_TrueFacts
09-03 11:00 PM
breddy2000,
Stick to the point, on YSR. Or open a thread on your favorite topics.
AP has seen an unprecedented political killings, govt and personal land grabbing, corruption, and opportunistic politics just for one man thirst YSR.
It’s better to have none than these factionist gundas. As for my id, yes just for this and more and it should not matter you. If you have point, talk about it, otherwise just shut up and don’t preach like YSR’s family member that “Someone or something is better than none”
Stick to the point, on YSR. Or open a thread on your favorite topics.
AP has seen an unprecedented political killings, govt and personal land grabbing, corruption, and opportunistic politics just for one man thirst YSR.
It’s better to have none than these factionist gundas. As for my id, yes just for this and more and it should not matter you. If you have point, talk about it, otherwise just shut up and don’t preach like YSR’s family member that “Someone or something is better than none”
wallpaper hot Chicago Tribune Building,
eb3_nepa
10-23 02:08 PM
Thanks eb3India.
How does the current company obtain a pre-approved labor? Does it buy the pre-app labour? Or is it SOLELY because someone in the company left (whose labor was approved)?
I was reading a lot about the controversy about why it should be stopped etc so i was wondering if someone had any documentation on why it was started in the first place and how it works
Thanks
How does the current company obtain a pre-approved labor? Does it buy the pre-app labour? Or is it SOLELY because someone in the company left (whose labor was approved)?
I was reading a lot about the controversy about why it should be stopped etc so i was wondering if someone had any documentation on why it was started in the first place and how it works
Thanks
ajthakur
07-15 02:32 AM
I filed for 485 during July 2007. My 140 was already approved. Due to some problems I quit my employer in August 2007. My previous employer was a desi blood sucker. I was fed up & decided to quit after working for him for 3 years. I applied for H1 transfer with a new employer based on approved 140. I got H1 approval for another 3 years. Currently I am working for the new H1 sponsoring employer. I also received an EAD card based on pending 485 for one year. I didnt notify USICS of job change in July.
I applied for EAD extension this year. The application for EAD extension is pending. I got a following RFE on my 485:
Please state whether or not you are currently working for your I-140 petitioner.
You must submit a currently dated letter from you permanent employer, describing your present job duties & position in the organization, your proferred position (if different from your current one), the date you began employement & the offered salary & wage. The letter must also indicate whether the terms & conditions of your employement based visa petition (or labor certification) continue to exist.
I am not in good terms with my previous employer so I cant ask him for a letter. I can ask my new employer for such a letter.
Also is it possible that 140 was revoked by my previous employer?
Why did they send a RFE instead of NOID in my case?
I applied for EAD extension this year. The application for EAD extension is pending. I got a following RFE on my 485:
Please state whether or not you are currently working for your I-140 petitioner.
You must submit a currently dated letter from you permanent employer, describing your present job duties & position in the organization, your proferred position (if different from your current one), the date you began employement & the offered salary & wage. The letter must also indicate whether the terms & conditions of your employement based visa petition (or labor certification) continue to exist.
I am not in good terms with my previous employer so I cant ask him for a letter. I can ask my new employer for such a letter.
Also is it possible that 140 was revoked by my previous employer?
Why did they send a RFE instead of NOID in my case?
2011 File Photo Of Chicago Tribune
styrum
02-12 06:51 PM
:DI just got home from work and logged in and I thought I was dreaming !!!!!
My priority date is June 2003!!!!! I already have approved petition and AOS. When should I be expeting my GC in the mail considering no need to wait for FBI check any more ?
Hold your horses, brother. Remember that the official position of USCIS now is: "Oh we got so many applications last June-August, that it will be by the end of 2010 when maybe we will return to processing times we had before last summer". So now even with PD current I don't even know anymore when we actually will get it. Also remember that there are rumors they threw people onto processing citizenship applications because that issue got some public visibility. Guess from where they took thos adjudicators. You are right - from 485 processing.:cool:
My priority date is June 2003!!!!! I already have approved petition and AOS. When should I be expeting my GC in the mail considering no need to wait for FBI check any more ?
Hold your horses, brother. Remember that the official position of USCIS now is: "Oh we got so many applications last June-August, that it will be by the end of 2010 when maybe we will return to processing times we had before last summer". So now even with PD current I don't even know anymore when we actually will get it. Also remember that there are rumors they threw people onto processing citizenship applications because that issue got some public visibility. Guess from where they took thos adjudicators. You are right - from 485 processing.:cool:
more...
gc_on_demand
09-17 11:24 AM
On a ballpark, EB2-I has demand for about 50K immigrant visa numbers. Last year we got 25K. I am assuming we are going to get the same number this year too. So that cleared entire 2004.
Next year the situation may be different, because demand from other countries is less, So we could see a bigger leap and might put us in early 2006 by end of FY10. FY11 may not be that nice when economy starts improving. We could be back to square one.
Bottomline, Without a recapture, EB2I/C will not make much progress. EB3-Worldwide is only a place holder in the very long line.
IV members need to concentrate on the recapture, filing AOS after I140 is approved, visa stamping within USA to make our life easy.
Only thing we can do is grassroots advocacy. Which may take few years... I don't have hope that in CIR we will be huge getting benefits ( Because of Antis and Some Dems like Senator Durbin ). Also Chances of any piecemeal is very less because of Hispanic caucus.
Only thing left is Administrative fixes. who can give us temp relief. Like Mr Bush did for TN visas.
Next year the situation may be different, because demand from other countries is less, So we could see a bigger leap and might put us in early 2006 by end of FY10. FY11 may not be that nice when economy starts improving. We could be back to square one.
Bottomline, Without a recapture, EB2I/C will not make much progress. EB3-Worldwide is only a place holder in the very long line.
IV members need to concentrate on the recapture, filing AOS after I140 is approved, visa stamping within USA to make our life easy.
Only thing we can do is grassroots advocacy. Which may take few years... I don't have hope that in CIR we will be huge getting benefits ( Because of Antis and Some Dems like Senator Durbin ). Also Chances of any piecemeal is very less because of Hispanic caucus.
Only thing left is Administrative fixes. who can give us temp relief. Like Mr Bush did for TN visas.
senthil1
06-26 01:35 PM
The main reason for this kind of fear is many people waited more than 5 years and PD was moving 2 weeks per 3 months. Suddenly PD become current everyone could not believe themselves and still Skeptical about it. This kind of PD movements happened many times in past. This kind of fear is unneccessary and try to file I485 ASAP to get earliest Receipt date.
Logiclife,
All I am saying is, the DOS or USCIS can be unpredictible at times. I know TECHNICALLY there is NO way the July bulletin can retrogress IN JULY. However I would NOT be surprised if that happens. Coz this suddenly creates a FLOOD of Ead applications and AP applications not to mention Finger printing.
Logiclife,
All I am saying is, the DOS or USCIS can be unpredictible at times. I know TECHNICALLY there is NO way the July bulletin can retrogress IN JULY. However I would NOT be surprised if that happens. Coz this suddenly creates a FLOOD of Ead applications and AP applications not to mention Finger printing.
more...
gcgoingon
06-14 05:33 PM
I guess my 9 months old prediction is coming true (off by a month).
http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/1049939-post209.html
I hope your predictions for the coming months also come true..
I do not know why the bulletin is so conservative about the EB2-I estimates for the year 2010 (March/April 2006)?
The reason I am saying this is the initial estimate they gave for EB2-I in Jan '10 bulletin is Feb/March 2005.
http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/1049939-post209.html
I hope your predictions for the coming months also come true..
I do not know why the bulletin is so conservative about the EB2-I estimates for the year 2010 (March/April 2006)?
The reason I am saying this is the initial estimate they gave for EB2-I in Jan '10 bulletin is Feb/March 2005.
2010 The Chicago Tribune Building
amsgc
07-04 11:42 AM
My suggestions:
"Door slams shut for highly skilled LEGAL immigrants in the US"
"US closes the door for highly skilled LEGAL immigrants"
"US isolates highly skilled legal immigrants"
"Broken Legal immigration system harmful to US competitiveness"
"Legal Immigration system in shambles"
"Flip-Flop: DOS & USCIS in cahoots?"
"Door slams shut for highly skilled LEGAL immigrants in the US"
"US closes the door for highly skilled LEGAL immigrants"
"US isolates highly skilled legal immigrants"
"Broken Legal immigration system harmful to US competitiveness"
"Legal Immigration system in shambles"
"Flip-Flop: DOS & USCIS in cahoots?"
more...
GCFROMOHIO
03-26 06:18 PM
Hi All,
I currently have an EB3 March 2003 priority date labor I140 approved with my company. Recently, I wanted to move to consulting, sothat I can get my GC converted to EB2 as the dates are only 2 months apart. I have asked my company if they are willing to take me as a contractor once I am out of the company and go to a consulting company. They said that it should be fine, but they said if GC is the only purpose, they can try to do something about converting my existing labor to EB2. It's a very big fortune 500 company and they do all their labors in EB3. My question is:
1. Can I re-apply another labor in EB2 for a position that qualifies in the same company and can port the existing EB3 priority date? Has anyone done this in the past?
2. Can I use any prior priority date approved labor in the same company, even though my EB3 I140 is approved with the same company.
3. Can I move to consulting company and reapply in EB2 with existing priority date and work for the same company that has my current labor.
The company legal counsel said that they would come back to me with some answers this week, but I want to get second opinion from all of you in this regard. I have my Masters in 2000 and MBA in 2004 with 8 years experience and so EB2 qualification shouldn't be a problem
Any help will be greatly appreciated!
Thanks,
I currently have an EB3 March 2003 priority date labor I140 approved with my company. Recently, I wanted to move to consulting, sothat I can get my GC converted to EB2 as the dates are only 2 months apart. I have asked my company if they are willing to take me as a contractor once I am out of the company and go to a consulting company. They said that it should be fine, but they said if GC is the only purpose, they can try to do something about converting my existing labor to EB2. It's a very big fortune 500 company and they do all their labors in EB3. My question is:
1. Can I re-apply another labor in EB2 for a position that qualifies in the same company and can port the existing EB3 priority date? Has anyone done this in the past?
2. Can I use any prior priority date approved labor in the same company, even though my EB3 I140 is approved with the same company.
3. Can I move to consulting company and reapply in EB2 with existing priority date and work for the same company that has my current labor.
The company legal counsel said that they would come back to me with some answers this week, but I want to get second opinion from all of you in this regard. I have my Masters in 2000 and MBA in 2004 with 8 years experience and so EB2 qualification shouldn't be a problem
Any help will be greatly appreciated!
Thanks,
hair The Chicago Tribune Building
gc28262
01-24 05:16 PM
If you think Memo is illegal why can't you file a lawsuit. That should be right way. But I did not see any suggestion from any lawyer. But when when July 2007 issue cropped most lawyers rushed to file lawsuit. Now no one even suggesting lawsuit except some members in IV. Either most are not interested or they think no legal basis to contest memo
I am filing a lawsuit. Want to join me ? :cool:
Please read this
MurthyDotCom : H1B Memo on Employer-Employee Relationships and 3rd-Party Placements (http://www.murthy.com/news/n_e-erel.html)
Read the conclusion. I am sure that won't make you happy.
I am filing a lawsuit. Want to join me ? :cool:
Please read this
MurthyDotCom : H1B Memo on Employer-Employee Relationships and 3rd-Party Placements (http://www.murthy.com/news/n_e-erel.html)
Read the conclusion. I am sure that won't make you happy.
more...
atlfp
07-25 09:28 AM
While many people are trying to get the system fixed, sometimes it might just be very much worth it to abandom the ship, if the ship is no good, just let it sink. There are other ships out on the ocean.
Dear Friends, I had it... I am moving to Canada in the next 2 months to work for guess who? Microsoft. Came to USA in 1997 for my masters, worked at Legato, Documentum and Opentext. Had to restart my GC twrice, once as the company laid me off and next for career progression. GC is still years years away. Interviewed with MSFT last month and got an offer to work in their Enterprise Collaboration team. MSFT looked at the visa mess I was in and offered me to work in Vancouver. I get my Canadian GC in 6 months and my wife can work from day one. I am abandoning my US dream for good;guess I would be satisfied with touching my 4 year old son's American passport.
I worked for a canadian company in US and now would be working for a US company in Canada. This is globalization. True Globalization. Any for those whiners belonging to IEEE and its propoganda machine, I would like to mention that I drew salries which were above way above the norm. I am sure I would be drawing more than 2 of his programmers combined. Ron- ask your folks to learn to compete and update their skills. They probably studied studied 'history of mathematics' as a math subject in high school instead of calculus. They were happy that they had the coolest Nintendo games while many like me were burning the midnight old figuring out data structures at Berkeley.
I hope Berney Sanders and his club of the CIR days are hearing the developments. Berney, fix the broken education system for job protection rather than building fences to prevent legal workers to come to this gifted country. More companies will leave for nearshore if the mess continues. Fix the system by closing the H1B loopholes that a small percentage of companies are exploiting. Don't bad mouth the H1B system which has given you so much talent that you could have never groomed, the talented individuals who have contributed to the society, social security system and what not. Patch the holes in the fence, do not erect a higher fence for which people need to pay $ 5000 to cross. And by the way if you have the inclination and the time- fix the broken LEGAL High Skilled immigration system.
Dear Friends, I had it... I am moving to Canada in the next 2 months to work for guess who? Microsoft. Came to USA in 1997 for my masters, worked at Legato, Documentum and Opentext. Had to restart my GC twrice, once as the company laid me off and next for career progression. GC is still years years away. Interviewed with MSFT last month and got an offer to work in their Enterprise Collaboration team. MSFT looked at the visa mess I was in and offered me to work in Vancouver. I get my Canadian GC in 6 months and my wife can work from day one. I am abandoning my US dream for good;guess I would be satisfied with touching my 4 year old son's American passport.
I worked for a canadian company in US and now would be working for a US company in Canada. This is globalization. True Globalization. Any for those whiners belonging to IEEE and its propoganda machine, I would like to mention that I drew salries which were above way above the norm. I am sure I would be drawing more than 2 of his programmers combined. Ron- ask your folks to learn to compete and update their skills. They probably studied studied 'history of mathematics' as a math subject in high school instead of calculus. They were happy that they had the coolest Nintendo games while many like me were burning the midnight old figuring out data structures at Berkeley.
I hope Berney Sanders and his club of the CIR days are hearing the developments. Berney, fix the broken education system for job protection rather than building fences to prevent legal workers to come to this gifted country. More companies will leave for nearshore if the mess continues. Fix the system by closing the H1B loopholes that a small percentage of companies are exploiting. Don't bad mouth the H1B system which has given you so much talent that you could have never groomed, the talented individuals who have contributed to the society, social security system and what not. Patch the holes in the fence, do not erect a higher fence for which people need to pay $ 5000 to cross. And by the way if you have the inclination and the time- fix the broken LEGAL High Skilled immigration system.
hot CHICAGO,TRIBUNE TOWER AT NIGHT
vamsi_poondla
02-14 12:51 PM
Watch and see how fast the Michigan government will start issuing DL to H1B holders and to those who has pending I-485.
http://www.aclumich.org/modules.php?name=News&file=article&sid=567
https://www.aclumich.org/pdf/licensecomplaint.pdf
A new ruling is different than challenging an existing rule. So, we cannot compare with DL Issue. Name checks, I don't think it is logical. But at the same time, it is not with sinister design as well. Latest memo doesnt admit that they introduced this to screw us. It happened consequentially due to delays, less funding allocation and other processing slack. (BTW, I think MI IV Leadership team did a wonderful job for the DL Issue.)
http://www.aclumich.org/modules.php?name=News&file=article&sid=567
https://www.aclumich.org/pdf/licensecomplaint.pdf
A new ruling is different than challenging an existing rule. So, we cannot compare with DL Issue. Name checks, I don't think it is logical. But at the same time, it is not with sinister design as well. Latest memo doesnt admit that they introduced this to screw us. It happened consequentially due to delays, less funding allocation and other processing slack. (BTW, I think MI IV Leadership team did a wonderful job for the DL Issue.)
more...
house Building (right). Central
mantric
12-13 12:36 PM
Here's the percentages of the top 10 populations of the world by nationality. How many of them are more than 7% ?
China 20.0 %
India 17.2 %
United States 4.6 %
Indonesia 3.4 %
Brazil 2.8 %
Pakistan 2.6 %
Nigeria 2.5 %
Russia 2.2 %
Bangladesh 2.1 %
Japan 2.0 %
Based on this one can conclude that the 7% nationality rule is a veiled effort to limit Indian and Chinese immigrants specifically. Does this not amount to discrimination by nationality ? In addition we as legal immigrants are taxed without any representation. Taxation without representation was the reason the US was created in the first place.
US history is full of examples where discrimination existed in one form or another and these discriminations were sucessfully challenged. A few examples are women's voting rights, minority voting rights and gerrymandering. These are good examples to study where the affected people had no legal voice to begin with.
The civil rights movement is a recent example. There were existing laws that limited people from voting based on their literacy levels in the southern states. The literacy requirement for voting was really a thinly veiled attempt to limit voting rights of african americans for as long as possible. The civil rights movement was about changing these artificial laws to give voting rights to people who legally had no voice.
http://www.usdoj.gov/crt/voting/intro/intro_c.htm
You don't need to be a lawyer to speak up for your hardships as a law abiding resident. This country has tremendous protections for people living here which is what makes it great. We as an immigrant community need to build our awareness of US history and government if we expect things to change.
China 20.0 %
India 17.2 %
United States 4.6 %
Indonesia 3.4 %
Brazil 2.8 %
Pakistan 2.6 %
Nigeria 2.5 %
Russia 2.2 %
Bangladesh 2.1 %
Japan 2.0 %
Based on this one can conclude that the 7% nationality rule is a veiled effort to limit Indian and Chinese immigrants specifically. Does this not amount to discrimination by nationality ? In addition we as legal immigrants are taxed without any representation. Taxation without representation was the reason the US was created in the first place.
US history is full of examples where discrimination existed in one form or another and these discriminations were sucessfully challenged. A few examples are women's voting rights, minority voting rights and gerrymandering. These are good examples to study where the affected people had no legal voice to begin with.
The civil rights movement is a recent example. There were existing laws that limited people from voting based on their literacy levels in the southern states. The literacy requirement for voting was really a thinly veiled attempt to limit voting rights of african americans for as long as possible. The civil rights movement was about changing these artificial laws to give voting rights to people who legally had no voice.
http://www.usdoj.gov/crt/voting/intro/intro_c.htm
You don't need to be a lawyer to speak up for your hardships as a law abiding resident. This country has tremendous protections for people living here which is what makes it great. We as an immigrant community need to build our awareness of US history and government if we expect things to change.
tattoo The Chicago Tribune Tower,
spicy_guy
01-24 03:12 PM
I have been a silent reader of Murthy forum, and I have been observing JoeF's posts. He is NOT an anti-immigrant. He is just educating people about the law. That's what I see from his posts. He is knowledgeable enough to answer the questions of the forum readers.
Maybe his posts sound rude for the wounded and needy. But I think he isn't taking anything bad about immigration or prospective immigrants.
Anyways, thats not the topic of this thread and don't mean to detract.
Maybe his posts sound rude for the wounded and needy. But I think he isn't taking anything bad about immigration or prospective immigrants.
Anyways, thats not the topic of this thread and don't mean to detract.
more...
pictures NBC Tower - Chicago, IL - Art
rb_248
12-13 11:39 AM
Hello All,
First and foremost, i must thank everyone from IV, who is working tirelessly to resolve the issues of retrogression in the GC process. As an affected individual I am very grateful that leaders of IV are ready to contribute so much effort for its goals. And even though I do not actively work for the IV agenda, I have contributed money to some IV action items.
I have a question/suggestion regarding the IV agenda. On IV's about page, pt number 2 asserts amongst other things,
The Discriminatory Per-Country Rationing of Green Cards That Exacerbates the Delays.
and further in the same point
We do not allow employers to discriminate hiring based on their nationality or country of origin. Therefore, the employment-based immigration, which is a derivative benefit of employment, should also be free from rationing based on nationality or country of birth.
I am curious to know what is the "legal" strength of these assertions is. Are they just "moral" statements or can the validity of these statements be tested in the legal framework of this country? In other words, my question is what is the constitutionality of the "Per Country Caps" in Employment / Family Based Immrigration procedures.
A lot of Laws and Statutes have been challenged in the Judicial System of USA. And many more are challenged every year. And if the laws are not constitutional then they can be repealed.
I am sure the leaders of IV must have thought about this argument however a quick search of the forums with 'constitutionality' as the search term did not return any results.
IV's efforts to utilize Lobbying to bring about change to alleviate/eliminate retrogression are certainly beneficial. However, if IV has not already considered and eliminated this legal argument, then it should explore whether there is any substance to this approach.
Hence this post. Below are some of the links that might be relevant.
wikipedia article on constitutionality (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Constitutionality)
wikipedia category on US immigration case law (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:United_States_immigration_and_naturalizat ion_case_law)
thanks and sincerely,
--soljabhai
This is a good point. But, in its current state, will not fly. This can only be used as a supporting evidence for our cause. Lawmakers will never remove country cap. We can use this point in pushing any of our other agendas.
First and foremost, i must thank everyone from IV, who is working tirelessly to resolve the issues of retrogression in the GC process. As an affected individual I am very grateful that leaders of IV are ready to contribute so much effort for its goals. And even though I do not actively work for the IV agenda, I have contributed money to some IV action items.
I have a question/suggestion regarding the IV agenda. On IV's about page, pt number 2 asserts amongst other things,
The Discriminatory Per-Country Rationing of Green Cards That Exacerbates the Delays.
and further in the same point
We do not allow employers to discriminate hiring based on their nationality or country of origin. Therefore, the employment-based immigration, which is a derivative benefit of employment, should also be free from rationing based on nationality or country of birth.
I am curious to know what is the "legal" strength of these assertions is. Are they just "moral" statements or can the validity of these statements be tested in the legal framework of this country? In other words, my question is what is the constitutionality of the "Per Country Caps" in Employment / Family Based Immrigration procedures.
A lot of Laws and Statutes have been challenged in the Judicial System of USA. And many more are challenged every year. And if the laws are not constitutional then they can be repealed.
I am sure the leaders of IV must have thought about this argument however a quick search of the forums with 'constitutionality' as the search term did not return any results.
IV's efforts to utilize Lobbying to bring about change to alleviate/eliminate retrogression are certainly beneficial. However, if IV has not already considered and eliminated this legal argument, then it should explore whether there is any substance to this approach.
Hence this post. Below are some of the links that might be relevant.
wikipedia article on constitutionality (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Constitutionality)
wikipedia category on US immigration case law (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:United_States_immigration_and_naturalizat ion_case_law)
thanks and sincerely,
--soljabhai
This is a good point. But, in its current state, will not fly. This can only be used as a supporting evidence for our cause. Lawmakers will never remove country cap. We can use this point in pushing any of our other agendas.
dresses Home of the Chicago Tribune,
la6470
01-16 02:37 PM
The fact is , as I perceive it to be , is that when this country needed the IT consulting industry to boom (pre dot com and a few years thereafter) they allowed consulting companies to send their employers to the client site (I dont understand how else a consulting firm can operate). However now the situation is changed and as per some misguided folks in USCIS going after the h1b consulting companies will DRAMATICALLY improve the job market for locals here. However the truth is that it is not going to help the locals. With the introduction of cloud computing, widespread broadband penetration around the globe and the software as a service model - the services will simply shift to the most optimum location. You can allready see it happening - just go to elance.com or guru.com and you will see small (1-10) person companies based in India and Russia earning more than half a million USD per year. At the end of it - these are nothing but misguided efforts by a prehistoric government agency that is governed by archaic rules that are irrelevant in today's world.
more...
makeup The Chicago tribune building.
RattuRani
06-03 09:39 PM
Giving an interim GC while visa number is unavailable will have the effect of bypassing the entire GC quota system. How do you want the interim card to be different from the final thing? No way that anyone in Congress will allow for their laws to be overridden through USCIS rulemaking.
girlfriend Chicago Tribune BBQ Roadtrip:
BharatPremi
12-13 02:16 PM
The OP was whether the country quota is constitutional. My interest was to find out if the current laws and regulations are violated by the country quota.
As lazycis pointed out, SC seems to uphold the current situation.
I was not looking into arguing in a court whether a particular regulation is fair or not. The law is what it is (what I or you consider fair or unfair is immaterial), question was : Is the law being implemented or not? Seems like it is.
To change the law, we as IV are lobbying and meeting lawmakers already.
Unless a constitutional lawyer says otherwise, I see no reason to pursue the country quota in a court, considering lazycis post.
Yes. As long as it is established as "law" we can not pursue the solution in a court.
As lazycis pointed out, SC seems to uphold the current situation.
I was not looking into arguing in a court whether a particular regulation is fair or not. The law is what it is (what I or you consider fair or unfair is immaterial), question was : Is the law being implemented or not? Seems like it is.
To change the law, we as IV are lobbying and meeting lawmakers already.
Unless a constitutional lawyer says otherwise, I see no reason to pursue the country quota in a court, considering lazycis post.
Yes. As long as it is established as "law" we can not pursue the solution in a court.
hairstyles The Chicago Tribune Building
chanduv23
03-16 01:07 PM
Verify with another lawyer also, basically your experience starts only after you graduate (after getting your degree and not after finishing college ie say you completed ur degree in may 2000 and recieved your degree in Dec 2000, your experience prior to Dec 2000 may not count)
Do verify this with a good lawyer.
Do verify this with a good lawyer.
jetflyer
06-02 10:51 AM
ss benefits when we retire is such a long way away ..who knows what the situation will be that time
You are so right that ss may not be there when we need, so we should raise voice today and fight for ourselves. We pay 40-45% of our hard earned money in tax, SS, medicare, insurance, etc. and then pay another 30% in housing... what left for us ? 25%??? is that what we work for ? even if you have your own paidoff house govt. want house tax 1-3% of current value of your house every year... what the heck. all this when we even don't get fair share of job market?
we must raise voice for NO SS, Medicare for H1b/EAD exactly same way as they say in job positing NO H1b/EAD - ONLY US Citizen/Green Card nee to apply, then yes ONLY US Citizen/Green Card holder need to pay SS + Medicare.
You are so right that ss may not be there when we need, so we should raise voice today and fight for ourselves. We pay 40-45% of our hard earned money in tax, SS, medicare, insurance, etc. and then pay another 30% in housing... what left for us ? 25%??? is that what we work for ? even if you have your own paidoff house govt. want house tax 1-3% of current value of your house every year... what the heck. all this when we even don't get fair share of job market?
we must raise voice for NO SS, Medicare for H1b/EAD exactly same way as they say in job positing NO H1b/EAD - ONLY US Citizen/Green Card nee to apply, then yes ONLY US Citizen/Green Card holder need to pay SS + Medicare.
Marphad
06-08 11:08 AM
employment based is just one part of the immigration thing. If you think EB immigration is important - there will be thousands of opinions from people who will say why other immigration is also important.
Actually as per government's official point of view, EB comes on second priority than FB. Family union always comes on first priority.
Actually as per government's official point of view, EB comes on second priority than FB. Family union always comes on first priority.
