eastindia
09-23 10:58 AM
It’s not India or China who asked for globalization. It was America who wants to sell their products throughout the world.
No matter how many bills these Senators may make they are not going to stop outsourcing.
America didn’t develop because of protectionist policies, it grow because it was a free market.
In today's world it is simply not possible to stop outsourcing. It is also not possible to stop all illegal immigration or send all legal/illegal immigrats out. Anti-immigrants are very few in number and they try to project as if the entire America wants what they want. They will still go and buy a Toyota and buy stuff Made in China from the store :) Ask them if they want double for their grocery every week if we deport all undocumented and their answer will definitely be a NO.
No matter how many bills these Senators may make they are not going to stop outsourcing.
America didn’t develop because of protectionist policies, it grow because it was a free market.
In today's world it is simply not possible to stop outsourcing. It is also not possible to stop all illegal immigration or send all legal/illegal immigrats out. Anti-immigrants are very few in number and they try to project as if the entire America wants what they want. They will still go and buy a Toyota and buy stuff Made in China from the store :) Ask them if they want double for their grocery every week if we deport all undocumented and their answer will definitely be a NO.
wallpaper Wisin y Yandel Estoy Enamorado
wandmaker
02-18 07:01 PM
Child born abroad to Lawful Permanent Resident (LPR) may be boarded if child was born during the temporary visit abroad of a mother who is a lawful permanent resident alien, or a national, of the United States, provided that the child's application for admission to the United States is made within 2 years of birth and the child is accompanied by the parent who is applying for readmission as a permanent resident upon the first return of the parent.
Link for the document (http://www.cbp.gov/linkhandler/cgov/travel/inspections_carriers_facilities/carrier_info_guide/carrier_info_guide.ctt/carrier_info_guide.pdf)
_______________________
Not a legal advice.
US citizen of Indian origin
Kudos to desi3933!
rajesh1972 - You should ask your wife to consider giving birth child in US land, who knows your baby may be a next president.
Link for the document (http://www.cbp.gov/linkhandler/cgov/travel/inspections_carriers_facilities/carrier_info_guide/carrier_info_guide.ctt/carrier_info_guide.pdf)
_______________________
Not a legal advice.
US citizen of Indian origin
Kudos to desi3933!
rajesh1972 - You should ask your wife to consider giving birth child in US land, who knows your baby may be a next president.
FrankZulu
08-12 04:26 PM
As my priority date is current I contacted my local congressman's office for help with my I-485. NSC replied back to the office (see reply below) saying my background checks are still on. But the officer at the infopass appointment said my backgrounds checks are complete. I don't know whom to believe.
Is this some kind of standard reply that USCIS is giving for Congressman's or Senators case status inquiry?
Good morning XXXXXXXXXXX,
Re: I-485s <Applicant Name>
I have conversed with those in charge of these cases.
The United States Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) is
committed to adjudicating immigration benefits in a timely, efficient
manner that ensures public safety and national security.
Toward that end, USCIS requires extensive background checks for every
application or petition it adjudicates. While background checks for
most applications or petitions are completed quickly, a small percentage
of cases involve unresolved background check issues that result in
adjudication delays.
Background checks involve more than just the initial submission of and
response related to biographical information and fingerprints. When
checks and/or a review of an administrative record reveal an issue
potentially impacting an applicant's eligibility for the requested
immigration benefit, further inquiry is needed. The inquiry may include
an additional interview and/or the need to contact another agency for
updates or more comprehensive information. If it is determined that an
outside agency possesses relevant information about a case, USCIS
requests such information for review. Upon gathering and assessing all
available information, USCIS then adjudicates the application as
expeditiously as possible.
We have checked into your constituent's case and have been assured that
the agency is aware of your inquiry, and is monitoring progress related
to it. However, unresolved issues in your constituent's case require
thorough review before a decision can be rendered. Unfortunately, we
cannot speculate as to when this review process will be completed.
We realize that your constituent may feel frustrated by delays related
to his or her case. As an agency, we must weigh individual
inconvenience against the broader concerns of public safety and national
security.
We hope this information and assurance are helpful. If we may be of
assistance in the future, please let us know.
I hope this information is helpful to you. At this time I am closing the
inquiry on this matter.
Thank you,
<Officer Name>
Immigration Services Officer
NSC Congressional Unit
I have tried multiple sources and following is the response:
* SR (july 19th): No response Yet
* IO Inquiry (2nd Level, multiple times): You are pre-adjudicated. Officer will review/in review.
* Congressmen: I am in the queue to be processed (File will be picked through electronic sweep :confused:).
* Senator: Background check being conducted. (No written response yet, just was updated on phone by the senators office).
* InfoPass (3 months back): Your application is pre-adju. and will be approved once visa is available.
To all who have experienced something similar, how can I confirm if my application is really going through background check??? Or should I give it more time?
Is this some kind of standard reply that USCIS is giving for Congressman's or Senators case status inquiry?
Good morning XXXXXXXXXXX,
Re: I-485s <Applicant Name>
I have conversed with those in charge of these cases.
The United States Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) is
committed to adjudicating immigration benefits in a timely, efficient
manner that ensures public safety and national security.
Toward that end, USCIS requires extensive background checks for every
application or petition it adjudicates. While background checks for
most applications or petitions are completed quickly, a small percentage
of cases involve unresolved background check issues that result in
adjudication delays.
Background checks involve more than just the initial submission of and
response related to biographical information and fingerprints. When
checks and/or a review of an administrative record reveal an issue
potentially impacting an applicant's eligibility for the requested
immigration benefit, further inquiry is needed. The inquiry may include
an additional interview and/or the need to contact another agency for
updates or more comprehensive information. If it is determined that an
outside agency possesses relevant information about a case, USCIS
requests such information for review. Upon gathering and assessing all
available information, USCIS then adjudicates the application as
expeditiously as possible.
We have checked into your constituent's case and have been assured that
the agency is aware of your inquiry, and is monitoring progress related
to it. However, unresolved issues in your constituent's case require
thorough review before a decision can be rendered. Unfortunately, we
cannot speculate as to when this review process will be completed.
We realize that your constituent may feel frustrated by delays related
to his or her case. As an agency, we must weigh individual
inconvenience against the broader concerns of public safety and national
security.
We hope this information and assurance are helpful. If we may be of
assistance in the future, please let us know.
I hope this information is helpful to you. At this time I am closing the
inquiry on this matter.
Thank you,
<Officer Name>
Immigration Services Officer
NSC Congressional Unit
I have tried multiple sources and following is the response:
* SR (july 19th): No response Yet
* IO Inquiry (2nd Level, multiple times): You are pre-adjudicated. Officer will review/in review.
* Congressmen: I am in the queue to be processed (File will be picked through electronic sweep :confused:).
* Senator: Background check being conducted. (No written response yet, just was updated on phone by the senators office).
* InfoPass (3 months back): Your application is pre-adju. and will be approved once visa is available.
To all who have experienced something similar, how can I confirm if my application is really going through background check??? Or should I give it more time?
2011 Wisin Y Yandel - Estoy
imneedy
02-04 10:33 AM
Does it make sense to change status to h4 from f1 before my spouse goes out of country and come back on h4 instead of AP?
more...
swapnajay
10-09 01:08 PM
Sorry to scare you in my previous reply....I did not read your question properly....
Since you are from a Non-Retrogressed Country, you may be eligible to apply for AOS. As you mentioned, you may apply I-140, I-485, I-131, and I-765 all together without any hassle. Make sure your attorney files all your applications with the right fee, since the fee structure has changed recently.
Sorry about my previous post though...
Good Luck!!
Since you are from a Non-Retrogressed Country, you may be eligible to apply for AOS. As you mentioned, you may apply I-140, I-485, I-131, and I-765 all together without any hassle. Make sure your attorney files all your applications with the right fee, since the fee structure has changed recently.
Sorry about my previous post though...
Good Luck!!
vejella
08-01 01:40 PM
I have seen many cases where the GC is given to primary applicant and none of his /her benificiaries got GC and otherwise , even though their name checks are cleared.
My Guess is for x number of GCs processed during last week of june, most of the 2008 quota is consumed by their benificiaries just to clean up the mess.
For the retrogressed countries /categories with thighter quota restrictions , i would not be too much hopefull for atleast couple of years.
Just MY 2Cents
My Guess is for x number of GCs processed during last week of june, most of the 2008 quota is consumed by their benificiaries just to clean up the mess.
For the retrogressed countries /categories with thighter quota restrictions , i would not be too much hopefull for atleast couple of years.
Just MY 2Cents
more...
chi_shark
07-24 03:49 PM
so, we are not out of the woods yet? its just that they (USCIS) can now say that they have gone through x number of apps... i wish they clarified this really well...
but thanks for answering the really important question!
Sanjay:
Most likely you will not have to do anything further and your application will be approved when the Visa Bulletin reaches your priority date. However it will depend on how long it is before that date is reached. you may have to be fingerprinted again, as the fingerprint checks are only valid for 18 months. Also, if the wait is long enough, USCIS may want you to go for another interview to make sure you are still eligible.
but thanks for answering the really important question!
Sanjay:
Most likely you will not have to do anything further and your application will be approved when the Visa Bulletin reaches your priority date. However it will depend on how long it is before that date is reached. you may have to be fingerprinted again, as the fingerprint checks are only valid for 18 months. Also, if the wait is long enough, USCIS may want you to go for another interview to make sure you are still eligible.
2010 wisin y yandel estoy enamorado. Wisin Yandel estoy enamorado
desi3933
07-20 04:29 PM
My H1 is expiring in Oct 2008 and my employer did not allow me to apply for EAD.
As for your questions, If you don't have a valid H1 and no EAD, you are out of status. That can have an adverse effect on your I-485 if such period exceeds 180 days.
about the 90-day thing, USCIS used to allow you to walk into a local office and get an interim EAD if your EAD application is pending for 90 days or more, but they seem to have discontinued that practice. Moreover, it will take much longer than 90 days now to get an EAD.
You can apply EAD yourself but you need the I-485 receipt notice for that and I'm sure such employer won't give that to you either.
>> If you don't have a valid H1 and no EAD, you are out of status
Partly correct. One is out of status ONLY if he/she is working without H1 or EAD. Without H1 or EAD one is allowed to stay without working (unpaid leave of absence) while I-485 is pending.
_____________________
Not a legal advice.
As for your questions, If you don't have a valid H1 and no EAD, you are out of status. That can have an adverse effect on your I-485 if such period exceeds 180 days.
about the 90-day thing, USCIS used to allow you to walk into a local office and get an interim EAD if your EAD application is pending for 90 days or more, but they seem to have discontinued that practice. Moreover, it will take much longer than 90 days now to get an EAD.
You can apply EAD yourself but you need the I-485 receipt notice for that and I'm sure such employer won't give that to you either.
>> If you don't have a valid H1 and no EAD, you are out of status
Partly correct. One is out of status ONLY if he/she is working without H1 or EAD. Without H1 or EAD one is allowed to stay without working (unpaid leave of absence) while I-485 is pending.
_____________________
Not a legal advice.
more...
vicks_don
04-18 10:34 AM
I filed 140 to VSC. Would it be transfered to TSC. It is still pending. I got a RFE on 140. Should i send the docs to VSC or TSC. Can anyone please answer this.
Thanks.
Thanks.
hair Wisin amp; Yandel - Estoy
h1bemployee
02-26 05:14 PM
wandmaker ..Please read Phony postings and do not respond to these guys , they are just playing .. I m surprised senior members are not understanding the intend of the posts .
What can we help if he had problems with employer ? what can we help if he had h1-h4-h1 issues ? Every one just relax and stop replying .
I know every one wants to help others in our community but think twice before replying
I am not posting this for timepass.... This is a real problem....
My employer gave me Mar 12th as deadline.....
wandmaker... I am really sorry ...
here are the details:
when my employer got the RFE.. he asked me to send the following documents
# Previous company experience letters(from INdia)
#All Education certificates
# letter from the End client
# current resume
# w2 form
and he asked me to notarize all these documents. I sent all the requested documents except the end client letter, because my client said that its not their company policy to provide these type of letters.
There are two sub vendors between my client and employer. So I got a letter from one of the subvendor(he is in CA) that I am working in this company through them. In the letter he mentioned other sub vendor name also.
after sending these docs to USCIS ... My employer came back to me saying that he need more detailed documents.
# USCIS is doubting that I am working in CA not in NJ as the subvendor is from CA . But we provided the documents saying that I am working in NJ and I have filed my taxes from NJ only. I have my driving license from NJ.
# My employer filed H1b Amendment (filed in Aug 2007) saying that I work as a computer support specialist(eventhough I am working as a Systems Engineer) to support the salary pay. USCIS is saying that its not a H1B level job.
If I can tranafer my H1b to the main vendor , I will get a good pay and They can say I am working as Systems engineer which is h1b level job.
Can I transfer my H1 in this situation?. Please help.
What can we help if he had problems with employer ? what can we help if he had h1-h4-h1 issues ? Every one just relax and stop replying .
I know every one wants to help others in our community but think twice before replying
I am not posting this for timepass.... This is a real problem....
My employer gave me Mar 12th as deadline.....
wandmaker... I am really sorry ...
here are the details:
when my employer got the RFE.. he asked me to send the following documents
# Previous company experience letters(from INdia)
#All Education certificates
# letter from the End client
# current resume
# w2 form
and he asked me to notarize all these documents. I sent all the requested documents except the end client letter, because my client said that its not their company policy to provide these type of letters.
There are two sub vendors between my client and employer. So I got a letter from one of the subvendor(he is in CA) that I am working in this company through them. In the letter he mentioned other sub vendor name also.
after sending these docs to USCIS ... My employer came back to me saying that he need more detailed documents.
# USCIS is doubting that I am working in CA not in NJ as the subvendor is from CA . But we provided the documents saying that I am working in NJ and I have filed my taxes from NJ only. I have my driving license from NJ.
# My employer filed H1b Amendment (filed in Aug 2007) saying that I work as a computer support specialist(eventhough I am working as a Systems Engineer) to support the salary pay. USCIS is saying that its not a H1B level job.
If I can tranafer my H1b to the main vendor , I will get a good pay and They can say I am working as Systems engineer which is h1b level job.
Can I transfer my H1 in this situation?. Please help.
more...
snram4
06-25 04:49 PM
what you mean by qualified people? Are you expecting a dynamic person with master degree or above with more than 5 years
but less than 10 years and those willing to work 16 hours a day and ready to relocate any time and for the QA analyst
position with the pay range of 30 to 40K? Then you will never get except some unemployed H1bs. I am seeing so
many unemployed Citizens/GCs/EAD and existing H1bs are available in USA. The slow movement of H1b cap shows that
That's correct.
There are many unemployed, but there are not many qualified willing people available.
Trying hard to recruit IT people for a month. Hardly finding any.
but less than 10 years and those willing to work 16 hours a day and ready to relocate any time and for the QA analyst
position with the pay range of 30 to 40K? Then you will never get except some unemployed H1bs. I am seeing so
many unemployed Citizens/GCs/EAD and existing H1bs are available in USA. The slow movement of H1b cap shows that
That's correct.
There are many unemployed, but there are not many qualified willing people available.
Trying hard to recruit IT people for a month. Hardly finding any.
hot wisin y yandel estoy enamorado
chanduv23
07-11 02:42 PM
My EAD and AP application was received June 19, 2009 at TSC. To my pleasant shocking & surprise USCIS approved mine and wife's application in 20 days and we received the card today.
We are happy with the speed and efficiency USCIS and wish they could do everything the same way. we received two year EAD but concerned as receiving a two year EAD indicates that it may take a while to get my PD (Dec 2005).
Thanks
Senthil.
My EAD and AP were receipted on June 9th from TSC. AP got approved, EAD still pending. So I guess these approvals are random.
We are happy with the speed and efficiency USCIS and wish they could do everything the same way. we received two year EAD but concerned as receiving a two year EAD indicates that it may take a while to get my PD (Dec 2005).
Thanks
Senthil.
My EAD and AP were receipted on June 9th from TSC. AP got approved, EAD still pending. So I guess these approvals are random.
more...
house estoy enamorado wisin y yandel. wisin y yandel estoy enamorado.
forever_waiting
04-13 12:14 PM
Why was this thread bumped up again? This bill was introduced in Jan and has been sitting in a committee since early feb and might never see light of day.
tattoo wisin y yandel estoy enamorado
akhilmahajan
09-30 02:24 PM
If you dont mind, can you please elaborate little bit more on this?
more...
pictures The Gezzy – Estoy Enamorado
vin13
01-09 06:58 PM
None of my friends have lost their jobs. I was recently in India, and everyone i talked to was asking how bad was the job scene in US. I think India and Indians are affected more because of IT consulting jobs.
dresses wisin y yandel estoy enamorado. Wisin y Yandel - Estoy
ineedhelp
07-22 11:45 AM
Hi All,
Thank you for your overwhelming response. I did spoke to an attorney and rightfully got sucked out with $$ but it gave me some peace of mind for sure.
1. His recommendation was that the maximum penalty in my case would be 10,000 $ + 2 months notice as given i my policy. Apart from this wipro cannot claim any more and again this could be challenged if asked for in USA but would work in wipro's favor if it is claimed in India.
2. But he did mentioned that many of other clauses could be challenged.
3. He also cautioned me that Wipro cannot be bounded to give my Experience letter :(
Bottom line is i'm ready to pay 10,000$ + remaining 4 weeks notice and get a clean exit. Yes some of you might argue otherwise but i thought from my personal perspective this is right decision as i have plans to get my GC processed.
@JRG, hope this helps u.
@reddyram,LONGGCQUE, gc28262, pagal, crazymonk ... I'm greatful to each one of you. @LONGGCQUE your specifc response was most helpful to me as it ideally match with my situation without any disrespect to others as each one of your suggestions have made to stand up against Wipro!!
Thanks Again.
ineedhelp (may be in future i will help as well!!! Time to change my user id :)
Thank you for your overwhelming response. I did spoke to an attorney and rightfully got sucked out with $$ but it gave me some peace of mind for sure.
1. His recommendation was that the maximum penalty in my case would be 10,000 $ + 2 months notice as given i my policy. Apart from this wipro cannot claim any more and again this could be challenged if asked for in USA but would work in wipro's favor if it is claimed in India.
2. But he did mentioned that many of other clauses could be challenged.
3. He also cautioned me that Wipro cannot be bounded to give my Experience letter :(
Bottom line is i'm ready to pay 10,000$ + remaining 4 weeks notice and get a clean exit. Yes some of you might argue otherwise but i thought from my personal perspective this is right decision as i have plans to get my GC processed.
@JRG, hope this helps u.
@reddyram,LONGGCQUE, gc28262, pagal, crazymonk ... I'm greatful to each one of you. @LONGGCQUE your specifc response was most helpful to me as it ideally match with my situation without any disrespect to others as each one of your suggestions have made to stand up against Wipro!!
Thanks Again.
ineedhelp (may be in future i will help as well!!! Time to change my user id :)
more...
makeup estoy enamorado wisin y yandel. Wisin amp; Yandel – Estoy
.jpg "estoy enamorado wisin y yandel. wisin y yandel estoy enamorado.")
shaikhshehzadali
07-29 03:35 PM
If that's the way u think...This is how it will work
Yeah right....come to US on tourist Visa when ur wife is pregnant.....let your child be born during that trip...and get a green card..
Hi there,
IV seems to be a terrific service to the immigration community. Kudos to the people who work hard to make it work.
Has anyone heard of cases where immigration lawyers have successfully petitioned on behalf of parents of a US baby (way before the age of 18) to become GC holders or citizens?
Yeah right....come to US on tourist Visa when ur wife is pregnant.....let your child be born during that trip...and get a green card..
Hi there,
IV seems to be a terrific service to the immigration community. Kudos to the people who work hard to make it work.
Has anyone heard of cases where immigration lawyers have successfully petitioned on behalf of parents of a US baby (way before the age of 18) to become GC holders or citizens?
girlfriend MP3: WISIN Y YANDEL – ESTOY
vxg
09-08 04:50 PM
Thanks for starting this. I am in same boat, i called TSC and the IO told me my case was approved on 9/4/09 and i have an LUD on 9/4/09 however online status says case pending. I asked that to the IO and she says she does not know about the online status but in there system it is approved. I did that after i received a call from an IO from local field office ( i went for Infopass last week at local office) informing that my and my wife's cases were approved on 9/4/09.
I am hoping to get the cards as have to travel to India next week. The IO in Texas advised me to get the Passport stamped.
Bump! Anyone in same situation? What steps you took if any?
I am hoping to get the cards as have to travel to India next week. The IO in Texas advised me to get the Passport stamped.
Bump! Anyone in same situation? What steps you took if any?
hairstyles Video: Wisin amp; Yandel - Estoy
srarao
07-19 04:23 PM
I read some posts and they say we need to go to local heath dept.If some one has exp ,I just wanted their suggestion
sledge_hammer
02-07 01:14 PM
hammer, here is another poll very similar at http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/showthread.php?t=1671
Thanks whoever,
I asked people on the EB3 poll thread where I can find the poll for EB2. Never got an answer, hence this thread.
Admin can delete this thread ...
Thanks whoever,
I asked people on the EB3 poll thread where I can find the poll for EB2. Never got an answer, hence this thread.
Admin can delete this thread ...
Blog Feeds
01-26 08:40 AM
Summary
(LINK TO FULL REPORT BELOW)
Congress created the H-1B program in 1990 to enable U.S. employers to hire temporary, foreign workers in specialty occupations. The law capped the number of H-1B visas issued per fiscal year at 65,000. Since then, the cap has fluctuated with legislative changes. Congress asked GAO to assess the impact of the cap on the ability of domestic companies to innovate, while ensuring that U.S. workers are not disadvantaged. In response, GAO examined what is known about (1) employer demand for H-1B workers; (2) how the cap affects employer costs and decisions to move operations overseas; (3) H-1B worker characteristics and the potential impact of raising the cap; and (4) how well requirements of the H-1B program protect U.S. workers. GAO analyzed data from 4 federal agencies; interviewed agency officials, experts, and H-1B employers; and reviewed agency documents and literature.
In most years, demand for new H-1B workers exceeded the cap: From 2000 to 2009, demand for new H-1B workers tended to exceed the cap, as measured by the numbers of initial petitions submitted by employers who are subject to the cap. There is no way to precisely determine the level of any unmet demand among employers, since they tend to stop submitting (and the Department of Homeland Security stops tracking) petitions once the cap is reached each year. When we consider all initial petitions, including those from universities and research institutions that are not subject to the cap, we find that demand for new H-1B workers is largely driven by a small number of employers. Over the decade, over 14 percent of all initial petitions were submitted by cap-exempt employers, and only a few employers (fewer than 1 percent) garnered over one-quarter of all H-1B approvals. Most interviewed companies said the H-1B cap and program created costs, but were not factors in their decisions to move R&D overseas: The 34 H-1B employers GAO interviewed reported that the cap has created some additional costs, though the cap's impact depended on the size and maturity of the company. For example, in years when visas were denied by the cap, most large firms reported finding other (sometimes more costly) ways to hire their preferred job candidates. On the other hand, small firms were more likely to fill their positions with different candidates, which they said resulted in delays and sometimes economic losses, particularly for firms in rapidly changing technology fields. Limitations in agency data and systems hinder tracking the cap and H-1B workers over time: The total number of H-1B workers in the U.S. at any one time--and information about the length of their stay--is unknown, because (1) data systems among the various agencies that process such individuals are not linked so individuals cannot be readily tracked, and (2) H-1B workers are not assigned a unique identifier that would allow for tracking them over time--particularly if and when their visa status changes. Restricted agency oversight and statutory changes weaken protections for U.S. workers: Elements of the H-1B program that could serve as worker protections--such as the requirement to pay prevailing wages, the visa's temporary status, and the cap itself--are weakened by several factors. First, program oversight is fragmented and restricted. Second, the H-1B program lacks a legal provision for holding employers accountable to program requirements when they obtain H-1B workers through a staffing company. Third, statutory changes made to the H-1B program have, in combination and in effect, increased the pool of H-1B workers beyond the cap and lowered the bar for eligibility. Taken together, the multifaceted challenges identified in this report show that the H-1B program, as currently structured, may not be used to its full potential and may be detrimental in some cases. This report offers several matters for congressional consideration, including that Congress re-examine key H-1B program provisions and make appropriate changes as needed. GAO also recommends that the Departments of Homeland Security and Labor take steps to improve efficiency, flexibility, and monitoring of the H-1B program. Homeland Security disagreed with two recommendations and one matter, citing logistical and other challenges; however, we believe such challenges can be overcome. Labor did not respond to our recommendations.
Recommendations
Our recommendations from this work are listed below with a Contact for more information. Status will change from "In process" to "Open," "Closed - implemented," or "Closed - not implemented" based on our follow up work.
Director:Andrew SherrillTeam:Government Accountability Office: Education, Workforce, and Income SecurityPhone:(202) 512-7252
Matters for Congressional Consideration
Recommendation: To ensure that the H-1B program continues to meet the needs of businesses in a global economy while maintaining a balance of protections for U.S. workers, Congress may wish to consider reviewing the merits and shortcomings of key program provisions and making appropriate changes as needed. Such a review may include, but would not necessarily be limited to (1) the qualifications required for workers eligible under the H-1B program, (2) exemptions from the cap, (3) the appropriateness of H-1B hiring by staffing companies, (4) the level of the cap, and (5) the role the program should play in the U.S. immigration system in relationship to permanent residency.
Status: In process
Comments: When we determine what steps the Congress has taken, we will provide updated information.
Recommendation: To reduce duplication and fragmentation in the administration and oversight of the H-1B application process, consistent with past GAO matters for congressional consideration, Congress may wish to consider eliminating the requirement that employers first submit a Labor Condition Application (LCA) to the Department of Labor for certification, and require instead that employers submit this application along with the I-129 application to the Department of Homeland Security's U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services for review.
Status: In process
Comments: When we determine what steps the Congress has taken, we will provide updated information.
Recommendation: To improve the Department of Labor's ability to investigate and enforce employer compliance with H-1B program requirements, Congress may wish to consider granting the department subpoena power to obtain employer records during investigations under the H-1B program.
Status: In process
Comments: When we determine what steps the Congress has taken, we will provide updated information.
Recommendation: To help ensure the full protection of H-1B workers employed through staffing companies, Congress may wish to consider holding the employer where an H-1B visa holder performs work accountable for meeting program requirements to the same extent as the employer that submitted the LCA form.
Status: In process
Comments: When we determine what steps the Congress has taken, we will provide updated information.
Recommendations for Executive Action
Recommendation: To help ensure that the number of new H-1B workers who are subject to the cap--both entering the United States and changing to H-1B status within the United States--does not exceed the cap each year, U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services should take steps to improve its tracking of the number of approved H-1B applications and the number of issued visas under the cap by fully leveraging the transformation effort currently under way, which involves the adoption of an electronic petition processing system that will be linked to the Department of State's tracking system. Such steps should ensure that linkages to the Department of State's tracking system will provide Homeland Security with timely access to data on visa issuances, and that mechanisms for tracking petitions and visas against the cap are incorporated into U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services' business rules to be developed for the new electronic petition system.
Agency Affected: Department of Homeland Security
Status: In process
Comments: When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.
Recommendation: To address business concerns without undermining program integrity, U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services should, to the extent permitted by its existing statutory authority, explore options for increasing the flexibility of the application process for H-1B employers, such as (1) allowing employers to rank their applications for visa candidates so that they can hire the best qualified worker for the jobs in highest need; (2) distributing the applications granted under the annual cap in allotments throughout the year (e.g. quarterly); and (3) establishing a system whereby businesses with a strong track-record of compliance with H-1B regulations may use a streamlined application process.
Agency Affected: Department of Homeland Security
Status: In process
Comments: When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.
Recommendation: To improve the transparency and oversight of the posting requirement on the Labor Condition Application (LCA), as part of its current oversight role, the Employment and Training Administration should develop and maintain a centralized Web site, accessible to the public, where businesses must post notice of the intent to hire H-1B workers. Such notices should continue to specify the job category and worksite location noted on the LCA and required by statute on current noncentralized postings.
Agency Affected: Department of Labor
Status: In process
Comments: When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.
Recommendation: To improve the efficiency and effectiveness of its investigations of employer compliance with H-1B requirements, the Employment and Training Administration should provide Labor's Wage and Hour Division searchable access to the LCA database.
Agency Affected: Department of Labor
Status: In process
Comments: When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.
VIEW FULL REPORT (http://www.gao.gov/new.items/d1126.pdf)
More... (http://ashwinsharma.com/2011/01/25/h-1b-visa-program-reforms-are-needed-to-minimize-the-risks-and-costs-of-current-program.aspx?ref=rss)
(LINK TO FULL REPORT BELOW)
Congress created the H-1B program in 1990 to enable U.S. employers to hire temporary, foreign workers in specialty occupations. The law capped the number of H-1B visas issued per fiscal year at 65,000. Since then, the cap has fluctuated with legislative changes. Congress asked GAO to assess the impact of the cap on the ability of domestic companies to innovate, while ensuring that U.S. workers are not disadvantaged. In response, GAO examined what is known about (1) employer demand for H-1B workers; (2) how the cap affects employer costs and decisions to move operations overseas; (3) H-1B worker characteristics and the potential impact of raising the cap; and (4) how well requirements of the H-1B program protect U.S. workers. GAO analyzed data from 4 federal agencies; interviewed agency officials, experts, and H-1B employers; and reviewed agency documents and literature.
In most years, demand for new H-1B workers exceeded the cap: From 2000 to 2009, demand for new H-1B workers tended to exceed the cap, as measured by the numbers of initial petitions submitted by employers who are subject to the cap. There is no way to precisely determine the level of any unmet demand among employers, since they tend to stop submitting (and the Department of Homeland Security stops tracking) petitions once the cap is reached each year. When we consider all initial petitions, including those from universities and research institutions that are not subject to the cap, we find that demand for new H-1B workers is largely driven by a small number of employers. Over the decade, over 14 percent of all initial petitions were submitted by cap-exempt employers, and only a few employers (fewer than 1 percent) garnered over one-quarter of all H-1B approvals. Most interviewed companies said the H-1B cap and program created costs, but were not factors in their decisions to move R&D overseas: The 34 H-1B employers GAO interviewed reported that the cap has created some additional costs, though the cap's impact depended on the size and maturity of the company. For example, in years when visas were denied by the cap, most large firms reported finding other (sometimes more costly) ways to hire their preferred job candidates. On the other hand, small firms were more likely to fill their positions with different candidates, which they said resulted in delays and sometimes economic losses, particularly for firms in rapidly changing technology fields. Limitations in agency data and systems hinder tracking the cap and H-1B workers over time: The total number of H-1B workers in the U.S. at any one time--and information about the length of their stay--is unknown, because (1) data systems among the various agencies that process such individuals are not linked so individuals cannot be readily tracked, and (2) H-1B workers are not assigned a unique identifier that would allow for tracking them over time--particularly if and when their visa status changes. Restricted agency oversight and statutory changes weaken protections for U.S. workers: Elements of the H-1B program that could serve as worker protections--such as the requirement to pay prevailing wages, the visa's temporary status, and the cap itself--are weakened by several factors. First, program oversight is fragmented and restricted. Second, the H-1B program lacks a legal provision for holding employers accountable to program requirements when they obtain H-1B workers through a staffing company. Third, statutory changes made to the H-1B program have, in combination and in effect, increased the pool of H-1B workers beyond the cap and lowered the bar for eligibility. Taken together, the multifaceted challenges identified in this report show that the H-1B program, as currently structured, may not be used to its full potential and may be detrimental in some cases. This report offers several matters for congressional consideration, including that Congress re-examine key H-1B program provisions and make appropriate changes as needed. GAO also recommends that the Departments of Homeland Security and Labor take steps to improve efficiency, flexibility, and monitoring of the H-1B program. Homeland Security disagreed with two recommendations and one matter, citing logistical and other challenges; however, we believe such challenges can be overcome. Labor did not respond to our recommendations.
Recommendations
Our recommendations from this work are listed below with a Contact for more information. Status will change from "In process" to "Open," "Closed - implemented," or "Closed - not implemented" based on our follow up work.
Director:Andrew SherrillTeam:Government Accountability Office: Education, Workforce, and Income SecurityPhone:(202) 512-7252
Matters for Congressional Consideration
Recommendation: To ensure that the H-1B program continues to meet the needs of businesses in a global economy while maintaining a balance of protections for U.S. workers, Congress may wish to consider reviewing the merits and shortcomings of key program provisions and making appropriate changes as needed. Such a review may include, but would not necessarily be limited to (1) the qualifications required for workers eligible under the H-1B program, (2) exemptions from the cap, (3) the appropriateness of H-1B hiring by staffing companies, (4) the level of the cap, and (5) the role the program should play in the U.S. immigration system in relationship to permanent residency.
Status: In process
Comments: When we determine what steps the Congress has taken, we will provide updated information.
Recommendation: To reduce duplication and fragmentation in the administration and oversight of the H-1B application process, consistent with past GAO matters for congressional consideration, Congress may wish to consider eliminating the requirement that employers first submit a Labor Condition Application (LCA) to the Department of Labor for certification, and require instead that employers submit this application along with the I-129 application to the Department of Homeland Security's U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services for review.
Status: In process
Comments: When we determine what steps the Congress has taken, we will provide updated information.
Recommendation: To improve the Department of Labor's ability to investigate and enforce employer compliance with H-1B program requirements, Congress may wish to consider granting the department subpoena power to obtain employer records during investigations under the H-1B program.
Status: In process
Comments: When we determine what steps the Congress has taken, we will provide updated information.
Recommendation: To help ensure the full protection of H-1B workers employed through staffing companies, Congress may wish to consider holding the employer where an H-1B visa holder performs work accountable for meeting program requirements to the same extent as the employer that submitted the LCA form.
Status: In process
Comments: When we determine what steps the Congress has taken, we will provide updated information.
Recommendations for Executive Action
Recommendation: To help ensure that the number of new H-1B workers who are subject to the cap--both entering the United States and changing to H-1B status within the United States--does not exceed the cap each year, U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services should take steps to improve its tracking of the number of approved H-1B applications and the number of issued visas under the cap by fully leveraging the transformation effort currently under way, which involves the adoption of an electronic petition processing system that will be linked to the Department of State's tracking system. Such steps should ensure that linkages to the Department of State's tracking system will provide Homeland Security with timely access to data on visa issuances, and that mechanisms for tracking petitions and visas against the cap are incorporated into U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services' business rules to be developed for the new electronic petition system.
Agency Affected: Department of Homeland Security
Status: In process
Comments: When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.
Recommendation: To address business concerns without undermining program integrity, U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services should, to the extent permitted by its existing statutory authority, explore options for increasing the flexibility of the application process for H-1B employers, such as (1) allowing employers to rank their applications for visa candidates so that they can hire the best qualified worker for the jobs in highest need; (2) distributing the applications granted under the annual cap in allotments throughout the year (e.g. quarterly); and (3) establishing a system whereby businesses with a strong track-record of compliance with H-1B regulations may use a streamlined application process.
Agency Affected: Department of Homeland Security
Status: In process
Comments: When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.
Recommendation: To improve the transparency and oversight of the posting requirement on the Labor Condition Application (LCA), as part of its current oversight role, the Employment and Training Administration should develop and maintain a centralized Web site, accessible to the public, where businesses must post notice of the intent to hire H-1B workers. Such notices should continue to specify the job category and worksite location noted on the LCA and required by statute on current noncentralized postings.
Agency Affected: Department of Labor
Status: In process
Comments: When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.
Recommendation: To improve the efficiency and effectiveness of its investigations of employer compliance with H-1B requirements, the Employment and Training Administration should provide Labor's Wage and Hour Division searchable access to the LCA database.
Agency Affected: Department of Labor
Status: In process
Comments: When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.
VIEW FULL REPORT (http://www.gao.gov/new.items/d1126.pdf)
More... (http://ashwinsharma.com/2011/01/25/h-1b-visa-program-reforms-are-needed-to-minimize-the-risks-and-costs-of-current-program.aspx?ref=rss)
No comments:
Post a Comment