mallickarjunreddy
03-26 01:33 PM
what happens if ur wife gets hired by CAP one and she has problems after getting into a organization .. so i think you can think about fighting but also look for other options and would u do the same thing if you were in India assuming u r from India or just move on
Right but the here problem is that how to come up with written evidence of discrimination? These jerks do not send you an email "Hey, we do not consider EAD". Their pattern is generally as under.
You get an first email for their interest as your resume matches teh job
description and they want you to spit out everything in your reply
Say you have written " Authorized to work for Any employer in USA" for
work status, they do not communicate to have you spitted out specifics.
They call you. If you do not spit out, they would not go ahead. If you spit
out "EAD" smart ones do not even talk further and you find all
communication stopped. Now this is my own experience. Tell me how can
I convert this into "evidence of discrimination". Even if I have tape
recorded conversation, that guy did not utter any single word after I
spitted out "EAD"
Right but the here problem is that how to come up with written evidence of discrimination? These jerks do not send you an email "Hey, we do not consider EAD". Their pattern is generally as under.
You get an first email for their interest as your resume matches teh job
description and they want you to spit out everything in your reply
Say you have written " Authorized to work for Any employer in USA" for
work status, they do not communicate to have you spitted out specifics.
They call you. If you do not spit out, they would not go ahead. If you spit
out "EAD" smart ones do not even talk further and you find all
communication stopped. Now this is my own experience. Tell me how can
I convert this into "evidence of discrimination". Even if I have tape
recorded conversation, that guy did not utter any single word after I
spitted out "EAD"
wallpaper Transformers: Dark of the Moon
eb3_2004
08-20 03:00 PM
It actually comes down to the language. I haven't read the rollover from EB to FB (if at all it happens), but look at the language for EB1. It talks about regular number + any not used by EB5. The language for EB5 is lost when it trickles down.
Does it mean: 1. EB5 can only be used by Eb1 and not rolled down further?
or
2) Does it mean that any of the EB5 unused numbers that are also not required by Eb1 rolls down to EB2.
If it is choice 1, then I suspect we have no case. If however, it is choice 2, then it is clear through the language that spill over Eb1 goes to Eb2 and EB3 at the same time. If not, based on the language of EB1, Eb3 would have just said "unused numbers of EB2", which means it would use Eb1 numbers only if Eb2 did not need them.
Suggestion to go via AILA is a good one, but do we have contact into AILA??
I feel it is Choice 2 as Choice 1 is not possible..If Choice 1 is the case how is EB5-->EB1-->Eb2 happening now justified???
Also, Is EB1-I/EB1-ROW quota used up every year???If not that has to trickle down to EB2 and EB3 if they change the EB3 allocation interpretation.
Does it mean: 1. EB5 can only be used by Eb1 and not rolled down further?
or
2) Does it mean that any of the EB5 unused numbers that are also not required by Eb1 rolls down to EB2.
If it is choice 1, then I suspect we have no case. If however, it is choice 2, then it is clear through the language that spill over Eb1 goes to Eb2 and EB3 at the same time. If not, based on the language of EB1, Eb3 would have just said "unused numbers of EB2", which means it would use Eb1 numbers only if Eb2 did not need them.
Suggestion to go via AILA is a good one, but do we have contact into AILA??
I feel it is Choice 2 as Choice 1 is not possible..If Choice 1 is the case how is EB5-->EB1-->Eb2 happening now justified???
Also, Is EB1-I/EB1-ROW quota used up every year???If not that has to trickle down to EB2 and EB3 if they change the EB3 allocation interpretation.
kewlchap
10-12 04:54 PM
@ fatjoe:
"With an IO" and "Assigned to IO" is the same, according to me. You need to ask them whether the IO has actually picked up the app. They use a bar scanner to update the status in their systems. So, ask, can you tell me if my IO has physically scanned my file and picked it up from the holding area? If yes, good.
I just tried the POJ method and it does appear to be blocked. Bummer.
"With an IO" and "Assigned to IO" is the same, according to me. You need to ask them whether the IO has actually picked up the app. They use a bar scanner to update the status in their systems. So, ask, can you tell me if my IO has physically scanned my file and picked it up from the holding area? If yes, good.
I just tried the POJ method and it does appear to be blocked. Bummer.
2011 “Transformers: Dark of the
miaroh
09-12 06:59 PM
but it is pending with FBI since Aug 1st. Looks like they also check for fragmented names.
This is my opinion, not an advise. Use it at your own risk.
If I search my "Firstname Middlename" there are 10000 hits in google :-). And I know for sure there are few murderers , politicians and movie stars(most of them are arrested atleast once for crime or the other :-)) who have the same first name and middle name as mine back in India.Last name is what makes the full name unique.
My Namecheck was initiated Aug 4th as per TSC IO and is still pending.Looks like I am going to be waiting for a long time.
This is my opinion, not an advise. Use it at your own risk.
If I search my "Firstname Middlename" there are 10000 hits in google :-). And I know for sure there are few murderers , politicians and movie stars(most of them are arrested atleast once for crime or the other :-)) who have the same first name and middle name as mine back in India.Last name is what makes the full name unique.
My Namecheck was initiated Aug 4th as per TSC IO and is still pending.Looks like I am going to be waiting for a long time.
more...
optimystic
03-24 02:54 PM
That's true actually. They have no business asking you about details of what your work authorization status is. All they need to know is that you are legally allowed to work. Doesn't matter EAD, GC or US citizenship. Sponsoring for H1B might come up during the hiring stage but that doesn't apply here.
Hypothetically in an interview, if directly asked, and if I am planning on using EAD, I would simply tell them that I have authorization from the DHS to work for any employer, and leave it at that. If they persist, I will tell them that I have the required documents for I-9. No need for more details unless some kind of security clearance is required.
Its a little hard to understand how the issue of 'work authorization' cannot be raised during interview or hiring process.
- Say I am an employer who has a critical project that needs a person to be on job for at least few months, to ensure that the project goes smoothly
- The DHS/USICS/DOL or the Fed (or whoever it is) has told me that it is illegal for me to hire anyone without proper work authorization
- I may not have sufficient funds to sponsor H1B
- During the interview process I want to know whether the candidate a) has work authorization b) how long his work authorization is valid for? so that I can prescreen and not trouble candidates with the whole interview process only to tell them later that I can't hire them.
Based on the criteria above I dont see how it is illegal to ask what type of work authorization one has, and if EAD , how long it is valid. It may be illegal to disqualify a candidate who has EAD with validity for the required amount of time. But I sure can ask about the details within legal limits, can't I?
I dont think DOL or whatever dept it is, that regulates employment, can force an employer that they have to treat seekers of H1B Visa [and/or EAD people with for example only 1 month validity left] on par with US citizens (On the other hand, it is the vice versa that they are more concerned about :) )....I mean what if the financial position of the employer cannot afford him to sponsor an H1B or take the risk of employing an EAD guy with only 1 month validity and risk financial loss if that guy had to quit after a month due to EAD renewal delay etc.... Would they be forced to sponsor H1B or take a risk by hiring the 1 month EAD guy?
What might be illegal though is rejecting to employ EAD people with reasonable amount of validity left on their card.
Isn't that right? [ I am just curious...I am not supporting the employer here, but just trying to understand the practical enforcement of the legality of such issues]
Regards.
Hypothetically in an interview, if directly asked, and if I am planning on using EAD, I would simply tell them that I have authorization from the DHS to work for any employer, and leave it at that. If they persist, I will tell them that I have the required documents for I-9. No need for more details unless some kind of security clearance is required.
Its a little hard to understand how the issue of 'work authorization' cannot be raised during interview or hiring process.
- Say I am an employer who has a critical project that needs a person to be on job for at least few months, to ensure that the project goes smoothly
- The DHS/USICS/DOL or the Fed (or whoever it is) has told me that it is illegal for me to hire anyone without proper work authorization
- I may not have sufficient funds to sponsor H1B
- During the interview process I want to know whether the candidate a) has work authorization b) how long his work authorization is valid for? so that I can prescreen and not trouble candidates with the whole interview process only to tell them later that I can't hire them.
Based on the criteria above I dont see how it is illegal to ask what type of work authorization one has, and if EAD , how long it is valid. It may be illegal to disqualify a candidate who has EAD with validity for the required amount of time. But I sure can ask about the details within legal limits, can't I?
I dont think DOL or whatever dept it is, that regulates employment, can force an employer that they have to treat seekers of H1B Visa [and/or EAD people with for example only 1 month validity left] on par with US citizens (On the other hand, it is the vice versa that they are more concerned about :) )....I mean what if the financial position of the employer cannot afford him to sponsor an H1B or take the risk of employing an EAD guy with only 1 month validity and risk financial loss if that guy had to quit after a month due to EAD renewal delay etc.... Would they be forced to sponsor H1B or take a risk by hiring the 1 month EAD guy?
What might be illegal though is rejecting to employ EAD people with reasonable amount of validity left on their card.
Isn't that right? [ I am just curious...I am not supporting the employer here, but just trying to understand the practical enforcement of the legality of such issues]
Regards.
axp817
09-10 12:11 PM
Got CPO email around 10.45 am today for both me and my wife. Big thanks to IV. Big thanks to Pappu, Jay, Aman, Anu ad all my wonderful IV friends. I will also continue supporting Iv and activities time to time.
Congratulations, Chandu! You've been very helpful on these forums, especially when it came to those goddamned wrongful 485 denials. So I'd like to thank you, and wish you the best for the future.
Congratulations, Chandu! You've been very helpful on these forums, especially when it came to those goddamned wrongful 485 denials. So I'd like to thank you, and wish you the best for the future.
more...
gccovet
11-21 10:44 AM
Hey PD_Recapturing,
Any updates on submitting cases to ombudsman office?
Thanks a lot for all the hardwork.
GCCovet.
Any updates on submitting cases to ombudsman office?
Thanks a lot for all the hardwork.
GCCovet.
2010 Transformers: Dark of the Moon
smaram1
08-17 01:39 PM
Thanks gbof and Anil for replying...
I raised SR on Aug 12th..No Response Yet...
Infopass appointment said that my file got assigned to Examination officer on Aug 4th...Not sure if Examination Officer and IO are same or not...
But the real kicker is i got second FP on July 26th, 2010 for Code 1...I didnt see any LUD after second FP...I am guessing this is where i am stuck with second time name check or back ground check verifications...
Also is it good to go for DHS 7001 form right way...i mean ombudsman request...
I raised SR on Aug 12th..No Response Yet...
Infopass appointment said that my file got assigned to Examination officer on Aug 4th...Not sure if Examination Officer and IO are same or not...
But the real kicker is i got second FP on July 26th, 2010 for Code 1...I didnt see any LUD after second FP...I am guessing this is where i am stuck with second time name check or back ground check verifications...
Also is it good to go for DHS 7001 form right way...i mean ombudsman request...
more...
anda007
07-10 11:59 PM
This is a three page article, but worth the read. Especially, I didn't think it would mention my name -->
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/07/10/AR2007071002055.html?referrer=emailarticle
Redemption Maan !!
Anand Sharma
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/07/10/AR2007071002055.html?referrer=emailarticle
Redemption Maan !!
Anand Sharma
hair Transformers: Dark of the Moon
skd
07-11 12:23 AM
we should not do nitpicking
more...
GCVictim
08-24 12:37 PM
If you give my reference we both will get 2 months free.
Srikanth Vadlakonda
972-798-0307 (H)
friend.
Srikanth Vadlakonda
972-798-0307 (H)
friend.
hot Photos and Posters
test12344321
01-12 09:28 PM
I had an appointment on Jan 10th, 1 pm got the stamped passport same evening at 6 pm from the VFS office
Is this a Visa renewal at mumbai consulate or visa stamping. My friend had similar scenario but hes stuck up from last 2 weeks.
Did you submit the papers early or something at the consulate for verification and when did u book the stamping date(was it 1+ month early).
Is this a Visa renewal at mumbai consulate or visa stamping. My friend had similar scenario but hes stuck up from last 2 weeks.
Did you submit the papers early or something at the consulate for verification and when did u book the stamping date(was it 1+ month early).
more...
house transformer: dark of the
ashres11
09-21 01:08 PM
Let me tell you I am as anxious and frustrated as you all "July 2 filers, no action yet" are. But I am thinking about it a bit calmly, rather than thinking of doing something so that I feel that I have done something (i.e. complain, write to congressman, etc.). Expressing my anger by saying they should have done this or that, does not change the situation. I believe USCIS is working, as expected, with the capability/attitude of a government worker, treating our filings (which are so important to us) just another government office paper work. Best is just to wait for another 10 days, and if nothing is heard by then, take action as per procedures.
Either India/USA or other part of world. All are same.
Either India/USA or other part of world. All are same.
tattoo New Poster: #39;Transformers:
l1fraud
06-13 05:22 PM
I think you are doing the right thing here. My question .. what are the typical signs you need to watch out for to determine L1 violations are happening? How do you collect information / evidence that ICE or USCIS could find helpful and act upon?
'Symptoms' of this violation are
1. If your outsourcing partner (TCS, CTS, IBM etc) brings in a lot of resources and places them in client managed and executed projects and all these resources are supervised by client managers then there is a violation (pretty sure that more than half of the resources from these companies would be in L-1B, please refer the statistics published in this discussion).
2. If these resources are used for any common technical skills (Java/.Net/Oracle etc) in their projects, then you can expect a violation because all L-1B petitions are approved by uscis/consulate for speciality skills/tools. If you verify most of these petitions they would be approved for some XYZ internal tool specific to these companies (couple of L-1B brothers where generous enough to share these information). If these resources are used for any other skills/tools then there is a violation. In case of Blanket L1 petitions its pretty easy because there is no blanket petition approvals for any common technical skills.
Hope its clear to you now, please try to educate your client management first and try to avoid such a scenario, most of the times these outsourcing vendors won't budge to open up these petitions and then you have to report these cases to the corresponding authorities. One way we are doing good to L-1B resources, they can ask their organisations to process H-1Bs using this oppurtunity and come out of the bonded labour.
'Symptoms' of this violation are
1. If your outsourcing partner (TCS, CTS, IBM etc) brings in a lot of resources and places them in client managed and executed projects and all these resources are supervised by client managers then there is a violation (pretty sure that more than half of the resources from these companies would be in L-1B, please refer the statistics published in this discussion).
2. If these resources are used for any common technical skills (Java/.Net/Oracle etc) in their projects, then you can expect a violation because all L-1B petitions are approved by uscis/consulate for speciality skills/tools. If you verify most of these petitions they would be approved for some XYZ internal tool specific to these companies (couple of L-1B brothers where generous enough to share these information). If these resources are used for any other skills/tools then there is a violation. In case of Blanket L1 petitions its pretty easy because there is no blanket petition approvals for any common technical skills.
Hope its clear to you now, please try to educate your client management first and try to avoid such a scenario, most of the times these outsourcing vendors won't budge to open up these petitions and then you have to report these cases to the corresponding authorities. One way we are doing good to L-1B resources, they can ask their organisations to process H-1Bs using this oppurtunity and come out of the bonded labour.
more...
pictures Transformers Dark Of The Moon
Macaca
12-05 03:59 PM
JUAN GONZALEZ: Now, Lou, you�ve been well known for years now, especially dealing with the issue of American corporations exporting jobs and criticizing that whole process of exporting American jobs overseas.
LOU DOBBS: Sure.
JUAN GONZALEZ: And your�but also the criticism of it, that as I�ve seen it as, oftentimes does not deal with the impact so much of what this globalization on those countries themselves. In other words, you criticize NAFTA for sending so many jobs overseas, but not with the impact so much that it�s having on Mexico and on these other countries that are the other end of this free trade.
LOU DOBBS: Juan, that may be because I�m a television journalist, limited in my intellect, as well as my time.
JUAN GONZALEZ: Well, on this show, we don�t have commercials, so we have a lot of time to get into the issues.
LOU DOBBS: The reality is that, of course, NAFTA is, in my judgment, at least deleterious to the interests of the Mexican people and to the state of Mexico. One only has to look at the empty villages in particularly southern Mexico to examine the impact of the agricultural policies within NAFTA. One only has to look at the maquiladoras across northern Mexico to see the impact on a society that is already 50% impoverished, education levels still where they were thirty years ago in Mexico.
But my perspective is an American one. And I won�t presume to speak for Mexico, as Felipe Calderon does presume to speak to the United States for Americans on American policy. The reality is that NAFTA doesn�t work for this country. It doesn�t work for Mexico.
But I am not one of those people�as Amy was talking about, my detractors. The suggestion I�m anti-immigrant, for example, is absurd. I would support an increase in lawful immigration and have said so repeatedly and have no problem whatsoever with current levels of immigration, which, by the way, are the highest levels of immigration in the world�in fact, more than the rest of the world combined. We bring in more than two million people. But the issue is one that the United States does not have a foreign policy toward Mexico. We�re paternalistic and condescending toward Mexico in our dealings with Mexico, both corporately and politically. And it�s time for that to change.
LOU DOBBS: Sure.
JUAN GONZALEZ: And your�but also the criticism of it, that as I�ve seen it as, oftentimes does not deal with the impact so much of what this globalization on those countries themselves. In other words, you criticize NAFTA for sending so many jobs overseas, but not with the impact so much that it�s having on Mexico and on these other countries that are the other end of this free trade.
LOU DOBBS: Juan, that may be because I�m a television journalist, limited in my intellect, as well as my time.
JUAN GONZALEZ: Well, on this show, we don�t have commercials, so we have a lot of time to get into the issues.
LOU DOBBS: The reality is that, of course, NAFTA is, in my judgment, at least deleterious to the interests of the Mexican people and to the state of Mexico. One only has to look at the empty villages in particularly southern Mexico to examine the impact of the agricultural policies within NAFTA. One only has to look at the maquiladoras across northern Mexico to see the impact on a society that is already 50% impoverished, education levels still where they were thirty years ago in Mexico.
But my perspective is an American one. And I won�t presume to speak for Mexico, as Felipe Calderon does presume to speak to the United States for Americans on American policy. The reality is that NAFTA doesn�t work for this country. It doesn�t work for Mexico.
But I am not one of those people�as Amy was talking about, my detractors. The suggestion I�m anti-immigrant, for example, is absurd. I would support an increase in lawful immigration and have said so repeatedly and have no problem whatsoever with current levels of immigration, which, by the way, are the highest levels of immigration in the world�in fact, more than the rest of the world combined. We bring in more than two million people. But the issue is one that the United States does not have a foreign policy toward Mexico. We�re paternalistic and condescending toward Mexico in our dealings with Mexico, both corporately and politically. And it�s time for that to change.
dresses Transformers: Dark of the
ArunAntonio
06-21 03:02 PM
Canadian_Dream and jonty_11, thanks for helping out, I like this forum much better than a lot other forums I have visiting of late...
and it is because of guys like you :D
and it is because of guys like you :D
more...
makeup Transformers TF3 Dark of the
anil_a
09-21 01:38 AM
I am also July 2nd filer with no checks being cashed yet, and no other activities around my case. What can we do when the waiting period is over 90 days???
girlfriend The new poster shows Optimus
gcdeal
06-22 08:55 PM
What did you put in for the question 16 (Last Question) ? is it c9?
hairstyles transformers dark of the moon
immi2006
07-11 10:33 AM
Guys,
This should not boomrang on us, let us do it with caution. Food Delivery etc can look mean.
What we can think of is Sending your tax statements for 5 years to tell them how honest we have been and how much we contributed to economy..
Sending it to local senators ?.
What dou think ?
This should not boomrang on us, let us do it with caution. Food Delivery etc can look mean.
What we can think of is Sending your tax statements for 5 years to tell them how honest we have been and how much we contributed to economy..
Sending it to local senators ?.
What dou think ?
kisana
06-20 10:09 PM
I heard that we have to provide all the address where we stayed in USA for filing I485. But very first time I came to USA almost 6-7 years back for short term and I do not remeber the actual address. Basically i do not remeber very first two address when I came here for short term. Is it a matter of concern.
test101
07-09 06:52 PM
What you guys are talking about ... Walter reed is the best place for the flowers to go, with all what is going on in there ... the media will eat this news . DO not Cancel whatever you Do do not cancel instead call the media and let them know........... This is even better.
Can we do a blood drive next as protest! seriously. Donate blood as protest and for media attention.
Can we do a blood drive next as protest! seriously. Donate blood as protest and for media attention.
No comments:
Post a Comment