pa_arora
03-11 12:27 PM
I am sorry if this is a re-post.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/03/06/AR2009030601926.html
----
They're Taking Their Brains and Going Home
By Vivek Wadhwa
Sunday, March 8, 2009; Page B02
Seven years ago, Sandeep Nijsure left his home in Mumbai to study computer science at the University of North Texas. Master's degree in hand, he went to work for Microsoft. He valued his education and enjoyed the job, but he worried about his aging parents. He missed watching cricket, celebrating Hindu festivals and following the twists of Indian politics. His wife was homesick, too, and her visa didn't allow her to work.
Not long ago, Sandeep would have faced a tough choice: either go home and give up opportunities for wealth and U.S. citizenship, or stay and bide his time until his application for a green card goes through. But last year, Sandeep returned to India and landed a software development position with Amazon.com in Hyderabad. He and his wife live a few blocks from their families in a spacious, air-conditioned house. No longer at the mercy of the American employer sponsoring his visa, Sandeep can more easily determine the course of his career. "We are very happy with our move," he told me in an e-mail.
The United States has always been the country to which the world's best and brightest -- people like Sandeep -- have flocked in pursuit of education and to seek their fortunes. Over the past four decades, India and China suffered a major "brain drain" as tens of thousands of talented people made their way here, dreaming the American dream.
But burgeoning new economies abroad and flagging prospects in the United States have changed everything. And as opportunities pull immigrants home, the lumbering U.S. immigration bureaucracy helps push them away.
When I started teaching at Duke University in 2005, almost all the international students graduating from our Master of Engineering Management program said that they planned to stay in the United States for at least a few years. In the class of 2009, most of our 80 international students are buying one-way tickets home. It's the same at Harvard. Senior economics major Meijie Tang, from China, isn't even bothering to look for a job in the United States. After hearing from other students that it's "impossible" to get an H-1B visa -- the kind given to highly-skilled workers in fields such as engineering and science -- she teamed up with a classmate to start a technology company in Shanghai. Investors in China offered to put up millions even before 23-year-old Meijie and her 21-year-old colleague completed their business plan.
When smart young foreigners leave these shores, they take with them the seeds of tomorrow's innovation. Almost 25 percent of all international patent applications filed from the United States in 2006 named foreign nationals as inventors. Immigrants founded a quarter of all U.S. engineering and technology companies started between 1995 and 2005, including half of those in Silicon Valley. In 2005 alone, immigrants' businesses generated $52 billion in sales and employed 450,000 workers.
Yet rather than welcome these entrepreneurs, the U.S. government is confining many of them to a painful purgatory. As of Sept. 30, 2006, more than a million people were waiting for the 120,000 permanent-resident visas granted each year to skilled workers and their family members. No nation may claim more than 7 percent, so years may pass before immigrants from populous countries such as India and China are even considered.
Like many Indians, Girija Subramaniam is fed up. After earning a master's in electrical engineering from the University of Virginia in 1998, she joined Texas Instruments as a test engineer. She wanted to stay in the United States, applied for permanent residency in 2002 and has been trapped in immigration limbo ever since. If she so much as accepts a promotion or, heaven forbid, starts her own company, she will lose her place in line. Frustrated, she has applied for fast-track Canadian permanent residency and expects to move north of the border by the end of the year.
For the Kaufmann Foundation, I recently surveyed 1,200 Indians and Chinese who worked or studied in the United States and then returned home. Most were in their 30s, and 80 percent held master's degrees or doctorates in management, technology or science -- precisely the kind of people who could make the greatest contribution to the U.S. economy. A sizable number said that they had advanced significantly in their careers since leaving the United States. They were more optimistic about opportunities for entrepreneurship, and more than half planned to start their own businesses, if they had not done so already. Only a quarter said that they were likely to return to the United States.
Why does all this matter? Because just as the United States has relied on foreigners to underwrite its deficit, it has also depended on smart immigrants to staff its laboratories, engineering design studios and tech firms. An analysis of the 2000 Census showed that although immigrants accounted for only 12 percent of the U.S. workforce, they made up 47 percent of all scientists and engineers with doctorates. What's more, 67 percent of all those who entered the fields of science and engineering between 1995 and 2006 were immigrants. What will happen to America's competitive edge when these people go home?
Immigrants who leave the United States will launch companies, file patents and fill the intellectual coffers of other countries. Their talents will benefit nations such as India, China and Canada, not the United States. America's loss will be the world's gain.
wadhwa@duke.edu
Vivek Wadhwa is a senior research associate at Harvard Law School and executive in residence at Duke University.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/03/06/AR2009030601926.html
----
They're Taking Their Brains and Going Home
By Vivek Wadhwa
Sunday, March 8, 2009; Page B02
Seven years ago, Sandeep Nijsure left his home in Mumbai to study computer science at the University of North Texas. Master's degree in hand, he went to work for Microsoft. He valued his education and enjoyed the job, but he worried about his aging parents. He missed watching cricket, celebrating Hindu festivals and following the twists of Indian politics. His wife was homesick, too, and her visa didn't allow her to work.
Not long ago, Sandeep would have faced a tough choice: either go home and give up opportunities for wealth and U.S. citizenship, or stay and bide his time until his application for a green card goes through. But last year, Sandeep returned to India and landed a software development position with Amazon.com in Hyderabad. He and his wife live a few blocks from their families in a spacious, air-conditioned house. No longer at the mercy of the American employer sponsoring his visa, Sandeep can more easily determine the course of his career. "We are very happy with our move," he told me in an e-mail.
The United States has always been the country to which the world's best and brightest -- people like Sandeep -- have flocked in pursuit of education and to seek their fortunes. Over the past four decades, India and China suffered a major "brain drain" as tens of thousands of talented people made their way here, dreaming the American dream.
But burgeoning new economies abroad and flagging prospects in the United States have changed everything. And as opportunities pull immigrants home, the lumbering U.S. immigration bureaucracy helps push them away.
When I started teaching at Duke University in 2005, almost all the international students graduating from our Master of Engineering Management program said that they planned to stay in the United States for at least a few years. In the class of 2009, most of our 80 international students are buying one-way tickets home. It's the same at Harvard. Senior economics major Meijie Tang, from China, isn't even bothering to look for a job in the United States. After hearing from other students that it's "impossible" to get an H-1B visa -- the kind given to highly-skilled workers in fields such as engineering and science -- she teamed up with a classmate to start a technology company in Shanghai. Investors in China offered to put up millions even before 23-year-old Meijie and her 21-year-old colleague completed their business plan.
When smart young foreigners leave these shores, they take with them the seeds of tomorrow's innovation. Almost 25 percent of all international patent applications filed from the United States in 2006 named foreign nationals as inventors. Immigrants founded a quarter of all U.S. engineering and technology companies started between 1995 and 2005, including half of those in Silicon Valley. In 2005 alone, immigrants' businesses generated $52 billion in sales and employed 450,000 workers.
Yet rather than welcome these entrepreneurs, the U.S. government is confining many of them to a painful purgatory. As of Sept. 30, 2006, more than a million people were waiting for the 120,000 permanent-resident visas granted each year to skilled workers and their family members. No nation may claim more than 7 percent, so years may pass before immigrants from populous countries such as India and China are even considered.
Like many Indians, Girija Subramaniam is fed up. After earning a master's in electrical engineering from the University of Virginia in 1998, she joined Texas Instruments as a test engineer. She wanted to stay in the United States, applied for permanent residency in 2002 and has been trapped in immigration limbo ever since. If she so much as accepts a promotion or, heaven forbid, starts her own company, she will lose her place in line. Frustrated, she has applied for fast-track Canadian permanent residency and expects to move north of the border by the end of the year.
For the Kaufmann Foundation, I recently surveyed 1,200 Indians and Chinese who worked or studied in the United States and then returned home. Most were in their 30s, and 80 percent held master's degrees or doctorates in management, technology or science -- precisely the kind of people who could make the greatest contribution to the U.S. economy. A sizable number said that they had advanced significantly in their careers since leaving the United States. They were more optimistic about opportunities for entrepreneurship, and more than half planned to start their own businesses, if they had not done so already. Only a quarter said that they were likely to return to the United States.
Why does all this matter? Because just as the United States has relied on foreigners to underwrite its deficit, it has also depended on smart immigrants to staff its laboratories, engineering design studios and tech firms. An analysis of the 2000 Census showed that although immigrants accounted for only 12 percent of the U.S. workforce, they made up 47 percent of all scientists and engineers with doctorates. What's more, 67 percent of all those who entered the fields of science and engineering between 1995 and 2006 were immigrants. What will happen to America's competitive edge when these people go home?
Immigrants who leave the United States will launch companies, file patents and fill the intellectual coffers of other countries. Their talents will benefit nations such as India, China and Canada, not the United States. America's loss will be the world's gain.
wadhwa@duke.edu
Vivek Wadhwa is a senior research associate at Harvard Law School and executive in residence at Duke University.
wallpaper long hairstyles with angs.
sircaustic
07-20 12:43 AM
good to hear that it worked out ok in your case!
One Q: how long did it take for USCIS to get back to you with a confirmation that the MTR was accepted? [from the day you requested it]
Well.I did not have to request for confirmation. My attorney received the letter the next day after I received the automated email. The online status for my case still shows as "Denial Notice Sent".:(
One Q: how long did it take for USCIS to get back to you with a confirmation that the MTR was accepted? [from the day you requested it]
Well.I did not have to request for confirmation. My attorney received the letter the next day after I received the automated email. The online status for my case still shows as "Denial Notice Sent".:(
DesiPardesi
07-13 04:25 PM
Done. Forwarded to other affected friends.
Wondering why IV has 4000 members while signatures are only 1327.
I believe your spouse can sign too because she is affected with this VB fiasco as well.
Wondering why IV has 4000 members while signatures are only 1327.
I believe your spouse can sign too because she is affected with this VB fiasco as well.
2011 long hairstyles with angs
funnymdguy
11-16 11:24 AM
I applied for my EAD in July 2007, got it approved Oct 2007, mailed to me but I NEVER received it.
Today I called USCIS and it says that since it is not "returned to them as undeliverable", they CAN NOT do anything . I will need to APPLY for it again??
Please Help since I dont know what to do as I was expecting the EAD card to start a new job.
Thanks in advance
Today I called USCIS and it says that since it is not "returned to them as undeliverable", they CAN NOT do anything . I will need to APPLY for it again??
Please Help since I dont know what to do as I was expecting the EAD card to start a new job.
Thanks in advance
more...
garybanz
12-18 12:34 PM
Looks like the EB2 dates for india have retrogressed by two years. I am applying for green card and would like to know if I shouls go with EB2 or EB3.
Thanks for your help...
In the long run EB2 will be better than EB3
Thanks for your help...
In the long run EB2 will be better than EB3
MatsP
January 30th, 2006, 08:22 AM
DMT: I couldn't agree more, magazines write differences up or down to make a point - and of course none of us would actually read a magazine where they tested three competing models of DSLR's and the article said "They are all good, just buy any and you'll be happy" - we want them to say that one of them is the best and that the others are ranging from so-so to absolute rubbish [althouhg I probably couldn't tell the difference]. I've had the same discussion on other subjects of magazine articles. Also look at which brand advertizes more and less in a magazine. The journalist working for a magazine MAY not want to upset the biggest advertiser. Further, they need to get "Free test samples". In a motorcycle magazine, one model of Triumph was written down quite badly. Triumph wrote to the publisher and said essentially "If you don't write better about the next bike we lend to you, we will not give you bikes for tests in the future".
Back to the subject, however: It's important to know what YOU are looking for in a camera. What sort of photos/occasions are you intending to photograph: sports, nature, family & friends, outdoors, indoors, close-up or far away, etc, etc?
--
Mats
Back to the subject, however: It's important to know what YOU are looking for in a camera. What sort of photos/occasions are you intending to photograph: sports, nature, family & friends, outdoors, indoors, close-up or far away, etc, etc?
--
Mats
more...
franklin
05-31 10:46 AM
Great news!
But to answer the question posed - how do we get more of the affected retrogressed people involved. I suspect it will take "casting a wider net" and getting people from different countries.
But to answer the question posed - how do we get more of the affected retrogressed people involved. I suspect it will take "casting a wider net" and getting people from different countries.
2010 long hairstyles with angs for
iv_only_hope
08-15 12:01 PM
Thanks a lot for reply. I just want to make sure she can go to canada, cause she has a bachelors degree from India. Forgetting the security checks, I was reading that for such ppl they say go back to home country for stamping. Mostly ppl with us degrees are fine. WOuld she be safe cause she had one h1 stamped in india few years back?
more...
psk79
08-24 08:50 PM
Hi guys,
I know J Barrett has been a star of this forum for a while.
I just wanted to check if anyone in a similar situation as mine as received any update on their 485.
140 approved from TSC in May 2006; LUD on 7/28
485 received at NSC on July 2, 2007
485 received and Signed for by J Barrett at 10:25 AM
Thanks.
I am in the same boat.. Jul2, NSC filesd I140 approved in TSC received by BArrett @1025am
I know J Barrett has been a star of this forum for a while.
I just wanted to check if anyone in a similar situation as mine as received any update on their 485.
140 approved from TSC in May 2006; LUD on 7/28
485 received at NSC on July 2, 2007
485 received and Signed for by J Barrett at 10:25 AM
Thanks.
I am in the same boat.. Jul2, NSC filesd I140 approved in TSC received by BArrett @1025am
hair Hot Long Hair Styles for 2011
ajaykk
08-09 10:44 AM
FAQ #2 - clarified that forms with �Y� designation means that prior version of the form will not be rejected.
Q29: The version date on the new I-485 form is 7/30/07 and it has an "N" designation after it, meaning that the I-485 applications arriving at the service center on or after July 30, 2007 must use the new I-485 form or it will be rejected at the mailroom. Is this really true?
A29. No, the �N� designation on the new version was inadvertently uploaded to the USCIS website and has since been removed. The new and corrected I-485 application form that will be uploaded will have the �Y� designation which means that prior version of the form will not be rejected.
Uff this gives me some relief. My attorney has sent my 485 documents on 07/27 and reached NE on 07/30. I'm sure she must have used the old version.
Q29: The version date on the new I-485 form is 7/30/07 and it has an "N" designation after it, meaning that the I-485 applications arriving at the service center on or after July 30, 2007 must use the new I-485 form or it will be rejected at the mailroom. Is this really true?
A29. No, the �N� designation on the new version was inadvertently uploaded to the USCIS website and has since been removed. The new and corrected I-485 application form that will be uploaded will have the �Y� designation which means that prior version of the form will not be rejected.
Uff this gives me some relief. My attorney has sent my 485 documents on 07/27 and reached NE on 07/30. I'm sure she must have used the old version.
more...
abcdefgh
03-29 12:48 PM
If you apply for extnsion, please keep in mind your parents stays in US until you receive their approval extension. If they travel outside the while case pending and if they try to renter before case is approved, they will deny at POE and cancel and 10 Year multiple visa. Be very careful here.
hot long black hairstyles with
langagadu
11-11 12:16 PM
I will advice you but do you provide free catering for the next 5 years?
Just kidding man. Stay with the employer for atleast 6 months (that's what pundits say).
Hi, I have got my GC couple of months back, planning to start a restaurant business and want to leave my current employer who sponsored my Green Card. Is it fine to leave my employer and start a business? Does it creates any problem in future when I apply for citizenship as Im into different field.
Please do advice accordingly as I need to take decision based on that.
Thanks in advance
Just kidding man. Stay with the employer for atleast 6 months (that's what pundits say).
Hi, I have got my GC couple of months back, planning to start a restaurant business and want to leave my current employer who sponsored my Green Card. Is it fine to leave my employer and start a business? Does it creates any problem in future when I apply for citizenship as Im into different field.
Please do advice accordingly as I need to take decision based on that.
Thanks in advance
more...
house lack short hairstyle with
up_guy
09-27 01:59 PM
The priority dates cannot be ported during the I-140 stage. This can be done only during 485 filing where in you have two I-140s approved and a request can be made to use the earlier priority date.
Thats not ture. PD can be ported at the time of I-140 filing
Thats not ture. PD can be ported at the time of I-140 filing
tattoo Beauty Long Layered Hairstyle
chi_shark
12-02 11:51 PM
thanks! i do have business activities... and i am not worried about audits...
If you are independent contractor you can take some allowed expenses. If you are salaried employee you need to show loss for getting some benefit. Generally if you show loss for 3 years continously then IRS mostly deny on third year. In any case if you take too much expense you are inviting audit and that is going to be nightmare. I do not think it is a good idea to start a company just for expenses unless you are going to do business. Atleast you should be doing independent contracting(corp to Corp).
If you are independent contractor you can take some allowed expenses. If you are salaried employee you need to show loss for getting some benefit. Generally if you show loss for 3 years continously then IRS mostly deny on third year. In any case if you take too much expense you are inviting audit and that is going to be nightmare. I do not think it is a good idea to start a company just for expenses unless you are going to do business. Atleast you should be doing independent contracting(corp to Corp).
more...
pictures Used a long gown lack dress
I_need_GC
07-25 04:07 PM
Hi,
I'm looking for some answers for my wife's visa issues. I'm on H1B (valid until 2010) and she is on OPT (Valid until Dec 20 2008. F-1 visa expired May 2008). My PERM labor is in process and we hope to file for I 140 and I 485 and EAD concurrently by September/ October 2008. My lawyer says that we can file concurrently because my wife's country of birth is in Europe.
Now the questions:
1. Is it okay for my wife to apply for EAD based in I 485 while on OPT with expired F-1 visa? Is there a requirement that wife has to be on H-4 to apply for EAD based on husband's GC application?
A. Singh
She can apply for adjustment of status EAD I-485 she does not need to have H4 to apply for adjustment under you. She is not out of status because he status in the US is currently OPT even thoug the visa itself might have expired on the passport.
2. Also read on some forums that Wife's F-1 OPT will be invalidated as soon as her I 485 application is recieved. Is this true?
A. Singh
It will not be invalidated. Her status will change from F1 to Adjustment of status. You can legally stay in the US while your I-485 is pending and travel using AP or work using EAD.
3. EAD approval takes 3-4 months on average. So if she doesn't recieve her EAD approval by December 2008 (Dec 20 2008 her OPT expires) she will be out of status. Should we apply for H-4 so that she doesn't become out-of-status?
A. Singh
In my opinion you don't need H4, but to be safe in case the I-485 gets denied then she will be out of status. Legally she can stay in the US while her I-485 is being processed that is one of the benefits of I-485.
4. We expect that her EAD approval will come by Jan/ Feb 2009. There is a 2 month gap provision that foreign nationals sometimes use to change their status. Is it a safe bet to avoid getting her on H-4 and use the 2 month gap period?
A. Singh
Yes the 2 month gap provision called 245q protects you against 2 month of illegal work or stay. But in my opinion she will not be out of status in this situation after filing I-485.
4. How much does applying for H-4 cost? I'm simply expecting a range of sorts.
Thanks,
A. Singh
I don't know the current fee you can check the uscis website.
I'm looking for some answers for my wife's visa issues. I'm on H1B (valid until 2010) and she is on OPT (Valid until Dec 20 2008. F-1 visa expired May 2008). My PERM labor is in process and we hope to file for I 140 and I 485 and EAD concurrently by September/ October 2008. My lawyer says that we can file concurrently because my wife's country of birth is in Europe.
Now the questions:
1. Is it okay for my wife to apply for EAD based in I 485 while on OPT with expired F-1 visa? Is there a requirement that wife has to be on H-4 to apply for EAD based on husband's GC application?
A. Singh
She can apply for adjustment of status EAD I-485 she does not need to have H4 to apply for adjustment under you. She is not out of status because he status in the US is currently OPT even thoug the visa itself might have expired on the passport.
2. Also read on some forums that Wife's F-1 OPT will be invalidated as soon as her I 485 application is recieved. Is this true?
A. Singh
It will not be invalidated. Her status will change from F1 to Adjustment of status. You can legally stay in the US while your I-485 is pending and travel using AP or work using EAD.
3. EAD approval takes 3-4 months on average. So if she doesn't recieve her EAD approval by December 2008 (Dec 20 2008 her OPT expires) she will be out of status. Should we apply for H-4 so that she doesn't become out-of-status?
A. Singh
In my opinion you don't need H4, but to be safe in case the I-485 gets denied then she will be out of status. Legally she can stay in the US while her I-485 is being processed that is one of the benefits of I-485.
4. We expect that her EAD approval will come by Jan/ Feb 2009. There is a 2 month gap provision that foreign nationals sometimes use to change their status. Is it a safe bet to avoid getting her on H-4 and use the 2 month gap period?
A. Singh
Yes the 2 month gap provision called 245q protects you against 2 month of illegal work or stay. But in my opinion she will not be out of status in this situation after filing I-485.
4. How much does applying for H-4 cost? I'm simply expecting a range of sorts.
Thanks,
A. Singh
I don't know the current fee you can check the uscis website.
dresses long hairstyles 2011 with
pmamp
02-27 07:42 PM
I have found some useful information as I was looking for solutions. I believe, if she does not leave US, she could stay on F1.
Please correct me if I am wrong.
http://www.hooyou.com/f-1/140filing.htm
Please correct me if I am wrong.
http://www.hooyou.com/f-1/140filing.htm
more...
makeup medium length blonde
Blog Feeds
01-09 02:20 PM
AILA Leadership Has Just Posted the Following:
https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiar-0WX3P5-ZTwag85AKhrZWDhLmIIEq3CMMDW3REgTYgpI2M3dIgEopb1Gj2UIfJUBKs1Vl5FNSMc_Ynp-BSvhvI_QlgSWUtoCljtP66D6NYzOohifcFHccC4BJ40KHy1XJ34SODFMO8/s320/2010-01-07+international-business-industry-night.jpg (https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiar-0WX3P5-ZTwag85AKhrZWDhLmIIEq3CMMDW3REgTYgpI2M3dIgEopb1Gj2UIfJUBKs1Vl5FNSMc_Ynp-BSvhvI_QlgSWUtoCljtP66D6NYzOohifcFHccC4BJ40KHy1XJ34SODFMO8/s1600-h/2010-01-07+international-business-industry-night.jpg)By Deborah Notkin, AILA Past President
Unfortunately, that's exactly what the Gutierrez bill is. While there are many excellent provisions on important components of immigration reform, especially family unity and legalization, the employment immigration provisions are overwhelmingly negative and geared to eliminate the employers from having any reasonable input on the specific types of foreign employees that are required in an evolving economy. The overarching provision is the establishment of a "Commission" that would determine U.S. immigration policy (numbers and categories) pertaining to temporary and permanent workers. A commission of seven "experts" would report to both houses of Congress annually the types and number of workers that could enter the U. S. Unless both houses of Congress acted to block them (a rarity in today's world), the Commission's "recommendations" would become the law of the land.
There are a number of reasons why substituting Congress with a commission is a bad idea. First, we don't have the statistical evidence available to make good measurements on an annual basis. Second, government commissions in DC overwhelmingly end up becoming unelected political entities, with their own agendas, often exceeding their original mission. Third, a politicized commission on such a controversial issue would be especially problematic because it would not be accountable directly to voters as are elected representatives. In a debate on the Commission concept that I attended in New York, proponents were struggling to find even a few examples of Beltway government commissions that worked and did not become politicized.
While the Gutierrez bill should be commended for including provisions requiring employers to take responsibility for utilizing ethical recruiters and providing a few exemptions from the employment based quota for certain types of professionals, it generally negates the legitimacy of corporate needs and lacks any concept of the global economy and the international, competitive personnel market.
Most egregious is the idea of bringing in a lesser skilled workforce through a sort of "hiring hall" lottery system that would eliminate employers entirely from the selection process. Foreign workers would be placed in a database and assigned to employers based on some computer's or bureaucrat's idea of a match. It reminds one of the unfortunate migrants who are day workers standing outside waiting to be randomly hired. Here, they can just stand in their own countries being assigned to an employer they may not have chosen if given the choice.
Additional provisions would eliminate the ability of employers to use entry level wages for entry level temporary workers. Forcing employers to pay foreign nationals more than their U.S. worker counterparts is totally absurd. Is this how we think America will benefit from the many foreign nationals who have just graduated from, among other fields, Science, Technology, Engineering, and Mathmatics, programs? And of course, the unworkable cap on H-1B temporary professional workers in a healthy economy is totally ignored, evidently to be left to the gang of seven commissioners.
It appears that Congressman Gutierrez put his heart and soul into legalization and family unity but left the employment provisions to be drafted by the most anti-employer parties in this debate. Much is borrowed from the Durbin-Grassley proposed H-1B and L-1B provisions and the Economic Policy Institute's piece on immigration, which starts out by labeling all employers using foreign workers as participants in indentured servitude.
I have only highlighted a few of the egregious provisions that promise to sink an otherwise good piece of legislation. And this does not serve anyone who sincerely wants to find a solution to the human tragedy faced by undocumented migrants in the United States.
https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/tracker/186823568153827945-4566215004987922662?l=ailaleadership.blogspot.com
More... (http://ailaleadership.blogspot.com/2010/01/gutierrez-billa-good-legalization-and.html)
https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiar-0WX3P5-ZTwag85AKhrZWDhLmIIEq3CMMDW3REgTYgpI2M3dIgEopb1Gj2UIfJUBKs1Vl5FNSMc_Ynp-BSvhvI_QlgSWUtoCljtP66D6NYzOohifcFHccC4BJ40KHy1XJ34SODFMO8/s320/2010-01-07+international-business-industry-night.jpg (https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiar-0WX3P5-ZTwag85AKhrZWDhLmIIEq3CMMDW3REgTYgpI2M3dIgEopb1Gj2UIfJUBKs1Vl5FNSMc_Ynp-BSvhvI_QlgSWUtoCljtP66D6NYzOohifcFHccC4BJ40KHy1XJ34SODFMO8/s1600-h/2010-01-07+international-business-industry-night.jpg)By Deborah Notkin, AILA Past President
Unfortunately, that's exactly what the Gutierrez bill is. While there are many excellent provisions on important components of immigration reform, especially family unity and legalization, the employment immigration provisions are overwhelmingly negative and geared to eliminate the employers from having any reasonable input on the specific types of foreign employees that are required in an evolving economy. The overarching provision is the establishment of a "Commission" that would determine U.S. immigration policy (numbers and categories) pertaining to temporary and permanent workers. A commission of seven "experts" would report to both houses of Congress annually the types and number of workers that could enter the U. S. Unless both houses of Congress acted to block them (a rarity in today's world), the Commission's "recommendations" would become the law of the land.
There are a number of reasons why substituting Congress with a commission is a bad idea. First, we don't have the statistical evidence available to make good measurements on an annual basis. Second, government commissions in DC overwhelmingly end up becoming unelected political entities, with their own agendas, often exceeding their original mission. Third, a politicized commission on such a controversial issue would be especially problematic because it would not be accountable directly to voters as are elected representatives. In a debate on the Commission concept that I attended in New York, proponents were struggling to find even a few examples of Beltway government commissions that worked and did not become politicized.
While the Gutierrez bill should be commended for including provisions requiring employers to take responsibility for utilizing ethical recruiters and providing a few exemptions from the employment based quota for certain types of professionals, it generally negates the legitimacy of corporate needs and lacks any concept of the global economy and the international, competitive personnel market.
Most egregious is the idea of bringing in a lesser skilled workforce through a sort of "hiring hall" lottery system that would eliminate employers entirely from the selection process. Foreign workers would be placed in a database and assigned to employers based on some computer's or bureaucrat's idea of a match. It reminds one of the unfortunate migrants who are day workers standing outside waiting to be randomly hired. Here, they can just stand in their own countries being assigned to an employer they may not have chosen if given the choice.
Additional provisions would eliminate the ability of employers to use entry level wages for entry level temporary workers. Forcing employers to pay foreign nationals more than their U.S. worker counterparts is totally absurd. Is this how we think America will benefit from the many foreign nationals who have just graduated from, among other fields, Science, Technology, Engineering, and Mathmatics, programs? And of course, the unworkable cap on H-1B temporary professional workers in a healthy economy is totally ignored, evidently to be left to the gang of seven commissioners.
It appears that Congressman Gutierrez put his heart and soul into legalization and family unity but left the employment provisions to be drafted by the most anti-employer parties in this debate. Much is borrowed from the Durbin-Grassley proposed H-1B and L-1B provisions and the Economic Policy Institute's piece on immigration, which starts out by labeling all employers using foreign workers as participants in indentured servitude.
I have only highlighted a few of the egregious provisions that promise to sink an otherwise good piece of legislation. And this does not serve anyone who sincerely wants to find a solution to the human tragedy faced by undocumented migrants in the United States.
https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/tracker/186823568153827945-4566215004987922662?l=ailaleadership.blogspot.com
More... (http://ailaleadership.blogspot.com/2010/01/gutierrez-billa-good-legalization-and.html)
girlfriend lack hairstyles with angs,
eastindia
12-20 01:40 PM
We need to have a working group to generate awareness @ grassroot levels about legal EB immigrations - common voters, media, people working around you.
This is a good idea.
How about you take your idea further and start this group. I am sure many folks who agree with you will join you. What do you think?
This is a good idea.
How about you take your idea further and start this group. I am sure many folks who agree with you will join you. What do you think?
hairstyles long black hairstyle
rjgleason
July 18th, 2004, 07:15 PM
Very interesting flower, great colors and shapes. I don't have a suggestion for the DOF problem, but I think this is a case where the flower is so unique I'm not thinking of the technicalities very much. I like the second picture, but it'd be great to pair it with an "overview" shot to understand how the whole flower/plant looks.
Don't apologize for your nice flower pictures - in that case I know one or two that would have to do the same for birds, or baseball, or semi-nudes, or [insert favourite subject here]... :p
Anders, I'll try and minimize my baseball shots, but I don't really know any semi-nudes, locally, anyway!
Don't apologize for your nice flower pictures - in that case I know one or two that would have to do the same for birds, or baseball, or semi-nudes, or [insert favourite subject here]... :p
Anders, I'll try and minimize my baseball shots, but I don't really know any semi-nudes, locally, anyway!
piyu7444
07-22 05:28 PM
Even if you use AP to re-enter, instead of a H1 visa, you may still be able to maintain your H1 status, provided you continue working for the same employer.
Hope this helps!
I probably know this works the way you have stated but do we have any references to legal document? rule? etc......
Scneario - "Alien'' working on h1b for US corp., AOS is pending approval, Alien applies for AP and gets it. Alien travels to home country and enters US on AP but still want to use valid h1b. h1b petition is approved till 2011 although visa stamp had expired in 08.
Now what does this ''alien'' (me) needs to do to continue working LEGALLY using h1b after entering on AP.
Hope this helps!
I probably know this works the way you have stated but do we have any references to legal document? rule? etc......
Scneario - "Alien'' working on h1b for US corp., AOS is pending approval, Alien applies for AP and gets it. Alien travels to home country and enters US on AP but still want to use valid h1b. h1b petition is approved till 2011 although visa stamp had expired in 08.
Now what does this ''alien'' (me) needs to do to continue working LEGALLY using h1b after entering on AP.
arc
10-25 04:01 PM
^^^
0 comments:
Post a Comment