nb_des
07-20 03:34 PM
If I read this correctly.
On the Motion (Motion to Waive CBA Cornyn Amdt No. 2339 )
Vote Counts: YEAs 55
NAYs 40
Not Voting 5
Therefore No mean those Senators supported the amendment.
On the Motion (Motion to Waive CBA Cornyn Amdt No. 2339 )
Vote Counts: YEAs 55
NAYs 40
Not Voting 5
Therefore No mean those Senators supported the amendment.
wallpaper lank white t shirt front and
Blessing&Lifeisbeautiful
10-23 12:34 AM
They are proposing to recapture 61,000 unused visa for Schedule A. Keep praying everyone!
bala50
09-13 04:07 PM
I'm ready to fill the sixth slot . I have contributed to rally before and i will match Milind's next contibution.
Thank you mohitb272, wolfsappi, kanaihya and ravikanthe. All your help and contributions are greatly appreciated.
Details of my $100 contribution are in my signature.
To people who still have their finger on the trigger,
Guys, Are we ready to fire the next round? Believe me you will feel good. The gun is loaded with 5 bullets again.
But wait a minute, someone told me this revolver has six chambers. We can put one extra bullet in this baby.
Would any senior member or previous contributors like to be the guest of honor and help us fire the last bullet?
On a more serious note we still required $10,000 before Sept 18th.
Thank you mohitb272, wolfsappi, kanaihya and ravikanthe. All your help and contributions are greatly appreciated.
Details of my $100 contribution are in my signature.
To people who still have their finger on the trigger,
Guys, Are we ready to fire the next round? Believe me you will feel good. The gun is loaded with 5 bullets again.
But wait a minute, someone told me this revolver has six chambers. We can put one extra bullet in this baby.
Would any senior member or previous contributors like to be the guest of honor and help us fire the last bullet?
On a more serious note we still required $10,000 before Sept 18th.
2011 Hi-Res Blank White T-Shirt
kdprasad
08-13 04:31 PM
Rcvd Receipt Notice from my Attorney.
Filed: July 2nd
PD: Jan 2006
I-140 Apporved: Nov 2006
Receipt Date: 8/10/2007 (Attorney on Received 8/13 Today)
Filed: July 2nd
PD: Jan 2006
I-140 Apporved: Nov 2006
Receipt Date: 8/10/2007 (Attorney on Received 8/13 Today)
more...
rdehar
07-20 04:10 PM
From what it looks like, I just want to say:
"Welcome to Backlog Part II."
"Welcome to Backlog Part II."
ajitst
07-23 01:04 PM
USINPAC is not interested in Legal immigrants or anything to do with greencard issues, guys they have already got their's. They are more interested in faimily reunification and GC's for their relatives.
I am not sure even democrats are with us in legal immigration. They are just trying to bundle this with illegal immigration issues and using it to negotiate with more business oriented republicans. I think IV should work more closely with republicans to decouple these two issues. I think its common misconception spread by American Indians (USINPAC) that democrats are pro-immigration.
I am not sure even democrats are with us in legal immigration. They are just trying to bundle this with illegal immigration issues and using it to negotiate with more business oriented republicans. I think IV should work more closely with republicans to decouple these two issues. I think its common misconception spread by American Indians (USINPAC) that democrats are pro-immigration.
more...
lonedesi
08-05 11:20 AM
lonedesi,
I saw your post last night and have some changes in mind for the NSC letter. But right now I'm working on having the 7001 piece out from my employer - hope others are doing that as well.
Thanks again for the initiative - Its always better to speak up about your pain rather than remaining silent.
Thanks!
Please feel free to change or modify the letter to suit your situation. Do whatever you need to do, but make sure you mail out the letter & the form soon. Also, encourage others in similar situation to take the time to mail the letters & form soon.
I saw your post last night and have some changes in mind for the NSC letter. But right now I'm working on having the 7001 piece out from my employer - hope others are doing that as well.
Thanks again for the initiative - Its always better to speak up about your pain rather than remaining silent.
Thanks!
Please feel free to change or modify the letter to suit your situation. Do whatever you need to do, but make sure you mail out the letter & the form soon. Also, encourage others in similar situation to take the time to mail the letters & form soon.
2010 lank yellow-white t-shirt
chandsri81
04-28 01:52 PM
Thank you!
Mine's a conventional loan - will the same guidelines apply?
We have sent them all the documents - we should know in about 2 weeks
Mine's a conventional loan - will the same guidelines apply?
We have sent them all the documents - we should know in about 2 weeks
more...
icedgin
07-30 01:38 AM
Angel,
Good to hear that you are a Kabayan!I am currently in Marikina City.My wife is also calling friends and colleagues to contact Senators and Congressmen.I also had my sister(teacher) and cousins (nurses) contact theirs too even way back in Nov 06 when SKIL was being pushed in the new Congress. It is almost a year and at the latest the SChumer/hutchison amendment was withdrawn. I really hope something does pass for Sched A this year.
How come you did not accompany your wife when she went Stateside?
Good to hear that you are a Kabayan!I am currently in Marikina City.My wife is also calling friends and colleagues to contact Senators and Congressmen.I also had my sister(teacher) and cousins (nurses) contact theirs too even way back in Nov 06 when SKIL was being pushed in the new Congress. It is almost a year and at the latest the SChumer/hutchison amendment was withdrawn. I really hope something does pass for Sched A this year.
How come you did not accompany your wife when she went Stateside?
hair BLANK WHITE T-SHIRT MODEL
swadeshi
08-10 09:00 PM
I am sorry for posting in here, but I was wondering if someone actually went in person to the Houston Consulate to get their passport renewed. Also, do we need to have any reason to attend in person at the Consulate such as emergency, etc.
I am from India and my passport is expiring on Aug 17. I read before in the forum that it is better to go in person to renew the passport. Any experiences please let me know.
Thanks a bunch
I went to NYC indian consulate got my passport renewed in a day! pretty easy but make u nostalgic abt standing line for cinema tickets!!!;)
I am from India and my passport is expiring on Aug 17. I read before in the forum that it is better to go in person to renew the passport. Any experiences please let me know.
Thanks a bunch
I went to NYC indian consulate got my passport renewed in a day! pretty easy but make u nostalgic abt standing line for cinema tickets!!!;)
more...
snhn
05-02 02:42 PM
I read here that King said that everyon on EAD and AP is getting a free ride even thought here green card might get rejected. What does he mean by that. I tahught every process goes thorugha security check. such as I 140, H1b, AP and even EAD.
hot Young male with lank white
vandanaverdia
09-12 02:00 PM
Thank you rangaswamy. We need more members to come forward & be first time contributors!!
We have lots to achieve & very few days left...
Support IV....
Help IV help you!!!
We have lots to achieve & very few days left...
Support IV....
Help IV help you!!!
more...
house The white tee is by far the; lank white tee. Manufacturers plain lank
sheelalann
05-21 12:53 PM
when porting always send a letter requesting old priority date
tattoo 2011 Blank White T Shirt
asdfred
08-12 01:27 PM
they are not approving h1s for consulting companies anyway
2k more is not back breaking..the attitude and the politics of it are disturbing
*edit
2k more is not back breaking..the attitude and the politics of it are disturbing
*edit
more...
pictures Blank white T-shirt PSD
Green.Tech
06-04 11:51 PM
Folks, the bills are going to be taken to the next level soon...We don't have much time....Please contribute financially for this cause so we can all get GC's sooner than later...
Who knows when our next opportunity will come!
Who knows when our next opportunity will come!
dresses CETE Tee White
pappu
08-12 10:55 AM
Senate Passage of Border Security Legislation
August 12, 2010
Today, I come to the floor to seek unanimous consent to pass a smart, tough, and effective $600 million bill that will significantly enhance the security and integrity of our nation’s southern border—which currently lacks the resources needed to fully combat the drug smugglers, gun-runners, human-traffickers, money launderers and other organized criminals that seek to do harm to innocent Americans along our border….
The best part of this border package, Mr. President, is that it is fully paid for and does not increase the deficit by a single penny. In actuality, the Congressional Budget Office has determined that this bill will yield a direct savings to taxpayers of $50 million….
The emergency border funds we are passing today are fully paid for by assessing fees on certain types of companies who hire foreign workers using certain types of visas in a way that Congress did not intend. I want to take a moment to explain exactly what we are doing in this bill a little further because I want everyone to clearly understand how these offsets are designed.
In 1990, Congress realized that the world was changing rapidly and that technological innovations like the internet were creating a high demand in the United States for high-tech workers to create new technologies and products. Consequently, Congress created the H-1B visa program to allow U.S. employers to hire foreign tech workers in special circumstances when they could not find an American citizen who was qualified for the job.
Many of the companies that use this program today are using the program in the exact way Congress intended. That is, these companies (like Microsoft, IBM, and Intel) are hiring bright foreign students educated in our American universities to work in the U.S. for 6 or 7 years to invent new product lines and technologies so that Microsoft, IBM, and Intel can sell more products to the American public. Then—at the expiration of the H-1B visa period—these companies apply for these talented workers to earn green cards and stay with the company.
When the H-1B visa program is used in this manner, it is a good program for everyone involved. It is good for the company. It is good for the worker. And it is good for the American people who benefit from the products and jobs created by the innovation of the H-1B visa holder.
Every day, companies like Oracle, Cisco, Apple and others use the H-1B visa program in the exact way I have just described—and their use of the program has greatly benefitted this country.
But recently, some companies have decided to exploit an unintended loophole in the H-1B visa program to use the program in a manner that many in Congress, including myself, do not believe is consistent with the program’s intent.
Rather than being a company that makes something, and simply needs to bring in a talented foreign worker to help innovate and create new products and technologies—these other companies are essentially creating “multinational temp agencies” that were never contemplated when the H-1B program was created.
The business model of these newer companies is not to make any new products or technologies like Microsoft or Apple does. Instead, their business model is to bring foreign tech workers into the United States who are willing to accept less pay than their American counterparts, place these workers into other companies in exchange for a “consulting fee,” and transfer these workers from company to company in order to maximize profits from placement fees. In other words, these companies are petitioning for foreign workers simply to then turn around and provide these same workers to other companies who need cheap labor for various short term projects.
Don’t take my word for it. If you look at the marketing materials of some of the companies that fall within the scope covered by today’s legislation, their materials boast about their “outsourcing expertise” and say that their advantage is their ability to conduct what they call “labor arbitrage” which is—in their own words—“transferring work functions to a lower cost environment for increased savings.”
The business model used by these companies within the United States is creating three major negative side effects. First, it is ruining the reputation of the H-1B program, which is overwhelmingly used by good actors for beneficial purposes. Second, according to the Economic Policy institute, it is lowering the wages for American tech workers already in the marketplace. Third, it is also discouraging many of our smartest students from entering the technology industry in the first place. Students can see that paying hundreds of thousands of dollars for advanced schooling is not worth the cost when the market is being flooded with foreign temporary workers willing to do tech-work for far less pay because their foreign education was much cheaper and they intend to move back home when their visa expires to a country where the cost of living is far less expensive.
This type of use of the H-1B visa program will be addressed as part of comprehensive immigration reform and will likely be dramatically restricted. We will be reforming the legal immigration system to encourage the world’s best and brightest individuals to come to the United States and create the new technologies and businesses that will employ countless American workers, but will discourage businesses from using our immigration laws as a means to obtain temporary and less-expensive foreign labor to replace capable American workers.
Nevertheless, I do wish to clarify a previous mischaracterization of these firms, where I labeled them as “chop shops.” That statement was incorrect, and I wish to acknowledge that. In the tech industry, these firms are sometimes known as “body shops” and that’s what I should have said.
While I strongly oppose the manner in which these firms are using the H-1B visa to accomplish objectives that Congress never intended, it would be unfortunate if anyone concluded from my remarks that these firms are engaging in illegal behavior.
But I also want to make clear that the purpose of this fee is not to target businesses from any particular country. Many news articles have reported that the only companies that will be affected by this fee are companies based in India and that, ipso facto, the purpose of this legislation must be to target Indian IT companies.
Well, it is simply untrue that the purpose of this legislation is to target Indian companies. We are simply raising fees for businesses who use the H-1B visa to do things that are contrary to the program’s original intent.
Visa fees will only increase for companies with more than 50 workers who continue to employ more than 50 percent of their employees through the H-1B program. Congress does not want the H-1B visa program to be a vehicle for creating multinational temp agencies where workers do not know what projects they will be working on—or what cities they will be working in—when they enter the country.
The fee is based solely upon the business model of the company, not the location of the company.
If you are using the H-1B visa to innovate new products and technologies for your own company to sell, that is a good thing regardless of whether the company was originally founded in India, Ireland, or Indiana.
But if you are using the H-1B visa to run a glorified international temp agency for tech workers in contravention of the spirit of the program, I and my colleagues believe that you should have to pay a higher fee to ensure that American workers are not losing their jobs because of unintended uses of the visa program that were never contemplated when the program was created.
This belief is consistent regardless of whether the company using these staffing practices was founded in Bangalore, Beijing, or Boston.
Raising the fees for companies hiring more than 50 percent of their workforce through foreign visas will accomplish two important goals. First, it will provide the necessary funds to secure our border without raising taxes or adding to the deficit. Second, it will level the playing field for American workers so that they do not lose out on good jobs here in America because it is cheaper to bring in a foreign worker rather than hire an American worker.
Let me tell you what objective folks around the world are saying about the impact of this fee increase. In an August 6, 2010, Wall Street Journal article, Avinash Vashistha—the CEO of a Bangalore based off-shoring advisory consulting firm—told the Journal that the new fee in this bill “would accelerate Indian firms’ plans to hire more American-born workers in the U.S.” What’s wrong with that? In an August 7, 2010 Economic Times Article, Jeya Kumar, a CEO of a top IT company, said that this bill would “erode cost arbitrage and cause a change in the operational model of Indian offshore providers.”
The leaders of this business model are agreeing that our bill will make it more expensive to bring in foreign tech workers to compete with American tech workers for jobs here in America. That means these companies are going to start having to hire U.S. tech workers again.
So Mr. President, this bill is not only a responsible border security bill, it has the dual advantage of creating more high-paying American jobs.
Finally, Mr. President, I want to be clear about one other thing. Even though passing this bill will secure our border, I again say that the only way to fully restore the rule of law to our entire immigration system is by passing comprehensive immigration reform….
The urgency for immigration reform cannot be overstated because it is so overdue. The time for excuses is now over, it is now time to get to work.
August 12, 2010
Today, I come to the floor to seek unanimous consent to pass a smart, tough, and effective $600 million bill that will significantly enhance the security and integrity of our nation’s southern border—which currently lacks the resources needed to fully combat the drug smugglers, gun-runners, human-traffickers, money launderers and other organized criminals that seek to do harm to innocent Americans along our border….
The best part of this border package, Mr. President, is that it is fully paid for and does not increase the deficit by a single penny. In actuality, the Congressional Budget Office has determined that this bill will yield a direct savings to taxpayers of $50 million….
The emergency border funds we are passing today are fully paid for by assessing fees on certain types of companies who hire foreign workers using certain types of visas in a way that Congress did not intend. I want to take a moment to explain exactly what we are doing in this bill a little further because I want everyone to clearly understand how these offsets are designed.
In 1990, Congress realized that the world was changing rapidly and that technological innovations like the internet were creating a high demand in the United States for high-tech workers to create new technologies and products. Consequently, Congress created the H-1B visa program to allow U.S. employers to hire foreign tech workers in special circumstances when they could not find an American citizen who was qualified for the job.
Many of the companies that use this program today are using the program in the exact way Congress intended. That is, these companies (like Microsoft, IBM, and Intel) are hiring bright foreign students educated in our American universities to work in the U.S. for 6 or 7 years to invent new product lines and technologies so that Microsoft, IBM, and Intel can sell more products to the American public. Then—at the expiration of the H-1B visa period—these companies apply for these talented workers to earn green cards and stay with the company.
When the H-1B visa program is used in this manner, it is a good program for everyone involved. It is good for the company. It is good for the worker. And it is good for the American people who benefit from the products and jobs created by the innovation of the H-1B visa holder.
Every day, companies like Oracle, Cisco, Apple and others use the H-1B visa program in the exact way I have just described—and their use of the program has greatly benefitted this country.
But recently, some companies have decided to exploit an unintended loophole in the H-1B visa program to use the program in a manner that many in Congress, including myself, do not believe is consistent with the program’s intent.
Rather than being a company that makes something, and simply needs to bring in a talented foreign worker to help innovate and create new products and technologies—these other companies are essentially creating “multinational temp agencies” that were never contemplated when the H-1B program was created.
The business model of these newer companies is not to make any new products or technologies like Microsoft or Apple does. Instead, their business model is to bring foreign tech workers into the United States who are willing to accept less pay than their American counterparts, place these workers into other companies in exchange for a “consulting fee,” and transfer these workers from company to company in order to maximize profits from placement fees. In other words, these companies are petitioning for foreign workers simply to then turn around and provide these same workers to other companies who need cheap labor for various short term projects.
Don’t take my word for it. If you look at the marketing materials of some of the companies that fall within the scope covered by today’s legislation, their materials boast about their “outsourcing expertise” and say that their advantage is their ability to conduct what they call “labor arbitrage” which is—in their own words—“transferring work functions to a lower cost environment for increased savings.”
The business model used by these companies within the United States is creating three major negative side effects. First, it is ruining the reputation of the H-1B program, which is overwhelmingly used by good actors for beneficial purposes. Second, according to the Economic Policy institute, it is lowering the wages for American tech workers already in the marketplace. Third, it is also discouraging many of our smartest students from entering the technology industry in the first place. Students can see that paying hundreds of thousands of dollars for advanced schooling is not worth the cost when the market is being flooded with foreign temporary workers willing to do tech-work for far less pay because their foreign education was much cheaper and they intend to move back home when their visa expires to a country where the cost of living is far less expensive.
This type of use of the H-1B visa program will be addressed as part of comprehensive immigration reform and will likely be dramatically restricted. We will be reforming the legal immigration system to encourage the world’s best and brightest individuals to come to the United States and create the new technologies and businesses that will employ countless American workers, but will discourage businesses from using our immigration laws as a means to obtain temporary and less-expensive foreign labor to replace capable American workers.
Nevertheless, I do wish to clarify a previous mischaracterization of these firms, where I labeled them as “chop shops.” That statement was incorrect, and I wish to acknowledge that. In the tech industry, these firms are sometimes known as “body shops” and that’s what I should have said.
While I strongly oppose the manner in which these firms are using the H-1B visa to accomplish objectives that Congress never intended, it would be unfortunate if anyone concluded from my remarks that these firms are engaging in illegal behavior.
But I also want to make clear that the purpose of this fee is not to target businesses from any particular country. Many news articles have reported that the only companies that will be affected by this fee are companies based in India and that, ipso facto, the purpose of this legislation must be to target Indian IT companies.
Well, it is simply untrue that the purpose of this legislation is to target Indian companies. We are simply raising fees for businesses who use the H-1B visa to do things that are contrary to the program’s original intent.
Visa fees will only increase for companies with more than 50 workers who continue to employ more than 50 percent of their employees through the H-1B program. Congress does not want the H-1B visa program to be a vehicle for creating multinational temp agencies where workers do not know what projects they will be working on—or what cities they will be working in—when they enter the country.
The fee is based solely upon the business model of the company, not the location of the company.
If you are using the H-1B visa to innovate new products and technologies for your own company to sell, that is a good thing regardless of whether the company was originally founded in India, Ireland, or Indiana.
But if you are using the H-1B visa to run a glorified international temp agency for tech workers in contravention of the spirit of the program, I and my colleagues believe that you should have to pay a higher fee to ensure that American workers are not losing their jobs because of unintended uses of the visa program that were never contemplated when the program was created.
This belief is consistent regardless of whether the company using these staffing practices was founded in Bangalore, Beijing, or Boston.
Raising the fees for companies hiring more than 50 percent of their workforce through foreign visas will accomplish two important goals. First, it will provide the necessary funds to secure our border without raising taxes or adding to the deficit. Second, it will level the playing field for American workers so that they do not lose out on good jobs here in America because it is cheaper to bring in a foreign worker rather than hire an American worker.
Let me tell you what objective folks around the world are saying about the impact of this fee increase. In an August 6, 2010, Wall Street Journal article, Avinash Vashistha—the CEO of a Bangalore based off-shoring advisory consulting firm—told the Journal that the new fee in this bill “would accelerate Indian firms’ plans to hire more American-born workers in the U.S.” What’s wrong with that? In an August 7, 2010 Economic Times Article, Jeya Kumar, a CEO of a top IT company, said that this bill would “erode cost arbitrage and cause a change in the operational model of Indian offshore providers.”
The leaders of this business model are agreeing that our bill will make it more expensive to bring in foreign tech workers to compete with American tech workers for jobs here in America. That means these companies are going to start having to hire U.S. tech workers again.
So Mr. President, this bill is not only a responsible border security bill, it has the dual advantage of creating more high-paying American jobs.
Finally, Mr. President, I want to be clear about one other thing. Even though passing this bill will secure our border, I again say that the only way to fully restore the rule of law to our entire immigration system is by passing comprehensive immigration reform….
The urgency for immigration reform cannot be overstated because it is so overdue. The time for excuses is now over, it is now time to get to work.
more...
makeup lank white shirt. lank white
vdlrao
06-10 04:26 PM
My PD is Dec. 04, and my I-485 was filed during the july fiasco in 2007. My PD was current since March 08 until it will become "unavailable" in June 08.
My attorney got update from Nebraska SC in May stating "Your case is in queue for green card." Now what will happen to my case since EB-3 ROW will be unavailable in June? Does that mean an IO once opened my file after March and will close it without processing any further because of the change in the June Visa Bulletin?
I am confused. Please share your insights and experiences.
Thank you.
Your PD in EB3 for ROW will be back into track in October 2008 as its said in the current visa bulletin dated Jul 2008 for EB3 preference. So once it is back to current in October then the new visa numbers will be alloted. Then you will get your GC. So just wait till October to receive your GC confirmation.
Good Luck!!!
My attorney got update from Nebraska SC in May stating "Your case is in queue for green card." Now what will happen to my case since EB-3 ROW will be unavailable in June? Does that mean an IO once opened my file after March and will close it without processing any further because of the change in the June Visa Bulletin?
I am confused. Please share your insights and experiences.
Thank you.
Your PD in EB3 for ROW will be back into track in October 2008 as its said in the current visa bulletin dated Jul 2008 for EB3 preference. So once it is back to current in October then the new visa numbers will be alloted. Then you will get your GC. So just wait till October to receive your GC confirmation.
Good Luck!!!
girlfriend lank white tee. lank white t
lonedesi
08-05 11:18 AM
LoneDesi:
What changes are needed when sending a letter from an EB3-I point of view?
The processing dates you have mentioned correspond only to EB2.
Thanks.
Just EB2 to EB3 and mention that processing of I-140's has nothing to do with the category you are in. Only at I-485 stage the category is important to obtain a immigrant visa from DOS. So make appropriate changes and feel free to modify the letter to suit your situation.
What changes are needed when sending a letter from an EB3-I point of view?
The processing dates you have mentioned correspond only to EB2.
Thanks.
Just EB2 to EB3 and mention that processing of I-140's has nothing to do with the category you are in. Only at I-485 stage the category is important to obtain a immigrant visa from DOS. So make appropriate changes and feel free to modify the letter to suit your situation.
hairstyles lank white tee shirt. lank
rvr_jcop
03-04 11:42 AM
Is your case at NSC? I have definitely noticed a pattern of pre-adjudcation activity from NSC for cases filed in July-August 2007.
I noticed that too, especially if the PD is 2003 or 2004, both EB2 and EB3.
I noticed that too, especially if the PD is 2003 or 2004, both EB2 and EB3.
Suva
12-26 06:30 PM
Mine was approved on 22 december. Receipt date was 4th June, 2007.
manderson
01-03 03:52 PM
I thought the Background check and AP are independent of each other. Perhaps one of the gurus can confirm this.
Now I am worried too... man the surprises never end!
Does anybody know whether USCIS do background checking on AP application or not ? It seems for my case they are doing as the IO told me.
Now I am worried too... man the surprises never end!
Does anybody know whether USCIS do background checking on AP application or not ? It seems for my case they are doing as the IO told me.
No comments:
Post a Comment