GCard_Dream
07-13 05:45 PM
I don't think you can do that, can you? I think it kind of defeats the purpose, however.
You can add to your own reputation by clicking the "balance" icon.
Thanks,
Jayant
You can add to your own reputation by clicking the "balance" icon.
Thanks,
Jayant
gc28262
07-18 03:47 PM
On H1B it is illegal for employer to enforce bond:
Please read employees rights in DOL page:
Employment Law Guide - Workers in Professional and Specialty Occupations (H-1B, H-1B1, and E-3 Visas) (http://www.dol.gov/compliance/guide/h1b.htm)
Employee Rights
H-1B, H-1B1, and E-3 workers are granted a number of rights. The employer must give the worker a copy of the LCA. The employer must pay the worker at least the same wage rate as paid to other employees with similar experience and qualifications or the local prevailing wage for the occupation in the area of employment, whichever is higher. The employer must pay for non-productive time caused by the employer or by the worker's lack of a license or permit. The employer must offer the worker fringe benefits on the same basis as its other employees. Also, the employer may not require the worker to pay a penalty for leaving employment prior to any agreed date. However, this restriction does not preclude the employer from seeking "liquidated damages" pursuant to relevant state law. Liquidated damages are generally estimates stated in a contract of the anticipated damages to the employer caused by the worker's breach of contract.
Please read employees rights in DOL page:
Employment Law Guide - Workers in Professional and Specialty Occupations (H-1B, H-1B1, and E-3 Visas) (http://www.dol.gov/compliance/guide/h1b.htm)
Employee Rights
H-1B, H-1B1, and E-3 workers are granted a number of rights. The employer must give the worker a copy of the LCA. The employer must pay the worker at least the same wage rate as paid to other employees with similar experience and qualifications or the local prevailing wage for the occupation in the area of employment, whichever is higher. The employer must pay for non-productive time caused by the employer or by the worker's lack of a license or permit. The employer must offer the worker fringe benefits on the same basis as its other employees. Also, the employer may not require the worker to pay a penalty for leaving employment prior to any agreed date. However, this restriction does not preclude the employer from seeking "liquidated damages" pursuant to relevant state law. Liquidated damages are generally estimates stated in a contract of the anticipated damages to the employer caused by the worker's breach of contract.
eb3retro
03-15 01:15 PM
Filing 485 during visa unavailability, should not be the concern in this bill. Why our people are worrying about filing AOS when visa number unavailable? Man, this should not be our concern at all. Our main concern should be reinstating the AC21 provision that allow the oversubscribed countries to use excess visas in each EB category. Specter removed very important provision that eliminate per country limit in EB visas for oversubscribed countries. This is a big blow to India, China. It will stop all the benefits from this bill.
If the current form of specter bill passes, there is no benefit to any of us. If EB visa increased to 290K, excluding dependents from counting from FY 2001, recapturing unused visa from 2001 to 2005, and excluding EB1 (OR+EA) and EB2 (MS+3) from count, that drastically increase the visa numbers. The increase is unimaginable, and I feel that it will be about 4 to 5 times than current 140K numbers. If all the listed provisions appears in the final bill, the visa number will always be �current� for all countries for many years, provided AC21 (elimination of per country limit if demand is less than supply) reinstated. If this happens, no one needs to worry about filing AOS when visa number unavailable. That situation never arises.
If current form of Specter bill passes, all the new numbers created thro above listed provisions, will not give any benefit to India/China. DOS simply say per country limit is 10% only no matter what. Remember that, 10% is total of FB+EB numbers. (480000+290000). India and China FB numbers are also heavily backlogged. Therefore our main concern is to reinstate AC21 provision not filing AOS, and keep pressure to keep the listed provisions (EB visa increased to 290K, excluding dependents from counting from FY 2001, recapturing unused visa from 2001 to 2005, and excluding EB1 (OR+EA) and EB2 (MS+3)) in the final bill
this person is bringing some valid points to ponder. People please go through her posting and i agree with her regarding the numbers is still 10% only for india. we need to fight for removing the per country limit, or else, we may probably be in this retrogression mess for quite sometime.
If the current form of specter bill passes, there is no benefit to any of us. If EB visa increased to 290K, excluding dependents from counting from FY 2001, recapturing unused visa from 2001 to 2005, and excluding EB1 (OR+EA) and EB2 (MS+3) from count, that drastically increase the visa numbers. The increase is unimaginable, and I feel that it will be about 4 to 5 times than current 140K numbers. If all the listed provisions appears in the final bill, the visa number will always be �current� for all countries for many years, provided AC21 (elimination of per country limit if demand is less than supply) reinstated. If this happens, no one needs to worry about filing AOS when visa number unavailable. That situation never arises.
If current form of Specter bill passes, all the new numbers created thro above listed provisions, will not give any benefit to India/China. DOS simply say per country limit is 10% only no matter what. Remember that, 10% is total of FB+EB numbers. (480000+290000). India and China FB numbers are also heavily backlogged. Therefore our main concern is to reinstate AC21 provision not filing AOS, and keep pressure to keep the listed provisions (EB visa increased to 290K, excluding dependents from counting from FY 2001, recapturing unused visa from 2001 to 2005, and excluding EB1 (OR+EA) and EB2 (MS+3)) in the final bill
this person is bringing some valid points to ponder. People please go through her posting and i agree with her regarding the numbers is still 10% only for india. we need to fight for removing the per country limit, or else, we may probably be in this retrogression mess for quite sometime.
xu1
08-24 12:20 PM
Interesting.. I followed the link and got the following numbers of EB AOS for China, India and World as a whole..
I didn't look at the CP based EB numbers.
It seems 2005 worldwide has used up all unused 2003 visa numbers.
EB1 EB2 EB3 (excluding other EB3)
2005
CH 6,422 9,346 4,761
IN 6,336 16,687 23,399
TOTAL 66,344 43,412 117,156
2004
CH 3,939 6,686 4,190
IN 2,998 16,262 19,962
TOTAL 31,140 32,711 84,767
2003
CH 1,654 2,613 2,619
IN 1,266 8,536 10,680
TOTAL 14,700 15,604 44,555
2002
CH 4,239 10,518 4,684
IN 2,820 21,310 17,428
TOTAL 33,922 43,390 83,767
2001
CH 6,482 11,666 4,604
IN 3,543 21,355 16,405
TOTAL 42,997 44,949 85,438
YEAR **** EB1 ****** EB2 ****** EB3 **** Total(EB)
2000 *** 2,306 ***** 7,233 ***** 5,360 *** 15,381
2001 *** 3,543 **** 21,355 **** 16,405 *** 41,720
2002 *** 2,820 **** 21,310 **** 17,428 *** 41,919
2003 *** 1,266 ***** 8,536 ****10,680 *** 20,818 :confused:
2004 *** 2,998 **** 16,262 **** 19,962 *** 39,496
2005 *** 6,336 **** 16,687 **** 23,399 *** 47,160 :)
These figures are from this link
http://travel.state.gov/visa/frvi/statistics/statistics_1476.html
I didn't look at the CP based EB numbers.
It seems 2005 worldwide has used up all unused 2003 visa numbers.
EB1 EB2 EB3 (excluding other EB3)
2005
CH 6,422 9,346 4,761
IN 6,336 16,687 23,399
TOTAL 66,344 43,412 117,156
2004
CH 3,939 6,686 4,190
IN 2,998 16,262 19,962
TOTAL 31,140 32,711 84,767
2003
CH 1,654 2,613 2,619
IN 1,266 8,536 10,680
TOTAL 14,700 15,604 44,555
2002
CH 4,239 10,518 4,684
IN 2,820 21,310 17,428
TOTAL 33,922 43,390 83,767
2001
CH 6,482 11,666 4,604
IN 3,543 21,355 16,405
TOTAL 42,997 44,949 85,438
YEAR **** EB1 ****** EB2 ****** EB3 **** Total(EB)
2000 *** 2,306 ***** 7,233 ***** 5,360 *** 15,381
2001 *** 3,543 **** 21,355 **** 16,405 *** 41,720
2002 *** 2,820 **** 21,310 **** 17,428 *** 41,919
2003 *** 1,266 ***** 8,536 ****10,680 *** 20,818 :confused:
2004 *** 2,998 **** 16,262 **** 19,962 *** 39,496
2005 *** 6,336 **** 16,687 **** 23,399 *** 47,160 :)
These figures are from this link
http://travel.state.gov/visa/frvi/statistics/statistics_1476.html
more...
ItIsNotFunny
10-30 04:45 PM
Dude you have the AP use it... I have travelled on AP multiple time no issues. I have an approved H1 which I dont use any more...
All the best
You serious that you have valid H1B but you travelled and entered back on AP?
Why would you do that?
All the best
You serious that you have valid H1B but you travelled and entered back on AP?
Why would you do that?
shsk
07-16 11:40 PM
thk u very much
more...
vin13
01-27 02:00 PM
Here is what my lawyer had typed for AC 21 letter
Brief description of the job offer with job titile, brief description, and salary.
A brief explanation of the company
Inform USCIS that this job is similar to the one applied for GC process and mention about using AC 21 as it has been more than 180 days since 485 was applied.
Attach copy of I-485 receipt, I-140 approval, EAD
Brief description of the job offer with job titile, brief description, and salary.
A brief explanation of the company
Inform USCIS that this job is similar to the one applied for GC process and mention about using AC 21 as it has been more than 180 days since 485 was applied.
Attach copy of I-485 receipt, I-140 approval, EAD
trance
07-21 07:41 PM
Hi anu_t,
Thanks a lot for your input.
Trance.
Thanks a lot for your input.
Trance.
more...
sandy_anand
04-08 05:11 PM
Well glad that at least all the lawyers' websites experienced lots of traffic these past few days. Happy for them. Only visible benefit from Mr.Oppenheim's dramatic announcement about the 12000 additional visas. :rolleyes:
PHANI_TAVVALA
06-17 10:39 AM
it's fifth-third
more...
Scythe
11-28 03:10 PM
Oh, you :fab:
meridiani.planum
02-17 12:44 AM
I have a feeling some good news is round the corner this "Election Year". Lets all keep our fingers crossed for any improvements in the increase of Visa numbers.
what has election year got to do with visa numbers?
what has election year got to do with visa numbers?
more...
jvs
03-02 06:36 PM
Regarding "New Scenario - Seeking second opinion"
Couple of things to consider...
1) You need to be present in US at time of applying for the extension and when its approved. In your case I think with travel coming up in June, you probably need to go premium so you have approval in hand my April end. Regular processing takes about 2-3 months I think.
2) You can only go 90 days in advance of your new/extended approval as far as I know. So you need to see if that matches when you plan to go for stamping.
If in similar situation I would probably do what you are planning. It adds some anxiety with both wedding and consulate visit at same time, but once past that it will make life little easier.
Couple of things to consider...
1) You need to be present in US at time of applying for the extension and when its approved. In your case I think with travel coming up in June, you probably need to go premium so you have approval in hand my April end. Regular processing takes about 2-3 months I think.
2) You can only go 90 days in advance of your new/extended approval as far as I know. So you need to see if that matches when you plan to go for stamping.
If in similar situation I would probably do what you are planning. It adds some anxiety with both wedding and consulate visit at same time, but once past that it will make life little easier.
hopefulgc
05-12 04:35 PM
while that i true... imagine where we would have been if MLk had decided to sit back..
or talk about another great soul from your motherland
...If Sherpa Tenzing had decided that he is happy climbing a knoll than conquer the heights of everest.... would he be distinguished.
As someone said, We will have to be the change, we wish to see in this world.
or talk about another great soul from your motherland
...If Sherpa Tenzing had decided that he is happy climbing a knoll than conquer the heights of everest.... would he be distinguished.
As someone said, We will have to be the change, we wish to see in this world.
more...
chanduv23
01-21 01:34 PM
I joined Immigration voice on orkut. My name is Chandrakanth
amitjoey
07-13 05:24 PM
That means you have no reputation at all :D :D :D .. kidding.
I think all that means is that no one has given you any reputation point yet.
Man, this is so funny, Somebody give me some good or atleast some bad reputation :D :D :D :D
I think all that means is that no one has given you any reputation point yet.
Man, this is so funny, Somebody give me some good or atleast some bad reputation :D :D :D :D
more...
gxr
10-02 09:14 PM
sush - What's the LUD on your 140 ?
andy garcia
12-14 12:58 PM
Now I am working for a company in OPT .
My OPT start at 7/10/2006
My OPT end at 7/9/2007
add 60 days Grace period ,so the date will be 9/7/2007
So 9/7/2007 till 10/1/2007 will have 24 days GAP.
How can I do to solve it ?
You can not work after 7/9/2007.
The end of the OPT will determine when you must stop working.
The 60 days grace period is only for you to take care of business before you go back home. In your case you must wait for 2 months and 24 days before returning to work otherwise you will be in violation of your status.
andy
My OPT start at 7/10/2006
My OPT end at 7/9/2007
add 60 days Grace period ,so the date will be 9/7/2007
So 9/7/2007 till 10/1/2007 will have 24 days GAP.
How can I do to solve it ?
You can not work after 7/9/2007.
The end of the OPT will determine when you must stop working.
The 60 days grace period is only for you to take care of business before you go back home. In your case you must wait for 2 months and 24 days before returning to work otherwise you will be in violation of your status.
andy
leo2606
07-29 01:09 PM
Old Pork Chops asked:
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?
But he didn't ask if the application is through Baby or Not (he just asked petitioned on behalf of parents of a US baby).
So I was just saying My application is filed in EB2 through my employment being parent of a US baby.I tried to be funny but I got red square for my reputation:(
Any way I would like to be out of this thread.
I did not understand your answer.
How come your 4 year old son apply in EB2 category and sponsor the parents. I know the application is for future employment. But this one is stretching too far? :)
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?
But he didn't ask if the application is through Baby or Not (he just asked petitioned on behalf of parents of a US baby).
So I was just saying My application is filed in EB2 through my employment being parent of a US baby.I tried to be funny but I got red square for my reputation:(
Any way I would like to be out of this thread.
I did not understand your answer.
How come your 4 year old son apply in EB2 category and sponsor the parents. I know the application is for future employment. But this one is stretching too far? :)
lazycis
09-29 09:50 AM
Hello Everyone,
Thank for all your help..My case have been pending over a year now of the due date......So can I file the Mandamus????
Yes, you can and you need to if you do not want to wait indefinitely. The federal courts routinely held that 2+ year delay in processing I-485 is unreasonable:
http://immigrationportal.com/attachment.php?attachmentid=16580&d=1182811320
http://www.immigrationportal.com/attachment.php?attachmentid=16062&d=1176397314
Thank for all your help..My case have been pending over a year now of the due date......So can I file the Mandamus????
Yes, you can and you need to if you do not want to wait indefinitely. The federal courts routinely held that 2+ year delay in processing I-485 is unreasonable:
http://immigrationportal.com/attachment.php?attachmentid=16580&d=1182811320
http://www.immigrationportal.com/attachment.php?attachmentid=16062&d=1176397314
vinzak
01-07 12:10 PM
waitingwaiting, may you could change the subject of this thread to something like "Bill to move DV numbers to EB!!!". It'll probably get more attention.
No comments:
Post a Comment