waitin_toolong
06-24 12:13 PM
same would go for a child born this year
.jpg "emo quotes about life")
GCBy3000
07-06 02:06 PM
No one will be on our side other than ourselves. Why should others(US business, political, people) should be behind our goals. They do not have much to gain from it. Our voice will be heard, but will not be considered unless the so called others have some facts and figures. Those facts and figures should make them feel that their counrty would lose to competetors in near future. It will take time.
Get support from whom? The same corporations that want to outsource jobs to low cost countries AND also lobby for H1B increase, again to keep wages low and all this to increase their bottom line. We need to re think our strategy and get it straight as to who is on our side and who is not.
Get support from whom? The same corporations that want to outsource jobs to low cost countries AND also lobby for H1B increase, again to keep wages low and all this to increase their bottom line. We need to re think our strategy and get it straight as to who is on our side and who is not.
GCard_Dream
03-21 11:16 AM
Great post. Couldn't agree with you more.
The more I read this form, the more I become disgruntled with this community! To say that someone from a lower class of visa and not from an "Oversubscribed country" (and I am assuming you mean India) is less skilled and less deserving than someone from a higher class and oversubscribed country is ludicrous to say the least. Each and everyone of us (and I mean "legal immigrants") have our own skill sets and contribute equally to the American society. As long as we are competent at what we do, then we are all SKILLED in our own way. The only real defining difference among the visa classes is the level of education not skill. To suggest one is better based on education alone is arrogance and nothing else!
The U.S. immigration system is not without its flaws and despite the delays and frustrations, it is FAIR! The per country limit is to ensure that citizens of ALL nations have an equal opportunity to immigrate to the U.S. and not just a select few. The only thing that I have found unfair as far as immigration in this country is concerned is the politicians focused efforts to do something for the "illegal" immigrants at the expense of the "legal" immigrants.
We are all in this together and the insults and innuendos that dominate this forum divide us so let's stop them and focus on the real issues!
The more I read this form, the more I become disgruntled with this community! To say that someone from a lower class of visa and not from an "Oversubscribed country" (and I am assuming you mean India) is less skilled and less deserving than someone from a higher class and oversubscribed country is ludicrous to say the least. Each and everyone of us (and I mean "legal immigrants") have our own skill sets and contribute equally to the American society. As long as we are competent at what we do, then we are all SKILLED in our own way. The only real defining difference among the visa classes is the level of education not skill. To suggest one is better based on education alone is arrogance and nothing else!
The U.S. immigration system is not without its flaws and despite the delays and frustrations, it is FAIR! The per country limit is to ensure that citizens of ALL nations have an equal opportunity to immigrate to the U.S. and not just a select few. The only thing that I have found unfair as far as immigration in this country is concerned is the politicians focused efforts to do something for the "illegal" immigrants at the expense of the "legal" immigrants.
We are all in this together and the insults and innuendos that dominate this forum divide us so let's stop them and focus on the real issues!
va_labor2002
07-06 02:32 PM
Please send your immigration problems and bad experiences to Douglas Montero, New York Post Reporter. He has published article on immigration matters earlier. He may listen to legal immigration issues.
Douglas Montero's email Id : douglas.montero@nypost.com
Douglas Montero's email Id : douglas.montero@nypost.com
more...
PlainSpeak
03-29 08:05 AM
Please Donate to IV Advocacy or participate in the Advocacy in person. This is for your own benefit and you are working for your own green card
Garv Se Bolo Legal Immigrant
Garv Se Bolo Regular (Not Highly) educated Skilled applicant for GC
Garv Se Bolo EB3 I
Garv Se Bolo Legal Immigrant
Garv Se Bolo Regular (Not Highly) educated Skilled applicant for GC
Garv Se Bolo EB3 I
starscream
06-19 03:14 PM
CIR is to be read in the Senate Calendar tomorrow as S 1639
Bill text:
http://www.heritage.org/Research/Immigration/2007legislation_2.cfm
Bill text:
http://www.heritage.org/Research/Immigration/2007legislation_2.cfm
more...
LONGGCQUE
05-21 04:25 PM
Fellow IV'ians,
Its time to double your contributions/efforts to IV, lets appreciate Sugaur's generosity. Make contributions for our own future.
Good luck
Its time to double your contributions/efforts to IV, lets appreciate Sugaur's generosity. Make contributions for our own future.
Good luck
GreenGrass
09-21 09:26 PM
I second that. Ranga, from NJ had an idea about making a documentary to project the whole issue
Can we form a Human Chain protest across the major cities of the country at a predefined date and time. for instance, say Nov 9th between 11.AM and 1 PM.
This way more local people, across the country, can participate and as the timing is around lunch hours, I presume many of us can get back to work within the two hour duration.
May be this decentralized & concerted effort in all major cities/states across the country at a specified time may gather main stream media attention.
This is just a thought...
-iOptimist
Can we form a Human Chain protest across the major cities of the country at a predefined date and time. for instance, say Nov 9th between 11.AM and 1 PM.
This way more local people, across the country, can participate and as the timing is around lunch hours, I presume many of us can get back to work within the two hour duration.
May be this decentralized & concerted effort in all major cities/states across the country at a specified time may gather main stream media attention.
This is just a thought...
-iOptimist
more...
cagedcactus
10-11 07:10 AM
We definitely should put down reminders in our cellphones.... We will keep this thread up and running so everyone can refresh the details....
After the first meeting we will open a new thread for next meeting place and agenda....
After the first meeting we will open a new thread for next meeting place and agenda....
Pineapple
04-29 06:51 PM
Small correction. I have contributed $ 200, not $ 100 for the latest effort (Paypal transaction ID 00M756271K0810455). So PA's contribution is at least 200. :)
Thank You to IV members who are contributing:
gconmymind-51, snathan-50, smanikandan-100, ahasan-100, MunnaBhai-100, vineet-100, rameshk75-50, mariusp-35, gcfordesi-50, belmontboy-100, Houstonguy-200, vikasw-50, kshitijnt-100, pune_guy-100, walking_dude-100, prasha98-100, ivvm-50, manojp4-100, Pineapple-100, sammyb-50, ca_gc-100, santb1975-100, nav_saini-100, gcpadmavyuh-100, pcs-100, akbose-100, eastwest-50, ubetman-100, pmurgai-100, deba-100, 5-Jun-100, wa_Saiprasad-100, chaukas-100, arunmohan-50, jimytomy-100, aspiration-50, prshah102-100, czar_the_king-100, maverick6993-100, eb3_nepa-100, kumar_77-50, Alien-100, nagio-100, vin13-100, manja-100, loti_GC-50, sonaliak-100, mdmd10-100, surabhi-100, m306m-100, malaGCPahije-100, patbose-50, clif-100, goel_ar-50, djit71-100, Jitamitra-100, rajtp-100, espoir-50, rp0lol-100, kicca-50, rajmalhotra-100, anuraj1234-100, yetanotherguyinline-100, MI member 1-100, MI member 2-100, NolaIndian32-50, poreddyp-100, Karthikthiru-100, pshah-100, tapukakababa-100, h1techSlave-100, uffyegc-100, rameshk75-50, Nagireddi-100, srinivas_o-100, nc14-50, aa2aa-100, add78-100, jbr-100, jayleno-100, naidu2543-50, vansvenkat-100
Statewise:
ca--1401
tx--1050
mi--650
nj--450
va--400
fl--335
il--300
wa--300
ny--200
al--200
ma--200
co--200
az--150
oh--150
mo--150
sd--100
sc--100
pa--100
mn--100
ky--100
in--100
ga--100
wi--100
md--100
nc--50
delaware--50
la--50
tn--50
Thank You to IV members who are contributing:
gconmymind-51, snathan-50, smanikandan-100, ahasan-100, MunnaBhai-100, vineet-100, rameshk75-50, mariusp-35, gcfordesi-50, belmontboy-100, Houstonguy-200, vikasw-50, kshitijnt-100, pune_guy-100, walking_dude-100, prasha98-100, ivvm-50, manojp4-100, Pineapple-100, sammyb-50, ca_gc-100, santb1975-100, nav_saini-100, gcpadmavyuh-100, pcs-100, akbose-100, eastwest-50, ubetman-100, pmurgai-100, deba-100, 5-Jun-100, wa_Saiprasad-100, chaukas-100, arunmohan-50, jimytomy-100, aspiration-50, prshah102-100, czar_the_king-100, maverick6993-100, eb3_nepa-100, kumar_77-50, Alien-100, nagio-100, vin13-100, manja-100, loti_GC-50, sonaliak-100, mdmd10-100, surabhi-100, m306m-100, malaGCPahije-100, patbose-50, clif-100, goel_ar-50, djit71-100, Jitamitra-100, rajtp-100, espoir-50, rp0lol-100, kicca-50, rajmalhotra-100, anuraj1234-100, yetanotherguyinline-100, MI member 1-100, MI member 2-100, NolaIndian32-50, poreddyp-100, Karthikthiru-100, pshah-100, tapukakababa-100, h1techSlave-100, uffyegc-100, rameshk75-50, Nagireddi-100, srinivas_o-100, nc14-50, aa2aa-100, add78-100, jbr-100, jayleno-100, naidu2543-50, vansvenkat-100
Statewise:
ca--1401
tx--1050
mi--650
nj--450
va--400
fl--335
il--300
wa--300
ny--200
al--200
ma--200
co--200
az--150
oh--150
mo--150
sd--100
sc--100
pa--100
mn--100
ky--100
in--100
ga--100
wi--100
md--100
nc--50
delaware--50
la--50
tn--50
more...
prince_charming
09-17 09:06 PM
Exactly the point that leads me to believe this:
ARE THEY SENDING EVERYTHING TO THE OLD LAWYER???
If they never updated the lawyer info....(AC21 papers being lost is not unusual at all, it happens commonly, as there is no set form for it, mail room does not know what to do with it and so it gets misplaced). However, even if they did not have AC21 info, they would have sent an RFE or at least NOID. All these could be LOST if they went to OLD attorney.
So Infopass is a good idea. To at least get this info and also to get the actual denial notice which may have to to the old attorney as well (to see on what grounds they denied it so you can file MTR accordingly).
Of course, a good attorney is a must.
All in all, I think, it should be ok at the end of the day (just a painful waiting period full of uncertainty) unless they revoked it based on some misrepresentation.
Good Luck.
I tried to get the denial reason but InfoPass doesn't seem to have that information or doesn't wanted to provide me because it;s denied on 12th they wanted me to wait for 2-3 days more for denial notice.
ARE THEY SENDING EVERYTHING TO THE OLD LAWYER???
If they never updated the lawyer info....(AC21 papers being lost is not unusual at all, it happens commonly, as there is no set form for it, mail room does not know what to do with it and so it gets misplaced). However, even if they did not have AC21 info, they would have sent an RFE or at least NOID. All these could be LOST if they went to OLD attorney.
So Infopass is a good idea. To at least get this info and also to get the actual denial notice which may have to to the old attorney as well (to see on what grounds they denied it so you can file MTR accordingly).
Of course, a good attorney is a must.
All in all, I think, it should be ok at the end of the day (just a painful waiting period full of uncertainty) unless they revoked it based on some misrepresentation.
Good Luck.
I tried to get the denial reason but InfoPass doesn't seem to have that information or doesn't wanted to provide me because it;s denied on 12th they wanted me to wait for 2-3 days more for denial notice.
chanduv23
09-22 10:01 AM
I did not go to DC because i did not want to get the green card this way.I grew upwatching aunts,uncles coming from USA bearing gifts.I grew up watching cousins go for USA for higher studies.It used to be so special. Now its become so cheap. Now you guys have literally taken it to the streets. There's no difference between those illegal immigrants and us. This H1visa has ruined it for really smart students who come here on F1 with full scholarship.
This software industry and these cheap bodyshopping companies made it nothing more than a whore business.
My heart is broken. I dont care anymore.thats why i did not come to DC.
SELF PRIDE
This software industry and these cheap bodyshopping companies made it nothing more than a whore business.
My heart is broken. I dont care anymore.thats why i did not come to DC.
SELF PRIDE
more...
amitjoey
05-21 04:06 PM
I am new to this and I sent email couple of times and called certain people in IV list.
Most of the responses from the senator/congress members or even conversation refers undocumented immigrants, safe/secure borders etc.
What is missing in representing the EB community different to illegal immigrants ?
Yes, you are absolutely right!
We do not get any attention, because we do not raise our issues and we are not vocal about the problems we face. Now granted, we are a small minority compared to the huge lobby and muscle power the undocumented have. But we need to educate the lawmakers about us. We face real issues and our lives have been held in limbo. We have done everything right, played by the rules, stood in the line, pay taxes, contribute to the society. To get this message across, we need to visit lawmakers offices,and educate them. That is exactly why we have the phone campaign, that is why we have this email campaign.
This advocacy and raising awareness is an ongoing effort, it cannot be a one day or one month thing. We will not get anywhere overnight, perceptions have to change, there is a whole lot of dynamics at play. The timing, legislative calender and politics in general. But we as a group need to stand up, talk about the issues we face and have our voices heard.
That is why - we have the DC Advocacy event - Where members will do presentations with legislative offices,educate them, then there is a media event also planned. This is all to raise awareness.
Most of the responses from the senator/congress members or even conversation refers undocumented immigrants, safe/secure borders etc.
What is missing in representing the EB community different to illegal immigrants ?
Yes, you are absolutely right!
We do not get any attention, because we do not raise our issues and we are not vocal about the problems we face. Now granted, we are a small minority compared to the huge lobby and muscle power the undocumented have. But we need to educate the lawmakers about us. We face real issues and our lives have been held in limbo. We have done everything right, played by the rules, stood in the line, pay taxes, contribute to the society. To get this message across, we need to visit lawmakers offices,and educate them. That is exactly why we have the phone campaign, that is why we have this email campaign.
This advocacy and raising awareness is an ongoing effort, it cannot be a one day or one month thing. We will not get anywhere overnight, perceptions have to change, there is a whole lot of dynamics at play. The timing, legislative calender and politics in general. But we as a group need to stand up, talk about the issues we face and have our voices heard.
That is why - we have the DC Advocacy event - Where members will do presentations with legislative offices,educate them, then there is a media event also planned. This is all to raise awareness.
raju123
07-03 03:31 PM
Don't waste time by calling National Call service center. They all are dumb !! They don't know anything. They just read the on line status of our case, which 8 year kid can do.
According to the first guy I talked to, one has already been assigned upon the start of processing of the case.
I just called again and the lady was completely clueless about the whole July 2 fiasco. I will try again in another hour and hopefully I won't get the village idiot again.
For anyone interested in calling themselves here is the info: 1-800-375-5283 options 1, 2, 3 (and possibly 6 after that-I can't remember).
According to the first guy I talked to, one has already been assigned upon the start of processing of the case.
I just called again and the lady was completely clueless about the whole July 2 fiasco. I will try again in another hour and hopefully I won't get the village idiot again.
For anyone interested in calling themselves here is the info: 1-800-375-5283 options 1, 2, 3 (and possibly 6 after that-I can't remember).
more...
needhelp!
03-06 05:16 PM
Section 6: Time Limits for Agencies to Act on Requests Section 6 of the Open Government Act has two provisions that address time limits for complying with FOIA requests, and the consequences of failing to do so. Significantly, this section does not take effect until one year after the date of enactment and will apply to FOIA requests �filed on or after that effective date.� Accordingly, agencies have until December 31, 2008 to take any necessary steps to prepare for the implementation of this Section.
First, section 6(a) of the Open Government Act amends 5 U.S.C. � 552(a)(6)(A) which gives the statutory time period for processing FOIA requests, and includes criteria for when that time period begins to run and when that time period may be suspended or �tolled.� Specifically, section 6(a) provides that the statutory time period commences �on the date on which the request is first received by the appropriate component of the agency, but in any event not later than ten days after the request is first received by any component of the agency that is designated in the agency�s regulations under this section to receive requests.� This provision addresses the situation where a FOIA request is received by a component of an agency that is designated to receive FOIA requests, but is not the proper component for the request at issue. In such a situation, the component that receives the request in error � provided it is a component of the agency that is designated by the agency�s regulations to receive requests � has ten working days within which to forward the FOIA request to the appropriate agency component for processing. Once the FOIA request has been forwarded and received by the appropriate agency component � which must take place within ten working days � the statutory time period to respond to the request commences.
Section 6(a) further provides for those circumstances when an agency may toll the statutory time period. Specifically, an agency �may make one request to the requester for information and toll� the statutory time period �while it is awaiting such information that it has reasonably requested from the requester.� The agency may also toll the time period �if necessary to clarify with the requester issues regarding fee assessment.� There is no limit given for the number of times an agency may go back to a requester to clarify issues regarding fee assessments � which sometimes may need to be done in stages as the records are being located and processed. In both situations, section 6(a) specifies that the requester�s response to the agency�s request �ends the tolling period.�
Second, section 6(b) addresses compliance with the FOIA�s time limits by amending 5 U.S.C. � 552(a)(4)(A), the provision addressing fees. Section 6(b) adds a clause to that provision providing that �[a]n agency shall not assess search fees (or in the case of a [favored] requester [i.e., one who qualifies as an educational or noncommercial scientific institution, or as a representative of the news media] duplication fees) . . . if the agency fails to comply with any time limit under paragraph (6), if no unusual or exceptional circumstances (as those terms are defined for purposes of (6)(B) and (C), respectively) apply to the processing of the request.�
As noted in the language of the new provision, the terms �unusual circumstances� and �exceptional circumstances� are existing terms in the FOIA. �Unusual circumstances� occur when there is a need to search or collect records from field offices, or other establishments; when there is a need to search for and examine a voluminous amount of records; or when there is a need for consultation with another agency or with more than two components within the same agency. Unlike �unusual circumstances,� �exceptional circumstances� are not affirmatively defined in the FOIA, but the FOIA does provide that �exceptional circumstances� cannot include �a delay that results from a predictable agency workload of requests . . . unless the agency demonstrates reasonable progress in reducing its backlog of pending requests.� 5 U.S.C. � 552(a)(6)(C)(ii). In addition, the statute provides that the �[r]efusal by a person to reasonably modify the scope of a request, or arrange an alternative time frame for processing the request . . . shall be considered as a factor in determining whether exceptional circumstances exist.� Id. at � 552(a)(6)(C)(iii).
Section 6(b) therefore precludes an agency from assessing search fees (or in the case of �favored� requesters, duplication fees), if the agency fails to comply with the FOIA�s time limits, unless �unusual� or �exceptional� circumstances �apply to the processing of the request.�
Finally, section 6(b) amends 5 U.S.C. � 552(a)(6)(B)(ii), which discusses notification to requesters regarding the time limits and the option of arranging an alternative time frame for processing, by directing agencies �[t]o aid the requester� by making �available its FOIA Public Liaison, who shall assist in the resolution of any disputes between the requester and the agency.� This provision incorporates an existing aspect of Executive Order 13,392.
The Department of Justice will be providing guidance to agencies in the near future on section 6.
First, section 6(a) of the Open Government Act amends 5 U.S.C. � 552(a)(6)(A) which gives the statutory time period for processing FOIA requests, and includes criteria for when that time period begins to run and when that time period may be suspended or �tolled.� Specifically, section 6(a) provides that the statutory time period commences �on the date on which the request is first received by the appropriate component of the agency, but in any event not later than ten days after the request is first received by any component of the agency that is designated in the agency�s regulations under this section to receive requests.� This provision addresses the situation where a FOIA request is received by a component of an agency that is designated to receive FOIA requests, but is not the proper component for the request at issue. In such a situation, the component that receives the request in error � provided it is a component of the agency that is designated by the agency�s regulations to receive requests � has ten working days within which to forward the FOIA request to the appropriate agency component for processing. Once the FOIA request has been forwarded and received by the appropriate agency component � which must take place within ten working days � the statutory time period to respond to the request commences.
Section 6(a) further provides for those circumstances when an agency may toll the statutory time period. Specifically, an agency �may make one request to the requester for information and toll� the statutory time period �while it is awaiting such information that it has reasonably requested from the requester.� The agency may also toll the time period �if necessary to clarify with the requester issues regarding fee assessment.� There is no limit given for the number of times an agency may go back to a requester to clarify issues regarding fee assessments � which sometimes may need to be done in stages as the records are being located and processed. In both situations, section 6(a) specifies that the requester�s response to the agency�s request �ends the tolling period.�
Second, section 6(b) addresses compliance with the FOIA�s time limits by amending 5 U.S.C. � 552(a)(4)(A), the provision addressing fees. Section 6(b) adds a clause to that provision providing that �[a]n agency shall not assess search fees (or in the case of a [favored] requester [i.e., one who qualifies as an educational or noncommercial scientific institution, or as a representative of the news media] duplication fees) . . . if the agency fails to comply with any time limit under paragraph (6), if no unusual or exceptional circumstances (as those terms are defined for purposes of (6)(B) and (C), respectively) apply to the processing of the request.�
As noted in the language of the new provision, the terms �unusual circumstances� and �exceptional circumstances� are existing terms in the FOIA. �Unusual circumstances� occur when there is a need to search or collect records from field offices, or other establishments; when there is a need to search for and examine a voluminous amount of records; or when there is a need for consultation with another agency or with more than two components within the same agency. Unlike �unusual circumstances,� �exceptional circumstances� are not affirmatively defined in the FOIA, but the FOIA does provide that �exceptional circumstances� cannot include �a delay that results from a predictable agency workload of requests . . . unless the agency demonstrates reasonable progress in reducing its backlog of pending requests.� 5 U.S.C. � 552(a)(6)(C)(ii). In addition, the statute provides that the �[r]efusal by a person to reasonably modify the scope of a request, or arrange an alternative time frame for processing the request . . . shall be considered as a factor in determining whether exceptional circumstances exist.� Id. at � 552(a)(6)(C)(iii).
Section 6(b) therefore precludes an agency from assessing search fees (or in the case of �favored� requesters, duplication fees), if the agency fails to comply with the FOIA�s time limits, unless �unusual� or �exceptional� circumstances �apply to the processing of the request.�
Finally, section 6(b) amends 5 U.S.C. � 552(a)(6)(B)(ii), which discusses notification to requesters regarding the time limits and the option of arranging an alternative time frame for processing, by directing agencies �[t]o aid the requester� by making �available its FOIA Public Liaison, who shall assist in the resolution of any disputes between the requester and the agency.� This provision incorporates an existing aspect of Executive Order 13,392.
The Department of Justice will be providing guidance to agencies in the near future on section 6.
.jpg "love quotes and icons. love")
johnggberg
06-13 10:06 PM
finally, we have something, but we still need to continue the fight
more...
GCard_Dream
03-20 06:35 PM
We are not talking about what's beneficial to the United States. What we are discussing is what the law says. It doesn't matter if it is beneficial to the United States or not, if it is the law of the land then everyone has to abide by it; even the government. I think everyone has a different opinion on what's beneficial for this country. If you talk to the people at numbersusa.com, they will say that H1B program and employment based immigration is the worst thing that happened to this country and should be stopped right at this moment yet we think that this is the best thing for this country. Go figure.
By the way, you seem to suggest that everyone in ROW is unskilled professional. Nothing can be further from the truth. I don't know where you get your facts from but it sounds like you certainly need some help on that front.
It does make sense that the overflow numbers are given to higher preference categories in single state oversubscribed countries. When you think about it, will that not be the most beneficial to United States? Who would you prefer .... and Unskilled professional from a ROW category or a skilled worker from an Oversubscribed country. I would gather it would make more sense to give the opportunity to the higher skilled since the benefit to US will be higher
By the way, you seem to suggest that everyone in ROW is unskilled professional. Nothing can be further from the truth. I don't know where you get your facts from but it sounds like you certainly need some help on that front.
It does make sense that the overflow numbers are given to higher preference categories in single state oversubscribed countries. When you think about it, will that not be the most beneficial to United States? Who would you prefer .... and Unskilled professional from a ROW category or a skilled worker from an Oversubscribed country. I would gather it would make more sense to give the opportunity to the higher skilled since the benefit to US will be higher
wanna_immigrate
05-19 02:56 PM
done ... and received response as well
immigrationmatters30
02-14 10:49 AM
I have six other guys who are in US for over 7 years who are also intrested in this admin(hopefully) fix . Please let us know what we can do? They just signed up@ immigrationvoice.org.
swamy
10-04 01:17 PM
any where in metro detroit is fine with me
gg_ny
07-01 07:20 AM
I am really concerned. Employers will lobby for increase in H1-B.
Well, at least most of them. If it comes to either H1-B or GC, they will obviously opt for H1-B increase.
So, if in the last minute, only H1-B is increased and not GC (Anything can happen behind closed doors negotiations) we will have more H1-B with the GC dream and suffering like us.
I think our Web fax should categorically state that we support Only GC related provisions in the skill bill. Else, at least, I plan not to sign the petition.
We don’t want to be supporting a cause outside of ours that will eventually indirectly
affect us. It will also affect many starry eyed new H1-Bs chasing their ever elusive GC dream. Haven’t we all had enough.
Does IV has any role in this step?
It would be difficult in the current situation to have a resolution of EB retrogression issue without putting it along with either H1visa (lobbied by industries) or CIR-like (lobbied by pro immigrationists and agreeable to majority of senators). I think this is as good as it could get. The other alternative would be to add clauses or amendments to existing 'guiding laws' of immigration by Congress which is a far cry. Looking at the language and treatment in past 4 or 5 versions of immigration bills since last fall, I have seen that H1 always get clubbed together with EB visa numbers and so it would help to wait and see how this bill evolves thru the legislative processes. Can this bill come under the lobbying prowess of IV to make sure EB specific clauses are not diluted?
BTW, what happens to those holding foreign PhDs or equivalent degree/training in specialized areas (apologies if this question had been answered before)?
Well, at least most of them. If it comes to either H1-B or GC, they will obviously opt for H1-B increase.
So, if in the last minute, only H1-B is increased and not GC (Anything can happen behind closed doors negotiations) we will have more H1-B with the GC dream and suffering like us.
I think our Web fax should categorically state that we support Only GC related provisions in the skill bill. Else, at least, I plan not to sign the petition.
We don’t want to be supporting a cause outside of ours that will eventually indirectly
affect us. It will also affect many starry eyed new H1-Bs chasing their ever elusive GC dream. Haven’t we all had enough.
Does IV has any role in this step?
It would be difficult in the current situation to have a resolution of EB retrogression issue without putting it along with either H1visa (lobbied by industries) or CIR-like (lobbied by pro immigrationists and agreeable to majority of senators). I think this is as good as it could get. The other alternative would be to add clauses or amendments to existing 'guiding laws' of immigration by Congress which is a far cry. Looking at the language and treatment in past 4 or 5 versions of immigration bills since last fall, I have seen that H1 always get clubbed together with EB visa numbers and so it would help to wait and see how this bill evolves thru the legislative processes. Can this bill come under the lobbying prowess of IV to make sure EB specific clauses are not diluted?
BTW, what happens to those holding foreign PhDs or equivalent degree/training in specialized areas (apologies if this question had been answered before)?
No comments:
Post a Comment