chanduv23
06-12 11:31 AM
Because Mahatma Gandhi was born on october.:):)
His 6years end in oct 2010.
ds
I was born in Oct too :) :)
His 6years end in oct 2010.
ds
I was born in Oct too :) :)
wallpaper These green homes are all in
manja
04-21 09:48 AM
Friends,
I will be relocating to Houston soon. I am new to the area. I would really appreciate if you can give your inputs on good neighborhoods, cost of living, etc.
Thanks,
nmdial
Welcome to H city! SugarLand and Katy have very good neighborhoods with lots of desis. A lot depends upon where your office located. Cost of living is in Houston is low compared to LA, NY. Homes are "affordable". But property taxes are high (average is above 3%). Food, gas and misc. services are cheap. Insurance and utility costs are high though. Let me know if you have any specific questions.
I will be relocating to Houston soon. I am new to the area. I would really appreciate if you can give your inputs on good neighborhoods, cost of living, etc.
Thanks,
nmdial
Welcome to H city! SugarLand and Katy have very good neighborhoods with lots of desis. A lot depends upon where your office located. Cost of living is in Houston is low compared to LA, NY. Homes are "affordable". But property taxes are high (average is above 3%). Food, gas and misc. services are cheap. Insurance and utility costs are high though. Let me know if you have any specific questions.
akkakarla
08-17 06:53 PM
One thing that stands out from US vs Europe(UK included) is that it is very difficult to blend into the main stream. Especially in UK where it is divided into Zones. These zones say that you belong to that community and that race.
Secondly, the number of IT jobs are comparatively less in UK and Europe and some places you need to know the language ex. Working with SAP AG or in SAP AG you need to know Deutsche otherwise you feel you are lost.
Thirdly, there is difference in the way the Operations are done, Process and procedures followed.
As the proverb goes The other side of the wall is always green. We cannot say UK is good or Germany is good unless we experienced. And also just one person becomes successful everyone cannot. One thing I can say for sure If anyone has MBA from top notch schools they can go to the top of the ladder easily in London Financial Industries.
Einen sch�nen Tag noch!
Secondly, the number of IT jobs are comparatively less in UK and Europe and some places you need to know the language ex. Working with SAP AG or in SAP AG you need to know Deutsche otherwise you feel you are lost.
Thirdly, there is difference in the way the Operations are done, Process and procedures followed.
As the proverb goes The other side of the wall is always green. We cannot say UK is good or Germany is good unless we experienced. And also just one person becomes successful everyone cannot. One thing I can say for sure If anyone has MBA from top notch schools they can go to the top of the ladder easily in London Financial Industries.
Einen sch�nen Tag noch!
2011 energy with Amory Lovins,
belmontboy
04-10 03:30 PM
source?
more...
sanju_eb3
02-26 09:33 AM
If I were you, I would take start with something "less technical" in the IT field like testing. You can learn a tool or two (example: Mercury, Rational etc) and basic methodology about planning, executing and monitoring testing. You have your background in HR and can use your functional skills to add value to any HR enterprise implementation.
You can then move to more technical side of the IT fields with configuration of any of the major enterprise tools like others have suggested - Peoplesoft, SAP etc.
You can then move to more technical side of the IT fields with configuration of any of the major enterprise tools like others have suggested - Peoplesoft, SAP etc.
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?
more...
go_guy123
09-14 03:34 PM
Obviously this is illegal you should report to DOL ...read the posting in this forum it has been
discussed at lenth. WH-4 cmplaint letter etc.
discussed at lenth. WH-4 cmplaint letter etc.
2010 Amory Lovins and His Nuclear
wandmaker
07-12 08:46 PM
Our Current EAD is expiring on 10/01/2008. So we had applied for extension in june. On july 7th our application was approved and today we recieved our EAD cards. I was expecting a one year extension , which is until 10/01/2009. But USCIS send us ead cards that will expire on 01/01/2009.
What should be the course of action here. Do i need to reapply or just contact USCIS and will they be able to fix it? Any body on similiar situation.?
Service center is nebraska
You do not have to reapply, please call USCIS and let them know of this issue. CSR will tell you how to proceed further
What should be the course of action here. Do i need to reapply or just contact USCIS and will they be able to fix it? Any body on similiar situation.?
Service center is nebraska
You do not have to reapply, please call USCIS and let them know of this issue. CSR will tell you how to proceed further
more...
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?
hair Amory Lovins vs.
cjain
11-13 09:32 AM
Tom,
This is completely false. Even if the employer revokes an un approved i-140, the I-485 is not affected if the following conditions are met:
- I-140 should've been "approvable when filed"
- New job should be in same/similar field
Read the Aytes Memo (google: aytes memo) for more clarification.
and stop spreading lies
The AC21 can be used only if the following 2 conditions are met:
a. I140 is approved.
b. 180 days after the receipt date of I1485.
One may leave the employer even before the 180 days or before the 140 approval with a risk that the emploeyer will not revoke I140 and no RFE comes for 485. The safest is to use AC21 only after the I140 approval.
If 180 days passed (485 receipt date) and if I140 is approved, there is no problem even if the employer revokes the I140 after you move the company. You may get an RFE to produce the offer letter from the new company.
This is completely false. Even if the employer revokes an un approved i-140, the I-485 is not affected if the following conditions are met:
- I-140 should've been "approvable when filed"
- New job should be in same/similar field
Read the Aytes Memo (google: aytes memo) for more clarification.
and stop spreading lies
The AC21 can be used only if the following 2 conditions are met:
a. I140 is approved.
b. 180 days after the receipt date of I1485.
One may leave the employer even before the 180 days or before the 140 approval with a risk that the emploeyer will not revoke I140 and no RFE comes for 485. The safest is to use AC21 only after the I140 approval.
If 180 days passed (485 receipt date) and if I140 is approved, there is no problem even if the employer revokes the I140 after you move the company. You may get an RFE to produce the offer letter from the new company.
more...
PMisYMMV
09-03 11:55 AM
I am in the same boat as you.. See SLUD on both bases on 09/01/09 with EAC08** pending at TSC. Waiting.
Thank you for sharing the boat. Although, it is better than being lonely, I don't want anyone in this dilemma.
I hope we both get ours soon, hopefully by EOD today as other poster was wishing.
Thank you for sharing the boat. Although, it is better than being lonely, I don't want anyone in this dilemma.
I hope we both get ours soon, hopefully by EOD today as other poster was wishing.
hot amory lovins
Ann Ruben
05-15 04:15 PM
I believe that in the original post, Keerthi indicated that he was in India.
more...
house Disaster by Amory Lovins
kpchal2
03-03 12:26 PM
hi chanduv
i am not worried about RFE or NOID. I am very much concerned about direct denial and then having to go through MTR and all the stress associated with that. Can you shed some light on the scenarios that miught cause denial other than plain old stupidity of the USCIS.
thanks
i am not worried about RFE or NOID. I am very much concerned about direct denial and then having to go through MTR and all the stress associated with that. Can you shed some light on the scenarios that miught cause denial other than plain old stupidity of the USCIS.
thanks
tattoo Amory Lovins at its annual
bigboy007
12-10 02:31 PM
bump^^^^^^^^^^^
more...
pictures Amory Lovins has long argued
eastindia
01-06 09:44 AM
I understand that this bill many not pass or even move any forward. I thought two senior senators from both parties showing interest in this topic is a great opportunity for IV to present our case in a different light. We have been clamoring about the difficulties we are facing because of the present delay in green card processing. Unfortunately this is only our problem and no one else really has to be bothered about it. If we present our case in a mutually beneficial point of view perhaps some of the politicians will have little more interest in our situation. Remember JFK’s famous words…”Ask not what the country can do for you….” If we write to Senators Kerry and Lugar now, even if the bill does not pass, they will consider our situation slightly differently next time CIR or another immigration bill is introduced in the congress. I think IV ought to present our case in all different angles possible rather than the one way approach of expecting mercy in our situation. Most importantly, I think the premise of the proposed Kerry/Lugar bill is very much applicable the folks in IV. Aren’t many people in this forum waiting for an opportunity to do some business on their own? That is how new immigrants in America have always been. We shouldn’t be any different. I am sure we cannot bring in the capital that senators are looking for. But why don’t they view us slightly differently?
If it is a great opportunity, why dont everyone work on it. Start with investing in IV and taking part in it. IV is you and me.
75% of us in this forum do not qualify for the legislation being proposed here!
You are saying we folks cannot even invest 100K into business?
Even if I agree with you for a second. According to you out of 50 thousand IV members 10 thousand members qualify for this legislation. 10 thousand is a very big number.
Where are these ten thousand members? Even if these 10 thousand members invest $25 per month to lobby this bill it will be 250K per month to lobby. This is a huge amount and they can lobby this bill easily. The problem I see in IV is that out of 50 thousand people only 50 people have $25 per month to invest to lobby their own issues. Rest everyone is just sitting here and only contributing opinions.
If it is a great opportunity, why dont everyone work on it. Start with investing in IV and taking part in it. IV is you and me.
75% of us in this forum do not qualify for the legislation being proposed here!
You are saying we folks cannot even invest 100K into business?
Even if I agree with you for a second. According to you out of 50 thousand IV members 10 thousand members qualify for this legislation. 10 thousand is a very big number.
Where are these ten thousand members? Even if these 10 thousand members invest $25 per month to lobby this bill it will be 250K per month to lobby. This is a huge amount and they can lobby this bill easily. The problem I see in IV is that out of 50 thousand people only 50 people have $25 per month to invest to lobby their own issues. Rest everyone is just sitting here and only contributing opinions.
dresses The energy guru Amory Lovins
vikki76
07-05 03:05 PM
I-140 can not be ported. You need to start all over again at your new company with new PERM labor and new I-140.
However, if you have a copy of old approved I-140, you can use that to port older priority date at the time of 485 filing.Companies usually don't give copies of I-140.
However, if you have a copy of old approved I-140, you can use that to port older priority date at the time of 485 filing.Companies usually don't give copies of I-140.
more...
makeup that Amory Lovins provided
123456mg
07-20 03:32 AM
Immigration attorneys normally send more than required documents to avoid getting RFEs later on. In this case, the reason people send W-2s (though it is not mandated) and tax returns is to show that you were working and were making approximately equal amount that was mentioned on you H-1B LCA.
Asking for W-2 or tax returns are within the powers of AOS adjudicator and s/he can raise an RFE for such "discretionary evidence".
The tax returns prove that you did not have any other source of income (that directly contradicts your H-1B compliance) and thus you were not employed on another part-time job or any other business of that fashion and complied to the terms of H-1B rules.
There are various factors to consider here:
1. If you know that your H-1B LCA had substantially higher amount and you did not make that much (cause you were on bench or any other reason), it would be far better not to send it. By sending your W-2 in such case, you are actually weakening your case and the AOS officer is going to find it out and will have RFE for it and later you will have a lot of explaining to do. Also, if you had any other form(s) of income (like some people use to make money in day trading and that forms their additional income), it will be wiser not to send your income tax returns and create additonal issues.
2. If you know that you made almost similar amount as mentioned on your H-1B LCA, then you will have to send all W-2 and income tax statements from the time when you were last inspected or paroled by the US immigration officer. Do not give anymore than what is really required of you. By giving unnecessorily more information, you may cause additional issues later on.
Asking for W-2 or tax returns are within the powers of AOS adjudicator and s/he can raise an RFE for such "discretionary evidence".
The tax returns prove that you did not have any other source of income (that directly contradicts your H-1B compliance) and thus you were not employed on another part-time job or any other business of that fashion and complied to the terms of H-1B rules.
There are various factors to consider here:
1. If you know that your H-1B LCA had substantially higher amount and you did not make that much (cause you were on bench or any other reason), it would be far better not to send it. By sending your W-2 in such case, you are actually weakening your case and the AOS officer is going to find it out and will have RFE for it and later you will have a lot of explaining to do. Also, if you had any other form(s) of income (like some people use to make money in day trading and that forms their additional income), it will be wiser not to send your income tax returns and create additonal issues.
2. If you know that you made almost similar amount as mentioned on your H-1B LCA, then you will have to send all W-2 and income tax statements from the time when you were last inspected or paroled by the US immigration officer. Do not give anymore than what is really required of you. By giving unnecessorily more information, you may cause additional issues later on.
girlfriend co-founder Amory Lovins
gc_chahiye
07-20 06:18 PM
My PD is Nov 2004, I got 140 approved. Im not filing 485 now as im unmarried.
Any ideas when can be the date current again(for my PD atleast)?
EB2 or EB3? If EB2 then based on data someone posted here earlier, there is a good chance of you becoming current in the next 12-18 months.
Any ideas when can be the date current again(for my PD atleast)?
EB2 or EB3? If EB2 then based on data someone posted here earlier, there is a good chance of you becoming current in the next 12-18 months.
hairstyles Paul Hawken, Amory Lovins,
Blog Feeds
02-01 08:30 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)
kevinkris
07-21 06:11 PM
Open this thread in case if you get it..
Hi All,
My skin test was positive, where as my x-ray was normal.Incase I get an RFE , Can I go to my PCP or need to go only to local health dept.
Can some body guide me
-Srarao
$100-so far
Hi All,
My skin test was positive, where as my x-ray was normal.Incase I get an RFE , Can I go to my PCP or need to go only to local health dept.
Can some body guide me
-Srarao
$100-so far
belmontboy
12-04 10:25 PM
http://minx.cc/?post=279217
you live your life dude, don't let any other M'fer control it!!!
you live your life dude, don't let any other M'fer control it!!!
No comments:
Post a Comment