maddipati1
07-30 02:02 PM
USCIS updated today (07/30/07), the form 765 and instructions corresponding to 765
go to http://www.uscis.gov, click on 'Immigration Forms' tab, search for '765' and open the EAD link, go to the bottom of this page. now they seperated instructions and form into two separate links.
http://www.uscis.gov/files/form/I-765instr.pdf ( for instructions )
http://www.uscis.gov/files/form/I-765.pdf ( the actual form )
I think they added details about 'where to file'.
The information AditiK was refering on 9th page is now on 12th page.
gcpradeep's interpretation is wrong. danila's interpretation is absolutely right.
Its 30 days for asylum applicants and 90 for all other eligible applicats.
It looks very clear that 485 filers CAN get interimEAD after 90days.
Interim EAD.
If you have not received a decision within90 days of receipt by USCIS of a properly filed EADapplication
or
within 30 days of a properly filed initial EADapplication based on an asylum application filed on or afterJanuary 4, 1995,
you may obtain interim work authorizationby appearing in person at your local USCIS district office.You must bring proof of identity and any notices that you havereceived from USCIS in connection with your application foremployment authorization.
go to http://www.uscis.gov, click on 'Immigration Forms' tab, search for '765' and open the EAD link, go to the bottom of this page. now they seperated instructions and form into two separate links.
http://www.uscis.gov/files/form/I-765instr.pdf ( for instructions )
http://www.uscis.gov/files/form/I-765.pdf ( the actual form )
I think they added details about 'where to file'.
The information AditiK was refering on 9th page is now on 12th page.
gcpradeep's interpretation is wrong. danila's interpretation is absolutely right.
Its 30 days for asylum applicants and 90 for all other eligible applicats.
It looks very clear that 485 filers CAN get interimEAD after 90days.
Interim EAD.
If you have not received a decision within90 days of receipt by USCIS of a properly filed EADapplication
or
within 30 days of a properly filed initial EADapplication based on an asylum application filed on or afterJanuary 4, 1995,
you may obtain interim work authorizationby appearing in person at your local USCIS district office.You must bring proof of identity and any notices that you havereceived from USCIS in connection with your application foremployment authorization.
chandra_mb
03-10 12:55 PM
H1-B is all sponser based. You just can't go to USCIS and say that give my wife H1-B. You need an employer who is willing to hire her, show how much he is willing to pay and many more things. You say for a license she needs SSN, so there is your answer
"NO"
Nurses come under schedule A which is completely different
Main point---
Nurses is completely a different cap and category.
Thanks for your reply, I do understand the process - sponsor-LCA etc..,
I just want to know if a sponsor can apply for H1 Dentist for a canditate who does not have a dental license yet.
Its hard to believe that a H4 cannot convert to H1 on a dentist job for the lack of SSN - I am sure there must be many people who passed/going through such situation (H4 to H1 dentist) - just looking for someone to share their experience.
"NO"
Nurses come under schedule A which is completely different
Main point---
Nurses is completely a different cap and category.
Thanks for your reply, I do understand the process - sponsor-LCA etc..,
I just want to know if a sponsor can apply for H1 Dentist for a canditate who does not have a dental license yet.
Its hard to believe that a H4 cannot convert to H1 on a dentist job for the lack of SSN - I am sure there must be many people who passed/going through such situation (H4 to H1 dentist) - just looking for someone to share their experience.
insbaby
09-18 06:48 PM
Two IDIOTS gave me red dots and these comments:
--------------
H-1B and working overtime 08-21-2008 11:31 PM ask the doctors who work more than 80 hrs a week
H-1B and working overtime 08-21-2008 09:58 PM Who gave youa H1 Visa, you dumbo?
--------------
I do not understand what was wrong with my question here. I did not know there are idiots roam around this forum and give people RED DOT for no reason. I wish there is a way to know who gave those dots and comments. Get a life you idiots.
Over time for the same employer is not all an issue. Almost all H1Bs should go thru this and many of them stay at work for months.
--------------
H-1B and working overtime 08-21-2008 11:31 PM ask the doctors who work more than 80 hrs a week
H-1B and working overtime 08-21-2008 09:58 PM Who gave youa H1 Visa, you dumbo?
--------------
I do not understand what was wrong with my question here. I did not know there are idiots roam around this forum and give people RED DOT for no reason. I wish there is a way to know who gave those dots and comments. Get a life you idiots.
Over time for the same employer is not all an issue. Almost all H1Bs should go thru this and many of them stay at work for months.
willwin
03-19 01:47 PM
^^^^^
more...
royus77
06-25 10:19 PM
Yes, I believe they were filed together - I saw a note in their web site. But why would they file 539 ? she is out of country already. Isn't I539 to extend stay only if u are already in the country ? And yes i already got an appointment in chennai. But the twist is, HR says they "informed" the attorneys to do PP. It is already 11 days and no receipt #. HR is tight lipped as to whether attorneys did infact file PP. If they did not, am i screwed ? Dont you need a receipt# atleast to bump up to PP?
I got notification for the same Receipt number which i had( Applied regular processing on May 15 and bumped to PP on 06/20 .Infact USICS notification came 2 days after my attroney received mail for PP
Receipt Number: EAC0716050372
Application Type: I129 , PETITION FOR A NONIMMIGRANT WORKER
Current Status: Request for Premium Processing
Your Request for Premium Processing Service for your I129 PETITION FOR
A NONIMMIGRANT WORKER was received on June 22, 2007. We mailed you a
receipt with information about processing. We will mail you a decision as
soon as processing is complete You can use our processing dates to
estimate when this case will be done. Follow the link below for current
processing dates.
I got notification for the same Receipt number which i had( Applied regular processing on May 15 and bumped to PP on 06/20 .Infact USICS notification came 2 days after my attroney received mail for PP
Receipt Number: EAC0716050372
Application Type: I129 , PETITION FOR A NONIMMIGRANT WORKER
Current Status: Request for Premium Processing
Your Request for Premium Processing Service for your I129 PETITION FOR
A NONIMMIGRANT WORKER was received on June 22, 2007. We mailed you a
receipt with information about processing. We will mail you a decision as
soon as processing is complete You can use our processing dates to
estimate when this case will be done. Follow the link below for current
processing dates.
rnanchal
12-09 01:27 PM
Time for the infighting, squabling, derogatory remarks and narrow mindedness to reach new heights
more...
pvganesh
10-23 09:47 PM
Hi,
We are filing I-140 in EB2 category in this month; I came to know from this forum that one should include 2 affidavits from past colleagues or managers with job duties if experience letters can't be obtained with job duties.
I have two questions with regard to Experience letters -
(i) My previous employer (worked in 2003 in India) is no longer in existence, and i could only get one affidavit from the client manager. I don't know now any other colleague from the company, so I�m not sure what can be done in these cases. Please advise...
(ii) I have obtained two affidavits, one from a manager and other from colleague for a previous company that i worked in 2009 in US. But the job duties they agreed to sign is not 100% equal to job duties included in PERM application for that previous experience. What i meant by difference is, wording may be slightly different or of the 6 to 7 job duties, one or two may be different. This happened because my manager advised that he could only include job duties of system analyst (per H1B petition) but my actual job duties are particular to a technology.
I'm not sure if there should be 100% match between experience letter/affidavit job duties and job duties included in PERM application for previous experiences. Please advise..
I think my thread is very long, but i feel this will help all of us to understand the legal requirement and help us avoiding any RFEs or denials in I-140.
Thanks and Regards,
PVGanesh
We are filing I-140 in EB2 category in this month; I came to know from this forum that one should include 2 affidavits from past colleagues or managers with job duties if experience letters can't be obtained with job duties.
I have two questions with regard to Experience letters -
(i) My previous employer (worked in 2003 in India) is no longer in existence, and i could only get one affidavit from the client manager. I don't know now any other colleague from the company, so I�m not sure what can be done in these cases. Please advise...
(ii) I have obtained two affidavits, one from a manager and other from colleague for a previous company that i worked in 2009 in US. But the job duties they agreed to sign is not 100% equal to job duties included in PERM application for that previous experience. What i meant by difference is, wording may be slightly different or of the 6 to 7 job duties, one or two may be different. This happened because my manager advised that he could only include job duties of system analyst (per H1B petition) but my actual job duties are particular to a technology.
I'm not sure if there should be 100% match between experience letter/affidavit job duties and job duties included in PERM application for previous experiences. Please advise..
I think my thread is very long, but i feel this will help all of us to understand the legal requirement and help us avoiding any RFEs or denials in I-140.
Thanks and Regards,
PVGanesh
samcam
05-19 10:57 AM
Welcome to our newest member TheHumanist
3869 and counting!!!
3869 and counting!!!
more...
karan2004m
12-01 03:46 PM
I have the exact same scenario :(
i don't think anyone would be able to use first EAD filed during July/Aug time frame as I-140 itself will take more than 1 yr.. or longer who knows...money wasted on EAD.
i don't think anyone would be able to use first EAD filed during July/Aug time frame as I-140 itself will take more than 1 yr.. or longer who knows...money wasted on EAD.
WeShallOvercome
08-03 12:12 PM
So my status doesnt change until my I 485 is approved- any idea how long that will take? My H 1B expires in Nov of 2007 should I get an extension? Thank you for your replies- Lisa
After you file your I-485, your status changes to 'Adjustment of status' or 'Adjustee'.
On this status you have 2 options to be able to work:
1) Use EAD, in that case you lose your H1-B status and if your I-485 is denied for any reason, you fall out of status immediately.
Please note that if you use EAD, you HAVE TO use AP for travel.
2) Continue using and extending your H1-B until your I-485 is approved and your status is adjusted to 'Permanent resident'.
You can switch from H1-B to EAD anytime, but there are limitations on whether you can easily switch back from EAD to H1-B.
Good luck
After you file your I-485, your status changes to 'Adjustment of status' or 'Adjustee'.
On this status you have 2 options to be able to work:
1) Use EAD, in that case you lose your H1-B status and if your I-485 is denied for any reason, you fall out of status immediately.
Please note that if you use EAD, you HAVE TO use AP for travel.
2) Continue using and extending your H1-B until your I-485 is approved and your status is adjusted to 'Permanent resident'.
You can switch from H1-B to EAD anytime, but there are limitations on whether you can easily switch back from EAD to H1-B.
Good luck
more...
ssss
09-18 10:36 PM
AFAIK if your Perm is approved then you can do premium processing of I-140 and get H1 extension after 140 is approved
I have already moved to company B. Have an i-140 approved from company A in 09/2006. Now that my 6 years are over in 5 months, waiting for Fragomen to determine appropriate strategy for extension since new Perm has not been pending for 365 days. Anyone have experience with extending H1 using company A I-140 when with company B?
I have already moved to company B. Have an i-140 approved from company A in 09/2006. Now that my 6 years are over in 5 months, waiting for Fragomen to determine appropriate strategy for extension since new Perm has not been pending for 365 days. Anyone have experience with extending H1 using company A I-140 when with company B?
learning01
03-23 04:22 PM
With a fast and swift response, one of the moderators from IV provided me with a general format.
I modified it and have posted here below. I had already sent to Nedra Pickler (npickler@ap.org) and Elliot Spagat(espagat@ap.org
). I have all the emails of media contacts and in the process of tabulating them alphabetically, so that viewers in a hurry can see them easily, before posting here. Comeback and check again.
Network Program Anchor Email:
MSNBC
Coast to Coast Connected@MSNBC.com
Abrams Report abramsreport@msnbc.com
Hardball Chris Mathews chris.matthews@msnbc.com
Hardball Chris Mathews hardball@msnbc.com
Countdown Keith Olbermann countdown@msnbc.com
Countdown Keith Olbermann KOlbermann@msnbc.com
Scarborough Country Joe Scarborough joe@msnbc.com
The Situation Tucker Carlson tucker.carlson@msnbc.com
News David Shuster dshuster@msnbc.com
News Brian Williams brian.williams@msnbc.com
MSNBC Investigates msnbcinvestigates@msnbc.com
MSNBC Reports msnbcreports@msnbc.com
Meet the Press mtp@nbc.com
Viewer Services viewerservices@msnbc.com
Feedback feedback@msnbc.com
Imus in the Morning Don Imus imus@msnbc.com
I modified it and have posted here below. I had already sent to Nedra Pickler (npickler@ap.org) and Elliot Spagat(espagat@ap.org
). I have all the emails of media contacts and in the process of tabulating them alphabetically, so that viewers in a hurry can see them easily, before posting here. Comeback and check again.
Network Program Anchor Email:
MSNBC
Coast to Coast Connected@MSNBC.com
Abrams Report abramsreport@msnbc.com
Hardball Chris Mathews chris.matthews@msnbc.com
Hardball Chris Mathews hardball@msnbc.com
Countdown Keith Olbermann countdown@msnbc.com
Countdown Keith Olbermann KOlbermann@msnbc.com
Scarborough Country Joe Scarborough joe@msnbc.com
The Situation Tucker Carlson tucker.carlson@msnbc.com
News David Shuster dshuster@msnbc.com
News Brian Williams brian.williams@msnbc.com
MSNBC Investigates msnbcinvestigates@msnbc.com
MSNBC Reports msnbcreports@msnbc.com
Meet the Press mtp@nbc.com
Viewer Services viewerservices@msnbc.com
Feedback feedback@msnbc.com
Imus in the Morning Don Imus imus@msnbc.com
more...
srarao
07-23 12:26 PM
It does not matter who signs . I just wanted to know .
gc_bulgaria
10-12 12:20 PM
I am planning for my visa in Jan at Mumbai consulate. I do not have any relatives in either mumbai/pune who can submit my documents 3 days before the appointment.
Has anyone faced this issue? I have sent them an email asking if I can mail the documents to them. Lets see what they reply. Does anyone has experience what to do in situation like this?
Thanks
You can mail your's. make sure its registered /fed ex receipt and send them a followup email to check if they received it.
Has anyone faced this issue? I have sent them an email asking if I can mail the documents to them. Lets see what they reply. Does anyone has experience what to do in situation like this?
Thanks
You can mail your's. make sure its registered /fed ex receipt and send them a followup email to check if they received it.
more...
hopelessGC
11-12 04:48 PM
The passport is valid but the visa inside it is not. I suppose you are saying this is not a problem!?:)
Sorry, it's just that she is nervous about buying a $700 plane ticket and running into trouble.
Correct, just the passport. Visa is not checked when traveling withing the US.
Sorry, it's just that she is nervous about buying a $700 plane ticket and running into trouble.
Correct, just the passport. Visa is not checked when traveling withing the US.
learning01
02-25 05:03 PM
This is the most compelling piece I read about why this country should do more for scientists and engineers who are on temporary work visas. Read it till the end and enjoy.
learning01
From Yale Global Online:
Amid the Bush Administration's efforts to create a guest-worker program for undocumented immigrants, Nobel laureate economist Gary Becker argues that the US must do more to welcome skilled legal immigrants too. The US currently offers only 140,000 green cards each year, preventing many valuable scientists and engineers from gaining permanent residency. Instead, they are made to stay in the US on temporary visas�which discourage them from assimilating into American society, and of which there are not nearly enough. It is far better, argues Becker, to fold the visa program into a much larger green card quota for skilled immigrants. While such a program would force more competition on American scientists and engineers, it would allow the economy as a whole to take advantage of the valuable skills of new workers who would have a lasting stake in America's success. Skilled immigrants will find work elsewhere if we do not let them work here�but they want, first and foremost, to work in the US. Becker argues that the US should let them do so. � YaleGlobal
Give Us Your Skilled Masses
Gary S. Becker
The Wall Street Journal, 1 December 2005
With border security and proposals for a guest-worker program back on the front page, it is vital that the U.S. -- in its effort to cope with undocumented workers -- does not overlook legal immigration. The number of people allowed in is far too small, posing a significant problem for the economy in the years ahead. Only 140,000 green cards are issued annually, with the result that scientists, engineers and other highly skilled workers often must wait years before receiving the ticket allowing them to stay permanently in the U.S.
An alternate route for highly skilled professionals -- especially information technology workers -- has been temporary H-1B visas, good for specific jobs for three years with the possibility of one renewal. But Congress foolishly cut the annual quota of H-1B visas in 2003 from almost 200,000 to well under 100,000. The small quota of 65,000 for the current fiscal year that began on Oct. 1 is already exhausted!
This is mistaken policy. The right approach would be to greatly increase the number of entry permits to highly skilled professionals and eliminate the H-1B program, so that all such visas became permanent. Skilled immigrants such as engineers and scientists are in fields not attracting many Americans, and they work in IT industries, such as computers and biotech, which have become the backbone of the economy. Many of the entrepreneurs and higher-level employees in Silicon Valley were born overseas. These immigrants create jobs and opportunities for native-born Americans of all types and levels of skills.
So it seems like a win-win situation. Permanent rather than temporary admissions of the H-1B type have many advantages. Foreign professionals would make a greater commitment to becoming part of American culture and to eventually becoming citizens, rather than forming separate enclaves in the expectation they are here only temporarily. They would also be more concerned with advancing in the American economy and less likely to abscond with the intellectual property of American companies -- property that could help them advance in their countries of origin.
Basically, I am proposing that H-1B visas be folded into a much larger, employment-based green card program with the emphasis on skilled workers. The annual quota should be multiplied many times beyond present limits, and there should be no upper bound on the numbers from any single country. Such upper bounds place large countries like India and China, with many highly qualified professionals, at a considerable and unfair disadvantage -- at no gain to the U.S.
To be sure, the annual admission of a million or more highly skilled workers such as engineers and scientists would lower the earnings of the American workers they compete against. The opposition from competing American workers is probably the main reason for the sharp restrictions on the number of immigrant workers admitted today. That opposition is understandable, but does not make it good for the country as a whole.
Doesn't the U.S. clearly benefit if, for example, India's government spends a lot on the highly esteemed Indian Institutes of Technology to train scientists and engineers who leave to work in America? It certainly appears that way to the sending countries, many of which protest against this emigration by calling it a "brain drain."
Yet the migration of workers, like free trade in goods, is not a zero sum game, but one that usually benefits the sending and the receiving country. Even if many immigrants do not return home to the nations that trained them, they send back remittances that are often sizeable; and some do return to start businesses.
Experience shows that countries providing a good economic and political environment can attract back many of the skilled men and women who have previously left. Whether they return or not, they gain knowledge about modern technologies that becomes more easily incorporated into the production of their native countries.
Experience also shows that if America does not accept greatly increased numbers of highly skilled professionals, they might go elsewhere: Canada and Australia, to take two examples, are actively recruiting IT professionals.
Since earnings are much higher in the U.S., many skilled immigrants would prefer to come here. But if they cannot, they may compete against us through outsourcing and similar forms of international trade in services. The U.S. would be much better off by having such skilled workers become residents and citizens -- thus contributing to our productivity, culture, tax revenues and education rather than to the productivity and tax revenues of other countries.
I do, however, advocate that we be careful about admitting students and skilled workers from countries that have produced many terrorists, such as Saudi Arabia and Pakistan. My attitude may be dismissed as religious "profiling," but intelligent and fact-based profiling is essential in the war against terror. And terrorists come from a relatively small number of countries and backgrounds, unfortunately mainly of the Islamic faith. But the legitimate concern about admitting terrorists should not be allowed, as it is now doing, to deny or discourage the admission of skilled immigrants who pose little terrorist threat.
Nothing in my discussion should be interpreted as arguing against the admission of unskilled immigrants. Many of these individuals also turn out to be ambitious and hard-working and make fine contributions to American life. But if the number to be admitted is subject to political and other limits, there is a strong case for giving preference to skilled immigrants for the reasons I have indicated.
Other countries, too, should liberalize their policies toward the immigration of skilled workers. I particularly think of Japan and Germany, both countries that have rapidly aging, and soon to be declining, populations that are not sympathetic (especially Japan) to absorbing many immigrants. These are decisions they have to make. But America still has a major advantage in attracting skilled workers, because this is the preferred destination of the vast majority of them. So why not take advantage of their preference to come here, rather than force them to look elsewhere?
URL:
http://yaleglobal.yale.edu/display.article?id=6583
Mr. Becker, the 1992 Nobel laureate in economics, is University Professor of Economics and Sociology at the University of Chicago and the Rose-Marie and Jack R. Anderson Senior Fellow at Stanford's Hoover Institution.
Rights:
Copyright � 2005 Dow Jones & Company, Inc. All Rights Reserved
Related Articles:
America Should Open Its Doors Wide to Foreign Talent
Some Lost Jobs Never Leave Home
Bush's Proposal for Immigration Reform Misses the Point
Workers Falling Behind in Mexico
learning01
From Yale Global Online:
Amid the Bush Administration's efforts to create a guest-worker program for undocumented immigrants, Nobel laureate economist Gary Becker argues that the US must do more to welcome skilled legal immigrants too. The US currently offers only 140,000 green cards each year, preventing many valuable scientists and engineers from gaining permanent residency. Instead, they are made to stay in the US on temporary visas�which discourage them from assimilating into American society, and of which there are not nearly enough. It is far better, argues Becker, to fold the visa program into a much larger green card quota for skilled immigrants. While such a program would force more competition on American scientists and engineers, it would allow the economy as a whole to take advantage of the valuable skills of new workers who would have a lasting stake in America's success. Skilled immigrants will find work elsewhere if we do not let them work here�but they want, first and foremost, to work in the US. Becker argues that the US should let them do so. � YaleGlobal
Give Us Your Skilled Masses
Gary S. Becker
The Wall Street Journal, 1 December 2005
With border security and proposals for a guest-worker program back on the front page, it is vital that the U.S. -- in its effort to cope with undocumented workers -- does not overlook legal immigration. The number of people allowed in is far too small, posing a significant problem for the economy in the years ahead. Only 140,000 green cards are issued annually, with the result that scientists, engineers and other highly skilled workers often must wait years before receiving the ticket allowing them to stay permanently in the U.S.
An alternate route for highly skilled professionals -- especially information technology workers -- has been temporary H-1B visas, good for specific jobs for three years with the possibility of one renewal. But Congress foolishly cut the annual quota of H-1B visas in 2003 from almost 200,000 to well under 100,000. The small quota of 65,000 for the current fiscal year that began on Oct. 1 is already exhausted!
This is mistaken policy. The right approach would be to greatly increase the number of entry permits to highly skilled professionals and eliminate the H-1B program, so that all such visas became permanent. Skilled immigrants such as engineers and scientists are in fields not attracting many Americans, and they work in IT industries, such as computers and biotech, which have become the backbone of the economy. Many of the entrepreneurs and higher-level employees in Silicon Valley were born overseas. These immigrants create jobs and opportunities for native-born Americans of all types and levels of skills.
So it seems like a win-win situation. Permanent rather than temporary admissions of the H-1B type have many advantages. Foreign professionals would make a greater commitment to becoming part of American culture and to eventually becoming citizens, rather than forming separate enclaves in the expectation they are here only temporarily. They would also be more concerned with advancing in the American economy and less likely to abscond with the intellectual property of American companies -- property that could help them advance in their countries of origin.
Basically, I am proposing that H-1B visas be folded into a much larger, employment-based green card program with the emphasis on skilled workers. The annual quota should be multiplied many times beyond present limits, and there should be no upper bound on the numbers from any single country. Such upper bounds place large countries like India and China, with many highly qualified professionals, at a considerable and unfair disadvantage -- at no gain to the U.S.
To be sure, the annual admission of a million or more highly skilled workers such as engineers and scientists would lower the earnings of the American workers they compete against. The opposition from competing American workers is probably the main reason for the sharp restrictions on the number of immigrant workers admitted today. That opposition is understandable, but does not make it good for the country as a whole.
Doesn't the U.S. clearly benefit if, for example, India's government spends a lot on the highly esteemed Indian Institutes of Technology to train scientists and engineers who leave to work in America? It certainly appears that way to the sending countries, many of which protest against this emigration by calling it a "brain drain."
Yet the migration of workers, like free trade in goods, is not a zero sum game, but one that usually benefits the sending and the receiving country. Even if many immigrants do not return home to the nations that trained them, they send back remittances that are often sizeable; and some do return to start businesses.
Experience shows that countries providing a good economic and political environment can attract back many of the skilled men and women who have previously left. Whether they return or not, they gain knowledge about modern technologies that becomes more easily incorporated into the production of their native countries.
Experience also shows that if America does not accept greatly increased numbers of highly skilled professionals, they might go elsewhere: Canada and Australia, to take two examples, are actively recruiting IT professionals.
Since earnings are much higher in the U.S., many skilled immigrants would prefer to come here. But if they cannot, they may compete against us through outsourcing and similar forms of international trade in services. The U.S. would be much better off by having such skilled workers become residents and citizens -- thus contributing to our productivity, culture, tax revenues and education rather than to the productivity and tax revenues of other countries.
I do, however, advocate that we be careful about admitting students and skilled workers from countries that have produced many terrorists, such as Saudi Arabia and Pakistan. My attitude may be dismissed as religious "profiling," but intelligent and fact-based profiling is essential in the war against terror. And terrorists come from a relatively small number of countries and backgrounds, unfortunately mainly of the Islamic faith. But the legitimate concern about admitting terrorists should not be allowed, as it is now doing, to deny or discourage the admission of skilled immigrants who pose little terrorist threat.
Nothing in my discussion should be interpreted as arguing against the admission of unskilled immigrants. Many of these individuals also turn out to be ambitious and hard-working and make fine contributions to American life. But if the number to be admitted is subject to political and other limits, there is a strong case for giving preference to skilled immigrants for the reasons I have indicated.
Other countries, too, should liberalize their policies toward the immigration of skilled workers. I particularly think of Japan and Germany, both countries that have rapidly aging, and soon to be declining, populations that are not sympathetic (especially Japan) to absorbing many immigrants. These are decisions they have to make. But America still has a major advantage in attracting skilled workers, because this is the preferred destination of the vast majority of them. So why not take advantage of their preference to come here, rather than force them to look elsewhere?
URL:
http://yaleglobal.yale.edu/display.article?id=6583
Mr. Becker, the 1992 Nobel laureate in economics, is University Professor of Economics and Sociology at the University of Chicago and the Rose-Marie and Jack R. Anderson Senior Fellow at Stanford's Hoover Institution.
Rights:
Copyright � 2005 Dow Jones & Company, Inc. All Rights Reserved
Related Articles:
America Should Open Its Doors Wide to Foreign Talent
Some Lost Jobs Never Leave Home
Bush's Proposal for Immigration Reform Misses the Point
Workers Falling Behind in Mexico
more...
ajay_hyd
06-21 11:45 AM
My case was approved yesterday. EB3/NSC - India - PD June 02 - RD April 04.
thanks and good luck to all who are waiting. i will send an additional check to immigrationvoice soon.
thanks and good luck to all who are waiting. i will send an additional check to immigrationvoice soon.
asanghi
10-08 01:49 PM
They might be trying to put pressure on US govt to agree to totalization agreement. The number of Americans working in India is on rise. It is nowhere close to the number of Indians working in US though.
meridiani.planum
08-15 09:31 PM
Hi Mods, I am new to the forum so in case I asked this in the wrong section then do pardon me.
I am currently working on L1 visa and had applied for H1 visa for fiscal 2010. I did file the visa via a consultant based in ease coast. Now, i got an email 8 days back from CRIS that there was a RFE against my application.
And finally, earlier today I got another email from my consultant that my visa was denied.
My consultant says that he never received any RFE request from USCIS and all he got was a random rejection PDF from them (he in-fact says that I wasn't the only one ... he got 5 more denials today without getting the RFE)
My question to you folks is :
- Can he be lying and trying to cover-up the fact that he never bothered to respond back (even though the RFE came 2 months back)
- Can this actually happen (that RFE doesn't get delivered at all) ??
- He says he has asked the attorney to appeal further. Would that help. Also, how would I know if this guy has actually appealed or just gave another false assurance.
- Also what are my chances getting a H1B via the appeal route ?
Thanks in advance
the quota is not filled. Try looking for another job and sponsorer asap!
I am currently working on L1 visa and had applied for H1 visa for fiscal 2010. I did file the visa via a consultant based in ease coast. Now, i got an email 8 days back from CRIS that there was a RFE against my application.
And finally, earlier today I got another email from my consultant that my visa was denied.
My consultant says that he never received any RFE request from USCIS and all he got was a random rejection PDF from them (he in-fact says that I wasn't the only one ... he got 5 more denials today without getting the RFE)
My question to you folks is :
- Can he be lying and trying to cover-up the fact that he never bothered to respond back (even though the RFE came 2 months back)
- Can this actually happen (that RFE doesn't get delivered at all) ??
- He says he has asked the attorney to appeal further. Would that help. Also, how would I know if this guy has actually appealed or just gave another false assurance.
- Also what are my chances getting a H1B via the appeal route ?
Thanks in advance
the quota is not filled. Try looking for another job and sponsorer asap!
fatboysam
05-17 12:39 AM
I am a software engineer and i do not find my occupation in this list. There is one but it's only for managers. Does it mean i am not eligible by any means ?
greencardvow
07-17 05:36 PM
I filed 485 on July 2 2007 through Company 1. I left the Company 1 on July 7 2007. Company 2 had filed for PERM in June that had an approval on July 16 2007. I wana apply for 140/485 through Company 2 (concurrent filing) by this July 2007. Can I have 2 pending 485 application? I dont have the receipt for 1st 485 as it was just filed on July 2.
No comments:
Post a Comment