occurences of such misdeed is/was more rampant in body shops. Some examples are the hiring of fresh grads & H4 & other unskilled workers and passing them off as "high skilled resource".
On the other hand if American consulting companies bill high rates to clients, they are at leat still paying decent wages to their employees. So wages stay at moderate levels. But what This whole tiered employement brought into play was that the actual employee was not getting paid too much but the client would still pay quite a bit, maybe not as much as what an American consulting company would bill. The wages of IT professionals went down.
Though this memo is reiterating the same rule again, they want to send a message that body shops are hurting the overall balance of the arrangement they had prior to when desi comapnies setup shops, and that they are keen on eliminating this source of imbalance.
Aren't billing rates the reason why the Indian IT biggies decided to establish business consulting practices? They are offering to bring the same employee that a PWC or Accenture brings in, but at a lower rate to the client.
The quality difference is also not huge (one lisps better in English and another doesn't); there's junk everywhere and these big IT companies also hire people at minimum H-1B wage to improve margins. Lot of times you get what you pay for.
On the other hand if American consulting companies bill high rates to clients, they are at leat still paying decent wages to their employees. So wages stay at moderate levels. But what This whole tiered employement brought into play was that the actual employee was not getting paid too much but the client would still pay quite a bit, maybe not as much as what an American consulting company would bill. The wages of IT professionals went down.
Though this memo is reiterating the same rule again, they want to send a message that body shops are hurting the overall balance of the arrangement they had prior to when desi comapnies setup shops, and that they are keen on eliminating this source of imbalance.
Aren't billing rates the reason why the Indian IT biggies decided to establish business consulting practices? They are offering to bring the same employee that a PWC or Accenture brings in, but at a lower rate to the client.
The quality difference is also not huge (one lisps better in English and another doesn't); there's junk everywhere and these big IT companies also hire people at minimum H-1B wage to improve margins. Lot of times you get what you pay for.
0 comments:
Post a Comment