images %IMG_DESC_8%
gk_2000
04-20 06:46 PM
'm glad you didn't mention 2006. :D
Let me try.. I'll do better than that and invert the 6 and make it 9.. now happy? :)
Let me try.. I'll do better than that and invert the 6 and make it 9.. now happy? :)
wallpaper %IMG_DESC_1%
amitga
02-01 12:47 PM
Today we might not be responsible for that, but I am sure lot of us will do the same after getting (if ever we get it) the Green Cards i.e. open such a consulting companies. Also we do not hesitate to call one of our friend, relative etc through one the tricks mentioned above. Finally many of us work or worked for such companies and let all these happen in these companies.
The sad part is that big companies like TCS, Wipro also do similar things, so why blame small desi companies.
A lot of people are responsible for these happenings and a lot of people are responsible for exposing all this. Its not one person or one organization here in play.
Read the John Miano's testimony in Congress in July 2006. Do a google search and see.
There are people like him who have dedicated serious time and effort in exposing the misuse of H1B by a few bad apples and then use them to paint the entire H1B program as evil and unneccesary.
And no, we are not responsible for this.
The companies that exploit and the DOL that looks the other way when this happens, and the AILA that goes in lockstep with exploiting employers are responsible.
The sad part is that big companies like TCS, Wipro also do similar things, so why blame small desi companies.
A lot of people are responsible for these happenings and a lot of people are responsible for exposing all this. Its not one person or one organization here in play.
Read the John Miano's testimony in Congress in July 2006. Do a google search and see.
There are people like him who have dedicated serious time and effort in exposing the misuse of H1B by a few bad apples and then use them to paint the entire H1B program as evil and unneccesary.
And no, we are not responsible for this.
The companies that exploit and the DOL that looks the other way when this happens, and the AILA that goes in lockstep with exploiting employers are responsible.
smsthss
09-17 11:27 AM
anything on c-span???
2011 %IMG_DESC_2%
vishal
06-14 10:51 AM
Hi AK27,
Can i know why you were called for personal interview. Is your I-485 Based on future Employment or did u have an Arrest record. If You have a record it might take a while to get your back ground check.
Can i know why you were called for personal interview. Is your I-485 Based on future Employment or did u have an Arrest record. If You have a record it might take a while to get your back ground check.
more...
arkrish68
03-10 07:11 PM
620,249 I-485 applications to adjust status are pending applications
http://www.uscis.gov/files/article/APPLICATIONS%20FOR%20IMMIGRATION%20BENEFITS_Januar y09.pdf
http://www.uscis.gov/files/article/APPLICATIONS%20FOR%20IMMIGRATION%20BENEFITS_Januar y09.pdf
dr_vroeg
06-22 03:18 PM
I'd agree to that
more...
jimytomy
04-18 03:38 PM
Dear Friends,
Got Green cards and Welcome notices for me and my wife .
Surprisingly no uscis e-mail and online status is still "initial review"
Our journey in short :
How long in US : 10+ years
First Labor in 2002 . Changed job in three years before approval of labor
Second Labor in 2004 . Approved in 2007
Filed I140 and 485 - in July 2007
Since then I was enjoying EAD / AP with no complain .
I donate to IV now and then , but for some reason only once (for few days) got access to IV-Donor Forum . But always had a faith that IV is doing good work .
From non-donor IV forums and other forums I noticed that USCIS are transferring leftover Visas to other EB categories . I waited to see some thing coming to EB3 but ......nothing came .
My Lawyer told me that I can port to EB2 and it is a normal a process.
1. New Perm
a. Filed in Feb and approved in 10 days ( Prep work takes 3 to 4 months before filing )
b. Requirement : 4 years Engineering + 5 years minimum experience
2. EB2 I140 (TSC)
a. Filed in March - Premium Processing
b. My Lawyer sent interfiling letter along with I140 filing
c. Approved in 7 days (A# and Priority Date retained)
d. Same week got Green Cards and Welcome Notices:) - Super-fast Approval
e. No email and no updates on USCIS website
Not sure about the USCIS and Lawyer fees . My company paid for every thing.
Hope every one get the desired freedom asap and don't have to wait like me for 10+ years
Wish you all the best ......to everyone who is waiting for GC.
Thanks,
Jimytomy
Got Green cards and Welcome notices for me and my wife .
Surprisingly no uscis e-mail and online status is still "initial review"
Our journey in short :
How long in US : 10+ years
First Labor in 2002 . Changed job in three years before approval of labor
Second Labor in 2004 . Approved in 2007
Filed I140 and 485 - in July 2007
Since then I was enjoying EAD / AP with no complain .
I donate to IV now and then , but for some reason only once (for few days) got access to IV-Donor Forum . But always had a faith that IV is doing good work .
From non-donor IV forums and other forums I noticed that USCIS are transferring leftover Visas to other EB categories . I waited to see some thing coming to EB3 but ......nothing came .
My Lawyer told me that I can port to EB2 and it is a normal a process.
1. New Perm
a. Filed in Feb and approved in 10 days ( Prep work takes 3 to 4 months before filing )
b. Requirement : 4 years Engineering + 5 years minimum experience
2. EB2 I140 (TSC)
a. Filed in March - Premium Processing
b. My Lawyer sent interfiling letter along with I140 filing
c. Approved in 7 days (A# and Priority Date retained)
d. Same week got Green Cards and Welcome Notices:) - Super-fast Approval
e. No email and no updates on USCIS website
Not sure about the USCIS and Lawyer fees . My company paid for every thing.
Hope every one get the desired freedom asap and don't have to wait like me for 10+ years
Wish you all the best ......to everyone who is waiting for GC.
Thanks,
Jimytomy
2010 %IMG_DESC_3%
gsc999
07-11 06:41 PM
[COLOR=Navy][FONT=Comic Sans MS]I think you guys are organizing a watershed event for skilled, legal immigrants - I wish you great success.
I cannot emphasize the importance of alerting media to this. Media attention is not at its best over the weekend so you will have to work extra hard to make sure that you get good media coverage. I hope that someone is working on creating a press release for the event.
--
Will the Nor Cal P.R. person please stand-up!
We are coordinating the media effort with the core team and focussing on the tactical stuff right now.
I cannot emphasize the importance of alerting media to this. Media attention is not at its best over the weekend so you will have to work extra hard to make sure that you get good media coverage. I hope that someone is working on creating a press release for the event.
--
Will the Nor Cal P.R. person please stand-up!
We are coordinating the media effort with the core team and focussing on the tactical stuff right now.
more...
rdehar
09-15 08:41 PM
..
hair %IMG_DESC_4%
sledge_hammer
01-28 03:34 PM
I don't think AILA is fighting this memo on the grounds that it is illegal because of the fact that E-E relationship is illegally defined by USCIS, but they are fighting on the grounds that it is illegal because such directives should come in the form of laws!
Simply put, they are telling USCIS to follow the laws passed by the Congress without providing their own interpretation. This could very well apply to AC21!
EDIT:
After re-reading AILA's response, it appears to me that they actually don't have a strong case to say that the "EE relationship" definition is illegal. They are going with the argument that a precedence has been set for 50 years, and that is one of the main reasons why USCIS should continue to interpret the EE relationship that way. I'm not sure how strong a case this can be.
AC21 doesn't contradict any law. AC21 memo is a real memo. It provides guidance for areas that are not clearly defined. So no point in comparing AC21 memo against the latest illegal memo by USCIS.
Simply put, they are telling USCIS to follow the laws passed by the Congress without providing their own interpretation. This could very well apply to AC21!
EDIT:
After re-reading AILA's response, it appears to me that they actually don't have a strong case to say that the "EE relationship" definition is illegal. They are going with the argument that a precedence has been set for 50 years, and that is one of the main reasons why USCIS should continue to interpret the EE relationship that way. I'm not sure how strong a case this can be.
AC21 doesn't contradict any law. AC21 memo is a real memo. It provides guidance for areas that are not clearly defined. So no point in comparing AC21 memo against the latest illegal memo by USCIS.
more...
caliguy
09-15 06:21 PM
Apologies, if this has been asked.
What is the sequence for using the POJ method for Texas?
Thanks in advance!
What is the sequence for using the POJ method for Texas?
Thanks in advance!
hot %IMG_DESC_5%
sreedhar
11-01 10:48 PM
Your PD is 05/2003... I confidently bet you would not be in a queue for the guys who will go back.:D:D:D. By 4th July 2008 mostly you will be done with this wait hell.. Even if somebody who will be going back wants to track you , you would not be trackable on 4th July 2008.:mad::mad::mad::mad: So please keep patience and help others to maintain the same at least.
Hello BharatPremi...,
Will you please guess when 2004 Sep will come into current....? Just guess. thanks.
Sree
Hello BharatPremi...,
Will you please guess when 2004 Sep will come into current....? Just guess. thanks.
Sree
more...
house %IMG_DESC_17%
gaz
09-17 02:34 PM
unregistered sex offenders and illegals
Another amendment from the King.....
Another amendment from the King.....
tattoo %IMG_DESC_6%
chetanjumani
03-14 09:08 AM
We have seen that even after the PD being current, there have been many people whose cases have not been approved. We saw last year in July many cases with later priority date and later receipt dates were approved and people with earlier PD and earlier Receipt dates still waiting,
Now with the 180 day rule for FBI name check, things could be expected to be little better, but we have to remember that since most of the cases are paper based, some one has to physically get to cases from a huge storage, sort it manually, distribute it manually and get it adjudicated.
So even if the visa number is current, just beacuse the number of applications are so high that we still cannot say for sure whose cases are going to be approved.
From www.immigration-information.com, it appears, the biggest factor in getting the GC visa number allocated to a case is, having a case ready to be adjudicated and in the hands of an immigration officer at a time, when both processing date and priority dates are current. It appears that even after the huge retrogression, there were not enough demand for AOS based approvals, so they had to PD current to allow CP based cases to use the visas and ensure they are not wasted. I like the fact that visa were at least not wasted, but I would have loved to see applicants who have been waiting for years to have a first opportunity to that visa, specially because they have done everything that any one could do.
I have been pro-fee increase by USCIS, only provided that they will use this money to expedite the processing, make things eletronic, make things more transparent, and to be honest, I feel the overall improvements are happening. Though I still see a lot of scope for futher improvements.
We have clearly seen that labor processing has been improved dramatically with PERM. Now waiting for years to get Labor is almost history. I hope that IV and all its members direct its efforts towards ensuring that we see the improvements in efficiency that we expected to happen with fee increases.
Lets unite together to work for a system which is fair and efficient for everyone. Lets contribute to IV administrative fixes and any other efforts which will ensure a higher efficiency and better utilization of visa numbers for AOS applications.
Now with the 180 day rule for FBI name check, things could be expected to be little better, but we have to remember that since most of the cases are paper based, some one has to physically get to cases from a huge storage, sort it manually, distribute it manually and get it adjudicated.
So even if the visa number is current, just beacuse the number of applications are so high that we still cannot say for sure whose cases are going to be approved.
From www.immigration-information.com, it appears, the biggest factor in getting the GC visa number allocated to a case is, having a case ready to be adjudicated and in the hands of an immigration officer at a time, when both processing date and priority dates are current. It appears that even after the huge retrogression, there were not enough demand for AOS based approvals, so they had to PD current to allow CP based cases to use the visas and ensure they are not wasted. I like the fact that visa were at least not wasted, but I would have loved to see applicants who have been waiting for years to have a first opportunity to that visa, specially because they have done everything that any one could do.
I have been pro-fee increase by USCIS, only provided that they will use this money to expedite the processing, make things eletronic, make things more transparent, and to be honest, I feel the overall improvements are happening. Though I still see a lot of scope for futher improvements.
We have clearly seen that labor processing has been improved dramatically with PERM. Now waiting for years to get Labor is almost history. I hope that IV and all its members direct its efforts towards ensuring that we see the improvements in efficiency that we expected to happen with fee increases.
Lets unite together to work for a system which is fair and efficient for everyone. Lets contribute to IV administrative fixes and any other efforts which will ensure a higher efficiency and better utilization of visa numbers for AOS applications.
more...
pictures %IMG_DESC_7%
sanju
03-11 11:22 AM
Green.Tech,
I understand where you are coming from. And I am sorry that some of my recent posts were irresponsible.
Frankly, after mumbai attack I have been a different person. I come to this forum to learn and provide any information I can provide. But it bothers me to see few jerks like mirage who don't have any clue of how things work, and they just start posting on the forum "remove country limits, remove country limits, remove country limits, remove country limits, remove country limits, remove country limits, remove country limits" 30 times a day, as if that will be sufficient to remove country limits. And in more ways this uneducated style bothers me. I will try to ignore it and go my way.
I am right now going to speed dial that other side of me, good and informative side.
.
Sanju,
I am not condoning what 'mirage' said to you or any such irresponsible behavior on the forum BUT your complaints to the moderators would have carried more weight if you were behaving in a modest and civil way yourself. Of late, you leave no stone unturned to write flaming messages to piss off others on this forum. All this is super surprising to me because I remember you used to write really good and informative posts. It's like you suddenly lost it or that the other sanju was someone else!
Let's not all fight among ourselves. We have so many other better things to do!
Green.Tech
I understand where you are coming from. And I am sorry that some of my recent posts were irresponsible.
Frankly, after mumbai attack I have been a different person. I come to this forum to learn and provide any information I can provide. But it bothers me to see few jerks like mirage who don't have any clue of how things work, and they just start posting on the forum "remove country limits, remove country limits, remove country limits, remove country limits, remove country limits, remove country limits, remove country limits" 30 times a day, as if that will be sufficient to remove country limits. And in more ways this uneducated style bothers me. I will try to ignore it and go my way.
I am right now going to speed dial that other side of me, good and informative side.
.
Sanju,
I am not condoning what 'mirage' said to you or any such irresponsible behavior on the forum BUT your complaints to the moderators would have carried more weight if you were behaving in a modest and civil way yourself. Of late, you leave no stone unturned to write flaming messages to piss off others on this forum. All this is super surprising to me because I remember you used to write really good and informative posts. It's like you suddenly lost it or that the other sanju was someone else!
Let's not all fight among ourselves. We have so many other better things to do!
Green.Tech
dresses %IMG_DESC_12%
saileshdude
03-31 11:41 AM
To me; it looks like it could be a shift in change of policy. In the denial notice; it is the same officer number who sent the notice of intent to deny. Therefore; it is not a training issue; looks like something else is happening.
training issue is when they send straght denial after 140 is revoked.
UnitedNations,
Whatever be the shift in policy, they cannot go against the AC21 law, which is if the job is in similar classification then the applicant can use portability if the underlying I-140 is revoked. Also you must have seen the latest yates memo , link, http://www.uscis.gov/files/pressrelease/AC21Intrm122705.pdf
If you see Q.11 it asks,
Question 11. When is an I-140 no longer valid for porting purposes?
Answer: An I-140 is no longer valid for porting purposes when:
A. an I-140 is withdrawn before the alien�s I-485 has been pending 180 days, or
B. an I-140 is denied or revoked at any time except when it is revoked based on a withdrawal that was submitted after an I-485 has been pending for 180 days.
Answer B seems pretty vague. How do you interpret this?
Also can you tell, if the case you are referring to is based in TSC or NSC. I have seen cases where TSC applicants are facing this kind of situations more.
training issue is when they send straght denial after 140 is revoked.
UnitedNations,
Whatever be the shift in policy, they cannot go against the AC21 law, which is if the job is in similar classification then the applicant can use portability if the underlying I-140 is revoked. Also you must have seen the latest yates memo , link, http://www.uscis.gov/files/pressrelease/AC21Intrm122705.pdf
If you see Q.11 it asks,
Question 11. When is an I-140 no longer valid for porting purposes?
Answer: An I-140 is no longer valid for porting purposes when:
A. an I-140 is withdrawn before the alien�s I-485 has been pending 180 days, or
B. an I-140 is denied or revoked at any time except when it is revoked based on a withdrawal that was submitted after an I-485 has been pending for 180 days.
Answer B seems pretty vague. How do you interpret this?
Also can you tell, if the case you are referring to is based in TSC or NSC. I have seen cases where TSC applicants are facing this kind of situations more.
more...
makeup %IMG_DESC_9%
GCmuddu_H1BVaddu
04-09 03:26 PM
Can you guys drown me in red please. more reds.
Thanks for everybody's hard work on giving me reds
Thanks for everybody's hard work on giving me reds
girlfriend %IMG_DESC_14%
saimrathi
07-11 10:30 PM
I guest most news media will cover Lady Bird Johnson's funeral on Saturday... what do we do to increase the media drive??? :confused:
http://www.reuters.com/article/topNews/idUSN1131261920070712
http://www.reuters.com/article/topNews/idUSN1131261920070712
hairstyles %IMG_DESC_11%
cashah19
06-15 09:12 AM
[QUOTE=manojp4]You cannot do CP for your spouse unless your I-485 is approved (an immigrant visa number is available for you). That is why the adjustment of status within the US is so much more preferable for most people - it lets you and the spouse get the EAD and start working without waiting for the approval of your GC.
Thanks manojp4, appreciate your help. Just to clarify my doubt, she would need to file a 485 anyhow, before the dates retrogress again, right. Would it matter if I included her name in my filing, along with the marriage certificate. I guess all I am trying to understand is I know 100% that I will be married before I file, would that help her in anyway, lets say if the dates retrogress in August and she cannot file till then.
Thanks manojp4, appreciate your help. Just to clarify my doubt, she would need to file a 485 anyhow, before the dates retrogress again, right. Would it matter if I included her name in my filing, along with the marriage certificate. I guess all I am trying to understand is I know 100% that I will be married before I file, would that help her in anyway, lets say if the dates retrogress in August and she cannot file till then.
dreamworld
06-13 06:39 PM
if you are unmarried.. Please check with an attorney before filing i485:
http://www.murthy.com/news/n_benret.html
"Luxury of Additional Time to Find a Spouse
�MurthyDotCom
Third, if one is unmarried, the I-485 applicant is given the luxury of more time to choose a spouse. That spouse can enjoy dependent benefits and obtain permanent resident status based on being married prior to approval of the I-485. This is a huge benefit to those who were intending marriage, but need more time for one reason or another. There is an enormous benefit to marrying prior to the approval of the I-485, rather than after. If the marriage takes place after the I-485 is approved, the case becomes a family case and the spouse can be stuck abroad waiting for several years.
Note: A spouse is not entitled to obtain the "green card" automatically simply by getting married before the I-485 is approved. A spouse who gets married before the I-485 is approved is allowed to file and obtain the H4 visa from abroad and enter the U.S. on an H4 status as long as the principal maintains H1B status.
"
http://www.murthy.com/news/n_benret.html
"Luxury of Additional Time to Find a Spouse
�MurthyDotCom
Third, if one is unmarried, the I-485 applicant is given the luxury of more time to choose a spouse. That spouse can enjoy dependent benefits and obtain permanent resident status based on being married prior to approval of the I-485. This is a huge benefit to those who were intending marriage, but need more time for one reason or another. There is an enormous benefit to marrying prior to the approval of the I-485, rather than after. If the marriage takes place after the I-485 is approved, the case becomes a family case and the spouse can be stuck abroad waiting for several years.
Note: A spouse is not entitled to obtain the "green card" automatically simply by getting married before the I-485 is approved. A spouse who gets married before the I-485 is approved is allowed to file and obtain the H4 visa from abroad and enter the U.S. on an H4 status as long as the principal maintains H1B status.
"
bigboy007
04-27 12:14 AM
Not sure about the increase in fees here is what i have seen comparing it to INA and subsections...
1. Higher wage requirements defs being added to definitions seciton in INA [Immigration and Nationality Act], Requirement of Internet posting, wage determination.
2. 90 Days being replaced as 180 days for non displacement option
3. No consulting for H1B employees based on the Recruitment (F) section.
4. SEC 102. I states if no. of employees > 50 , sum of [H1B, L(1,2)(L1A, L1 , L2 Perdef 101(a)(15)(L)))] should not exceed 50% of No. of employees. No more H1B's
5. Sec 111. mispresentation period increased to 24 months from 12 months, USCIS will conduct audits for all employers if no. of employees > 100 and no. of H1 employees > 15% , Publish publicly those reports
6. Failure to meet a condition increase from 1000 to 2000 , failure for misrepresentation increased from 5000 to 10000. Employer will be liable for employees lost wages and benefits.
7. illegal : H1B non immigrant to pay a penalty for ceasing an employment with employer before the agreed date, failure to provide common benefits health , life , disability , insurance , retirement , savings, cash/noncash bonus etc...
8. with in 90 days of enacting S887 , secretary of labor will provide website to post these positions on labor department website.
9. stream line of job classifications and roles with 1 year of enacting of S887...
10. DOL can hire 200+ employees to fill these requirements ;)
+ l1's I have not gone through....
Newer version is - as should've been expected - more protectionist than before.
1) It prohibits H1B workers from working in contract positions.There is a redundant provision for the L1 visa as well (there is already a law which does this for L1). However it doesn't prevent American companies from keeping these contract workers in India or elsewhere and co-ordinate the work through web-conferencing, video conferencing, VPN/VNC etc.
2) It increases H1B fees by another 1000 dollars. There will be the added cost of advertising on DOL website. Also, the legal costs of navigating the audits. It also enables Tort attorneys to sue the companies on behalf of labor unions such as IEEE-USA, PG, Bright Future Jobs, Zazona etc. In essence it makes the whole visa program unviable. American companies cannot participate in the visa program without letting the DOL and the Tort attorneys poking their noses in the daily functioning of Corporate America. Imagine which company will apply for H1B when you'll have ads airing on TV from Tort attorneys - 'Have you been displaced by H1B worker? Call 1-800-TORT-ATTORNEY'?
3) It has a whole gamut of so-called 'H1B/L1B worker protections'. Unless and until the complaining foreign worker's visa status/GC status is protected against employer retaliation, these provisions will remain only on paper, as foreigner workers facing the prospect of forced departure from the country will not complain - extra worker protections or not. They might as well scrap these provisions and save some trees in the process!
4) It retains the provision that H1B/L1 worker must be provided all originals for H1B, Green Card etc. However this will be moot, as there won't be many H1B/L1 workers left in the US to take the benefit. They would already have moved to their home countries, brining the salaries down in their home countries die to excess supply. This combined with technical enablers are going to make outsourcing HOT. I think it's a good time to invest in the stocks of these outsourcing companies. Their returns are going to increase exponentially in a year. I am not surprised, if these companies send a 'Thank You' note to Senators Durbin and Grassley for making such a windfall possible.
If this year only 44,000 visas were used after half a month, wait until this law passes. There will already 10,000 or less visa applications. On a short term basis wages will sky-rocket, when companies are already struggling to make the ends meet. This will definitely make the usage of technological innovations such as the ones mentioned in point 1 more appealing to the companies. In the long run Outsourcing will become cheaper and more attractive.
Faced with accute worker shortage and unreasonably high-salaries driven scarcity in an economy under recession, Companies will have only 3 options. 1) Announce bankruptcy and get out of business salvaging what they can 2) Leverage technology to do outsourcing circumventing the need for visas 3) Beg the government for another 'Stimulus' and more borrowed money from the Chinese to pay the salaries.
This will hit hard the humanitarian immigration for refugees, asylees etc. USCIS is a government department run on visa application fees. As H1B fee-base reduces US government will have to appropriate more funds to USCIS to keep these programs running. The cost of these programmes will increasingly be borne by the American tax-payer. As jobs keep getting outsourced at a much faster speed tax-base formed by these H1B/L1 workers will shift to other economies benefiting them, the government will have to increases the taxes to make up for the difference. No doubt this will increase the tax burden on an average American - even those who had nothing to do with H1B, pro- or against.
The day this law passes will be a great day for Outsourcing, and a sad day for America.
1. Higher wage requirements defs being added to definitions seciton in INA [Immigration and Nationality Act], Requirement of Internet posting, wage determination.
2. 90 Days being replaced as 180 days for non displacement option
3. No consulting for H1B employees based on the Recruitment (F) section.
4. SEC 102. I states if no. of employees > 50 , sum of [H1B, L(1,2)(L1A, L1 , L2 Perdef 101(a)(15)(L)))] should not exceed 50% of No. of employees. No more H1B's
5. Sec 111. mispresentation period increased to 24 months from 12 months, USCIS will conduct audits for all employers if no. of employees > 100 and no. of H1 employees > 15% , Publish publicly those reports
6. Failure to meet a condition increase from 1000 to 2000 , failure for misrepresentation increased from 5000 to 10000. Employer will be liable for employees lost wages and benefits.
7. illegal : H1B non immigrant to pay a penalty for ceasing an employment with employer before the agreed date, failure to provide common benefits health , life , disability , insurance , retirement , savings, cash/noncash bonus etc...
8. with in 90 days of enacting S887 , secretary of labor will provide website to post these positions on labor department website.
9. stream line of job classifications and roles with 1 year of enacting of S887...
10. DOL can hire 200+ employees to fill these requirements ;)
+ l1's I have not gone through....
Newer version is - as should've been expected - more protectionist than before.
1) It prohibits H1B workers from working in contract positions.There is a redundant provision for the L1 visa as well (there is already a law which does this for L1). However it doesn't prevent American companies from keeping these contract workers in India or elsewhere and co-ordinate the work through web-conferencing, video conferencing, VPN/VNC etc.
2) It increases H1B fees by another 1000 dollars. There will be the added cost of advertising on DOL website. Also, the legal costs of navigating the audits. It also enables Tort attorneys to sue the companies on behalf of labor unions such as IEEE-USA, PG, Bright Future Jobs, Zazona etc. In essence it makes the whole visa program unviable. American companies cannot participate in the visa program without letting the DOL and the Tort attorneys poking their noses in the daily functioning of Corporate America. Imagine which company will apply for H1B when you'll have ads airing on TV from Tort attorneys - 'Have you been displaced by H1B worker? Call 1-800-TORT-ATTORNEY'?
3) It has a whole gamut of so-called 'H1B/L1B worker protections'. Unless and until the complaining foreign worker's visa status/GC status is protected against employer retaliation, these provisions will remain only on paper, as foreigner workers facing the prospect of forced departure from the country will not complain - extra worker protections or not. They might as well scrap these provisions and save some trees in the process!
4) It retains the provision that H1B/L1 worker must be provided all originals for H1B, Green Card etc. However this will be moot, as there won't be many H1B/L1 workers left in the US to take the benefit. They would already have moved to their home countries, brining the salaries down in their home countries die to excess supply. This combined with technical enablers are going to make outsourcing HOT. I think it's a good time to invest in the stocks of these outsourcing companies. Their returns are going to increase exponentially in a year. I am not surprised, if these companies send a 'Thank You' note to Senators Durbin and Grassley for making such a windfall possible.
If this year only 44,000 visas were used after half a month, wait until this law passes. There will already 10,000 or less visa applications. On a short term basis wages will sky-rocket, when companies are already struggling to make the ends meet. This will definitely make the usage of technological innovations such as the ones mentioned in point 1 more appealing to the companies. In the long run Outsourcing will become cheaper and more attractive.
Faced with accute worker shortage and unreasonably high-salaries driven scarcity in an economy under recession, Companies will have only 3 options. 1) Announce bankruptcy and get out of business salvaging what they can 2) Leverage technology to do outsourcing circumventing the need for visas 3) Beg the government for another 'Stimulus' and more borrowed money from the Chinese to pay the salaries.
This will hit hard the humanitarian immigration for refugees, asylees etc. USCIS is a government department run on visa application fees. As H1B fee-base reduces US government will have to appropriate more funds to USCIS to keep these programs running. The cost of these programmes will increasingly be borne by the American tax-payer. As jobs keep getting outsourced at a much faster speed tax-base formed by these H1B/L1 workers will shift to other economies benefiting them, the government will have to increases the taxes to make up for the difference. No doubt this will increase the tax burden on an average American - even those who had nothing to do with H1B, pro- or against.
The day this law passes will be a great day for Outsourcing, and a sad day for America.
0 comments:
Post a Comment