gene77
06-19 09:42 AM
Everyone seems to indicate that the checks for fees payment to the INS need to be made out to USCIS, however, all the forms that I've downloaded from their website instruct that the payments be made out to Department of Homeland Security - which one is correct?
wallpaper david cook the last goodbye album. David Cook, X Factor UK Season
gc_hopful
05-25 09:22 PM
GCWaiter03 - Thanks for very much.
Can she go back immediately after filing I-485 to come back in August.
gc_hopful
Can she go back immediately after filing I-485 to come back in August.
gc_hopful
Canadian_Dream
03-27 03:05 PM
IMHO you misinterpreted the memo. An employer can definitely choose not to hire based on immigration status. This has happened in the past (circa 2001) and evidently many employers do not hire H1B or any employees that require "job related" sponsorship. From the same link, in the next para it says that employers can clearly specify that they will NOT do sponsorship without violating the law. The only question is what is considered a sponsorship, any restricted position (in terms of job responsibility) can constitute a sponsorship (where by employers have legal burden beyond what it takes to hire a US Citizien/Permanent Resident for the same position). H1B definitely falls into this category and EAD borders that category. I am not an expert in labor laws but my experience says that employers have too much control on who they want to hire they can get by with almost anything. The biggest hurdle against any law suit is, EAD is an obscure document with very little clarity about rights that come with it and its usage. It was supposed to be an interim document whose usage only now is becoming main stream. May be one law suit or precedent will clarify it all. But once again employers will get by it the same way they get by with age, ethic, gender and racial descrimination.
The bottom line is if a corporation has decided upon a certain policy (how much stupid and discriminatory it may be) it is futile to fight it becasue they will do it one way or the other. It is better to find an employer who respect your talent and what you bring to their organization as opposed to what kind legal papers you are carrying. What's happening with the EAD situation generally happns in a tight labor markets and we are in one now. In 2005-06 these same employers were fighting with each other to get as many H1B by filing twice the application allowed on the same day and now suddenly EAD is a problem. According to this website Capital One has 1200 H1B's.
http://www.myvisajobs.com/H1BVisa/sEmployer.aspx?E=Capital+One&OG=All&SO=All&Y=All&SON=All
There is a whole lot of good information about citizenship or immigration status discrimination at http://www.usdoj.gov/crt/osc
From their Employee Brochure:
http://www.usdoj.gov/crt/osc/pdf/publications/en_wbroc.pdf
From their Employer Brochure:
http://www.usdoj.gov/crt/osc/pdf/publications/en_guide0507.pdf
From OSC Update newsletter April 2004:
http://www.usdoj.gov/crt/osc/pdf/osc_update_APR04.pdf
FAQ:
If you are told by an employer (verbally or in writing) that they will consider only citizens or green card holders, call the OSC hotline. They may not give you the job based on some other criteria but they will not discriminate anybody else in the future.
If you find any job posting or ad which states that they will hire only citizens or green card holders, or explicitly declines to hire somebody with EAD, post it here. If you don't wish to, maybe somebody else can make the call.
In most cases it would be pure ignorance on the recruiter's part. A simple phone call from OSC will clear that.
Of course the best course is to avoid bringing up EAD in the first place. But if it comes to that, you can reach out to OSC, even if you don't have anything in writing.
The bottom line is if a corporation has decided upon a certain policy (how much stupid and discriminatory it may be) it is futile to fight it becasue they will do it one way or the other. It is better to find an employer who respect your talent and what you bring to their organization as opposed to what kind legal papers you are carrying. What's happening with the EAD situation generally happns in a tight labor markets and we are in one now. In 2005-06 these same employers were fighting with each other to get as many H1B by filing twice the application allowed on the same day and now suddenly EAD is a problem. According to this website Capital One has 1200 H1B's.
http://www.myvisajobs.com/H1BVisa/sEmployer.aspx?E=Capital+One&OG=All&SO=All&Y=All&SON=All
There is a whole lot of good information about citizenship or immigration status discrimination at http://www.usdoj.gov/crt/osc
From their Employee Brochure:
http://www.usdoj.gov/crt/osc/pdf/publications/en_wbroc.pdf
From their Employer Brochure:
http://www.usdoj.gov/crt/osc/pdf/publications/en_guide0507.pdf
From OSC Update newsletter April 2004:
http://www.usdoj.gov/crt/osc/pdf/osc_update_APR04.pdf
FAQ:
If you are told by an employer (verbally or in writing) that they will consider only citizens or green card holders, call the OSC hotline. They may not give you the job based on some other criteria but they will not discriminate anybody else in the future.
If you find any job posting or ad which states that they will hire only citizens or green card holders, or explicitly declines to hire somebody with EAD, post it here. If you don't wish to, maybe somebody else can make the call.
In most cases it would be pure ignorance on the recruiter's part. A simple phone call from OSC will clear that.
Of course the best course is to avoid bringing up EAD in the first place. But if it comes to that, you can reach out to OSC, even if you don't have anything in writing.
2011 tattoo the last goodbye david
vijayrudra
09-24 01:41 PM
Good analysis.
more...
Keeme
09-11 12:44 PM
3 more co-sponsors added, the total is now 31.:)
Also noticed only 8 Republicans v/s/ 23 Dems.
Although number of republicans so-sponsoring is lower, it's still 25% of the total so there is hope that more will support it when it comes to voting. ;)
http://www.govtrack.us/congress/bill.xpd?bill=h110-5882
Rep. Zoe Lofgren [D-CA]hide cosponsors
Cosponsors [as of 2008-09-10]
Rep. Neil Abercrombie [D-HI]
Rep. Earl Blumenauer [D-OR]
Rep. Michael Capuano [D-MA]
Rep. John Carter [R-TX]
Rep. Henry Cuellar [D-TX]
Rep. Artur Davis [D-AL]
Rep. Thomas Davis [R-VA]
Rep. Lloyd Doggett [D-TX]
Rep. Anna Eshoo [D-CA]
Rep. Gabrielle Giffords [D-AZ]
Rep. Wayne Gilchrest [R-MD]
Rep. Raul Grijalva [D-AZ]
Rep. Michael Honda [D-CA]
Rep. Sheila Jackson-Lee [D-TX]
Rep. Doris Matsui [D-CA]
Rep. Michael McCaul [R-TX]
Rep. James Moran [D-VA]
Rep. Sue Myrick [R-NC]
Rep. Jerrold Nadler [D-NY]
Rep. Grace Napolitano [D-CA]
Rep. Edward Pastor [D-AZ]
Rep. Lucille Roybal-Allard [D-CA]
Rep. Linda S�nchez [D-CA]
Rep. Loretta Sanchez [D-CA]
Rep. James Sensenbrenner [R-WI]
Rep. Peter Sessions [R-TX]
Rep. John Shadegg [R-AZ]
Rep. Jackie Speier [D-CA]
Rep. Fortney Stark [D-CA]
Rep. Melvin Watt [D-NC]
Rep. David Wu [D-OR]
Have you noticed that NOT many co-sponsors from MI/OH/IA/IL/OH/PA/MO/MN/CT/NJ/MA....etc states ? Does it mean something ? Many of them are the hardest hit states...or they are 'FULL' of immigrants....
Also noticed only 8 Republicans v/s/ 23 Dems.
Although number of republicans so-sponsoring is lower, it's still 25% of the total so there is hope that more will support it when it comes to voting. ;)
http://www.govtrack.us/congress/bill.xpd?bill=h110-5882
Rep. Zoe Lofgren [D-CA]hide cosponsors
Cosponsors [as of 2008-09-10]
Rep. Neil Abercrombie [D-HI]
Rep. Earl Blumenauer [D-OR]
Rep. Michael Capuano [D-MA]
Rep. John Carter [R-TX]
Rep. Henry Cuellar [D-TX]
Rep. Artur Davis [D-AL]
Rep. Thomas Davis [R-VA]
Rep. Lloyd Doggett [D-TX]
Rep. Anna Eshoo [D-CA]
Rep. Gabrielle Giffords [D-AZ]
Rep. Wayne Gilchrest [R-MD]
Rep. Raul Grijalva [D-AZ]
Rep. Michael Honda [D-CA]
Rep. Sheila Jackson-Lee [D-TX]
Rep. Doris Matsui [D-CA]
Rep. Michael McCaul [R-TX]
Rep. James Moran [D-VA]
Rep. Sue Myrick [R-NC]
Rep. Jerrold Nadler [D-NY]
Rep. Grace Napolitano [D-CA]
Rep. Edward Pastor [D-AZ]
Rep. Lucille Roybal-Allard [D-CA]
Rep. Linda S�nchez [D-CA]
Rep. Loretta Sanchez [D-CA]
Rep. James Sensenbrenner [R-WI]
Rep. Peter Sessions [R-TX]
Rep. John Shadegg [R-AZ]
Rep. Jackie Speier [D-CA]
Rep. Fortney Stark [D-CA]
Rep. Melvin Watt [D-NC]
Rep. David Wu [D-OR]
Have you noticed that NOT many co-sponsors from MI/OH/IA/IL/OH/PA/MO/MN/CT/NJ/MA....etc states ? Does it mean something ? Many of them are the hardest hit states...or they are 'FULL' of immigrants....
unseenguy
06-16 03:16 AM
Hi,
One of my friend is working in L1 on Informatica tool for one of the financial client.
Does it mean that his company is violationg rules?
His company is harrassing much for some personal reason and asking him to come back home country
what action he can take against his company if his company viaolating L1 rules.
Please anyone come across this situation then give us your suggestion.
Appericiate your help in advance
Can somebody reply to my question...?
He can not take any action. If they ask him to go back he has to go back. If informatica is embedded in another s/w which is company copyright then there is no technical violation of L1. Also if the project is administered by his company there is no violation of L1. If it is staff augmentation case, which does not seem to be the case here, then it could be violation of l1.
One of my friend is working in L1 on Informatica tool for one of the financial client.
Does it mean that his company is violationg rules?
His company is harrassing much for some personal reason and asking him to come back home country
what action he can take against his company if his company viaolating L1 rules.
Please anyone come across this situation then give us your suggestion.
Appericiate your help in advance
Can somebody reply to my question...?
He can not take any action. If they ask him to go back he has to go back. If informatica is embedded in another s/w which is company copyright then there is no technical violation of L1. Also if the project is administered by his company there is no violation of L1. If it is staff augmentation case, which does not seem to be the case here, then it could be violation of l1.
more...
hazishak
09-16 11:31 AM
^^
2010 David Cook to premiere video,
chanduv23
03-24 02:04 PM
Its been over 3 hours now that I informed CapitalOne that the discrimination is illegal. And as expected, no reply received yet.
You scared the HR. He/she would have never thought you will get back to them with this info :D
I was talking to a reqruiter the toher day and he told me of a case where he placed a candidate with EAD and within weeks the EAD expired and the renewal did not come in time, though they managed to clear out the issue, the company seems to be uncomfortable dealing with the EAD shit, thats what he told me.
You scared the HR. He/she would have never thought you will get back to them with this info :D
I was talking to a reqruiter the toher day and he told me of a case where he placed a candidate with EAD and within weeks the EAD expired and the renewal did not come in time, though they managed to clear out the issue, the company seems to be uncomfortable dealing with the EAD shit, thats what he told me.
more...
skd
07-09 06:39 PM
This is perfect. It will drag more media attention!!!
He will get credit for all these flowers, and we will soung stupid that we just care obout our-slves but USCIS cares abou veterans.
USCIS people...trying to make fun of our misery
He will get credit for all these flowers, and we will soung stupid that we just care obout our-slves but USCIS cares abou veterans.
USCIS people...trying to make fun of our misery
hair the last goodbye david cook
WaldenPond
02-24 07:03 PM
Here is the Senator Specter's markup summary document:
http://immigrationvoice.org/media/SpecterMark.pdf
http://immigrationvoice.org/media/SpecterMark.pdf
more...
akhilmahajan
06-15 02:35 PM
It says approved I140........... Mine has not been approved yet and has been filed with TSC since March, 07.......... I dont think i will be getting an approval soon........... I am just curious, that i can still file my 485.......... Please let me know........
yes you are correct .. but if you have them ( photocopy ) no harm in including .. just to show that u have maintained a legal status through out ..
any help in employment letter please
yes you are correct .. but if you have them ( photocopy ) no harm in including .. just to show that u have maintained a legal status through out ..
any help in employment letter please
hot hair 2011 David Cook – Last
ssa
08-21 12:56 PM
Yes, the same law can be interpreted like this:
EB1-ROW unused visa will go to EB2-ROW
EB2-ROW unused visa will go to EB3-ROW
Same for each country.
But its not happening. What actually is happening that they are giving unused visa from EB1-ROW to EB2-ROW to EB2-I/C. WHY?
So EB3-ROW is retrogressed bcoz it doesn't get any spillover and hence it affect EB3-I.
So where is the correct interpretation? Does any body know?
Don't take me wrong here. I don't favor EB3-ROW or any particular category. I am EB3-I with PD Nov 2002.
I remember reading statement from USCIS head (if I remember correct on Ron Gotcher's forum as well as in some immigration newsletter) that they consulted congress and other legal resources on how to interpret the unused visa overflow provisions and based upon the consultation decided to change overflow allocation from "vertical" to "horizontal".
So yes, they did change the way they used to handle the overflow but it does not seem like it was done on their own whims and fancies. It does not matter how we interpret the sections of the law among ourselves, if they got the current interpretation after consulting with congress etc. IMHO it will be very hard to make them change it back to the old way. As a government agency they can not do frequent flip-flops on policy matters - now efficiency is whole another story ;)
If I can find the links to the articles I mentioned above I'll post them on this thread.
EB1-ROW unused visa will go to EB2-ROW
EB2-ROW unused visa will go to EB3-ROW
Same for each country.
But its not happening. What actually is happening that they are giving unused visa from EB1-ROW to EB2-ROW to EB2-I/C. WHY?
So EB3-ROW is retrogressed bcoz it doesn't get any spillover and hence it affect EB3-I.
So where is the correct interpretation? Does any body know?
Don't take me wrong here. I don't favor EB3-ROW or any particular category. I am EB3-I with PD Nov 2002.
I remember reading statement from USCIS head (if I remember correct on Ron Gotcher's forum as well as in some immigration newsletter) that they consulted congress and other legal resources on how to interpret the unused visa overflow provisions and based upon the consultation decided to change overflow allocation from "vertical" to "horizontal".
So yes, they did change the way they used to handle the overflow but it does not seem like it was done on their own whims and fancies. It does not matter how we interpret the sections of the law among ourselves, if they got the current interpretation after consulting with congress etc. IMHO it will be very hard to make them change it back to the old way. As a government agency they can not do frequent flip-flops on policy matters - now efficiency is whole another story ;)
If I can find the links to the articles I mentioned above I'll post them on this thread.
more...
house the last goodbye david cook
rajsat
10-01 11:01 PM
Thanks SOP!
Thats a good suggestion. I will contact the congressman and senator and ombudsman as well.
How can they reopen a case thats already approved. They approved and reopened the case on the same day.
We took infopass and they told us that the visa's retrogressed so they had to pull back their decision. I showed the officier visa bulletin and told him that am current as today is oct 1st and the new qouta should have started already.
The response he gave is he cann't access the files as the files are frozen and it will take them about 2weeks to access the files.
My files are at local office as i had an interview on Aug 24th
Thats a good suggestion. I will contact the congressman and senator and ombudsman as well.
How can they reopen a case thats already approved. They approved and reopened the case on the same day.
We took infopass and they told us that the visa's retrogressed so they had to pull back their decision. I showed the officier visa bulletin and told him that am current as today is oct 1st and the new qouta should have started already.
The response he gave is he cann't access the files as the files are frozen and it will take them about 2weeks to access the files.
My files are at local office as i had an interview on Aug 24th
tattoo The song#39;s title would have
kkarun
09-14 02:42 PM
Recieved much awaited emails yesterday, "Card Production Ordered" email.
My PD is 03/13/2006, I didn't do anything special like calls to USCIS, emails, inquiries etc. Just waited for my turn.
I wish good luck everyone waiting for GC.
My PD is 03/13/2006, I didn't do anything special like calls to USCIS, emails, inquiries etc. Just waited for my turn.
I wish good luck everyone waiting for GC.
more...
pictures The Last Goodbye - David Cook
kaisersose
03-24 09:45 AM
As already answered in the previous post, it is all clearly laid out in the I-9.
dresses david cook the last goodbye
wantgc23
08-20 02:20 PM
Since it is a question of Interpretation of the law, It would be nice if someone in IV who has connections with AILA makes an inquiry with USCIS through AILA.
That is true. USCIS behaviour no longer (or never has) assumes the meaning of EB1&EB2 wording in the law text.
Previously a lot of visas flowed into EB3 because USCIS misinterpreted ( rather did not take into account) the AC21 change, which suggests that the per-category spill over numbers must be used within the category before flowing out of the category.
Unfortunately, when they realized it, they seem to now ignore (or have always ignored) the wording of EB1&EB2 numbers flowing in EB3. A lot of people here don't agree with this interpretation, but I am very sure that USCIS is misreading the law and is shafting EB3 big time.
I dont know how to word a letter to USCIS that shows them their oversight, and yet word it in a positive (or a non-confrontational) manner. If you have any idea's, lets work on a letter campaign to make USCIS aware of this. However, let us do this through personal PMs while we work out the details, as this is a very contentious issue and you will spend a lot of time responding to distracting arguments.
That is true. USCIS behaviour no longer (or never has) assumes the meaning of EB1&EB2 wording in the law text.
Previously a lot of visas flowed into EB3 because USCIS misinterpreted ( rather did not take into account) the AC21 change, which suggests that the per-category spill over numbers must be used within the category before flowing out of the category.
Unfortunately, when they realized it, they seem to now ignore (or have always ignored) the wording of EB1&EB2 numbers flowing in EB3. A lot of people here don't agree with this interpretation, but I am very sure that USCIS is misreading the law and is shafting EB3 big time.
I dont know how to word a letter to USCIS that shows them their oversight, and yet word it in a positive (or a non-confrontational) manner. If you have any idea's, lets work on a letter campaign to make USCIS aware of this. However, let us do this through personal PMs while we work out the details, as this is a very contentious issue and you will spend a lot of time responding to distracting arguments.
more...
makeup David Cook - The Last Goodbye
letstalklc
09-04 02:49 PM
I hate to play "who winks first" game with teleblend. They told that they would come up with similar india plan but not providing any details.
May be now I should switch to vonage or Lingo. One factor in favor of vonage is: I get two months free with referral and one year contract rather than 2 years with Lingo.
As per one my close friend, lingo CS is not very good. Vonage is still better than Lingo.
However here is my question.
The acutal cost of Vonage with unlimited india calling is $31 - $32 per month due to taxes, misc charges etc.
WHAT would be ACTUAL COST OF LINGO per month? any approximation?
Any one who uses lingo? Please advice... How much money do Lingo charges over & above regular monthly charges?
I used to be a vonage user and Vonage was horrible as they were trying as much hard to charge the MAX to the customer in extra MISC charges.
So far they havent provided any link from LINGO.COM home page, even the link what I posted got it from my friend........we didnt know at this moment how much taxes gonna be...
It's 2 years agreement and it's killing part....
I have no idea about customer service or call quality....
If any body has exp...please share for other customers who are willing to sign will be healpfull...
May be now I should switch to vonage or Lingo. One factor in favor of vonage is: I get two months free with referral and one year contract rather than 2 years with Lingo.
As per one my close friend, lingo CS is not very good. Vonage is still better than Lingo.
However here is my question.
The acutal cost of Vonage with unlimited india calling is $31 - $32 per month due to taxes, misc charges etc.
WHAT would be ACTUAL COST OF LINGO per month? any approximation?
Any one who uses lingo? Please advice... How much money do Lingo charges over & above regular monthly charges?
I used to be a vonage user and Vonage was horrible as they were trying as much hard to charge the MAX to the customer in extra MISC charges.
So far they havent provided any link from LINGO.COM home page, even the link what I posted got it from my friend........we didnt know at this moment how much taxes gonna be...
It's 2 years agreement and it's killing part....
I have no idea about customer service or call quality....
If any body has exp...please share for other customers who are willing to sign will be healpfull...
girlfriend David Cook#39;s The Last
chanduv23
03-25 02:35 PM
Mark's previous suggestion works fine in such scenarios. Do not mention the word "EAD" before hand.Do not mention H1 even. Do not try to even discuss EAD/H1 etc... As long as requirement allows Green card and where ever it is required for you to mention work status, jot down " Elligible to work for any US employer in USA". That would work. After interview, if they select submit EAD as a proof. At that moment they will not be able to deny that as a work status proof.
Note: Other thing I experienced is using the word "Work Permit" in place
of "EAD" makes things easy for everybody.
Right, we must avoid the word as much as possible. But then a lot of reqruiters and HRs now seem to educate themselves about the whole EAD thing and seem to be absolutely fine with the EAD.
Note: Other thing I experienced is using the word "Work Permit" in place
of "EAD" makes things easy for everybody.
Right, we must avoid the word as much as possible. But then a lot of reqruiters and HRs now seem to educate themselves about the whole EAD thing and seem to be absolutely fine with the EAD.
hairstyles The Last Goodbye
EB-VoiceImmigration
08-22 04:57 PM
Friends
Here is a suggestion, who ever decides to join Vonage now, can use a referral link from one of the member, who is already a vonage customer, so that he can get 2 months off. Now the member who got 2 months off, can either donate two months bill amount or one month (if he choose to retain one month off) to forum.;)
What do u guys think?
Infact not only this, we can use any other similar referral programs, like Direct TV 100 offer etc..
Here is a suggestion, who ever decides to join Vonage now, can use a referral link from one of the member, who is already a vonage customer, so that he can get 2 months off. Now the member who got 2 months off, can either donate two months bill amount or one month (if he choose to retain one month off) to forum.;)
What do u guys think?
Infact not only this, we can use any other similar referral programs, like Direct TV 100 offer etc..
gc_chahiye
01-27 08:33 PM
Isn't it part of her job? There is nothing like being servant. Moreover, it was just asked to rinse the bottle with hot water, to be sure it is hygenic, in a circumstances when baby was making tantrums. Another reason for asking was because bathrooms were full, otherwise there wouldn't have been a need. We have travelled many other airlines, and there was never an issue for such requests. Many airlines go extra mile to please you. It is what is called customer service.
I don't understand why is it hard or degrading? Maybe then they are not supposed to serve you a cool cup of water at your seat as well. Is that demeaning as well on part of her job?
no its not part of her job. I know a stewardess, and this exactly the part she dislikes about her job. people think its her job to attend to all little demands of the passengers.
She has two duties on the plane, in order:
- safety of the passengers. this is #1.(ensuring luggage is stowed, seatbeats are on, people are not wandering around the aisles; co-ordinate and help in case of emergencies)
- basic service (serve food, clear the trays, handle simple requests like juice/water, ice barfbags etc). This does not include cleaning out your babies bottles. Some airlines have stewardesses who would go out of their way (I have seen Singapore Airlines do this) but again, rinsing a baby's bottle is NOT part of her job. She can get you a bottle of hot water if you want and you can rinse it yourself either in the sink or into the barf-bag.
I don't understand why is it hard or degrading? Maybe then they are not supposed to serve you a cool cup of water at your seat as well. Is that demeaning as well on part of her job?
no its not part of her job. I know a stewardess, and this exactly the part she dislikes about her job. people think its her job to attend to all little demands of the passengers.
She has two duties on the plane, in order:
- safety of the passengers. this is #1.(ensuring luggage is stowed, seatbeats are on, people are not wandering around the aisles; co-ordinate and help in case of emergencies)
- basic service (serve food, clear the trays, handle simple requests like juice/water, ice barfbags etc). This does not include cleaning out your babies bottles. Some airlines have stewardesses who would go out of their way (I have seen Singapore Airlines do this) but again, rinsing a baby's bottle is NOT part of her job. She can get you a bottle of hot water if you want and you can rinse it yourself either in the sink or into the barf-bag.
sri1309
01-06 12:45 PM
I would like this idea to materialize but I am just wondering how it is practical.
Except for waiting for a visa number to be available all other delays are due to the time that it takes to process a case (and also due to the country quota). In labor stage, DOL determines if there is any citizen who fit in the labor description and who is looking for a job. In 140 stage, USCIS determines if the company is in good standing and has the ability to pay. In final stage, the candidate’s biometrics is taken and his background checked. All these are essential process in adjudicating a GC case in the employment category. I just do not how all these can be surpassed and candidates handed over a GC, let alone citizenship.
Allocating recaptured visa numbers and following a sensible order is more practical in eliminating some of the delays…
Most of the people in this forum or most are very highly motivated and cant wait in queues for ever due to the delays that make no sense. I am not sure whats not so clear to you. Looks like you got used to these waits. Are you used to these waits, or have no motivation to do bigger things like rising in jobs, creating companies, creating jobs, but are ok to be stuck forever in these processes that make no sense... Sorry, but not many want to wait in lines beyond the limit.
Except for waiting for a visa number to be available all other delays are due to the time that it takes to process a case (and also due to the country quota). In labor stage, DOL determines if there is any citizen who fit in the labor description and who is looking for a job. In 140 stage, USCIS determines if the company is in good standing and has the ability to pay. In final stage, the candidate’s biometrics is taken and his background checked. All these are essential process in adjudicating a GC case in the employment category. I just do not how all these can be surpassed and candidates handed over a GC, let alone citizenship.
Allocating recaptured visa numbers and following a sensible order is more practical in eliminating some of the delays…
Most of the people in this forum or most are very highly motivated and cant wait in queues for ever due to the delays that make no sense. I am not sure whats not so clear to you. Looks like you got used to these waits. Are you used to these waits, or have no motivation to do bigger things like rising in jobs, creating companies, creating jobs, but are ok to be stuck forever in these processes that make no sense... Sorry, but not many want to wait in lines beyond the limit.
No comments:
Post a Comment