newcomer
07-11 10:37 PM
Good one. Could also add the IV logo on it
vts31
10-22 04:17 PM
i always start a drawing or anything, with primitives. Usually circles and curves because they are organik..if i want something more rigid i uses cubes...then i try to visualize that primitives potential and how i can link it to something else alter in the composition...after i do that 1 of 2 things happen, I either do it or i get scared ima ruin it and just go work on something else.
Blog Feeds
02-25 07:20 PM
AILA Leadership Has Just Posted the Following:
https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhfkv8aJLt-n8znzkAw4_aPhSZhs4brNenQ06_Xsh6QGydMI1P0YLqwQw43sHGMtDS7jjlPc2HlNbG28N10kh2OxG4vK3_EruxKG4PVIliEHGfS8Nhi270Qr4lCrViw8UFWQa9QYwf7nis/s320/2010-02-23+Magnifying+Glass.jpg (https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhfkv8aJLt-n8znzkAw4_aPhSZhs4brNenQ06_Xsh6QGydMI1P0YLqwQw43sHGMtDS7jjlPc2HlNbG28N10kh2OxG4vK3_EruxKG4PVIliEHGfS8Nhi270Qr4lCrViw8UFWQa9QYwf7nis/s1600-h/2010-02-23+Magnifying+Glass.jpg)
By Eleanor Pelta, AILA First Vice President
The latest salvo in the war against H-1B workers and their employers (and this time, they�ve thrown L-1�s in just for fun,) is the Economic Policy Institute�s briefing paper by Ron Hira, released last week, which concludes that the practice of using H-1B and L-1 workers and then sending them back to their home countries is bad for the economy. While Hira�s findings are certainly headline-grabbing, the road that Hira takes to get there is filled with twists, turns and manipulations and simply lacks real data.
Hira starts with the premise that some employers use H-1B�s and L visas as a bridge to permanent residence, and some employers use those categories for temporary worker mobility. (His particular political bent is belied by his constant usage of the term �guest-worker status��a term that brings with it the politically charged connotations of the European guest worker programs for unskilled workers�for the practice of bringing H-1B�s and L�s in to the U.S. on a temporary basis.) After examining his �data,� he divides the world of employers into two broad categories:
� Bad guys (generally foreign employers, no surprise, or U.S. employers with off-shore companies in India) that bring in H-1B and L workers for temporary periods, exploit them, underpay them and send them home after they get training from the American workers whose jobs they will outsource when they return home
� Good guys (U.S. corporations �Hira uses the more genteel label, �firms with traditional business models�) that bring H-1B and L workers to the U.S., pay them adequate wages, and sponsor them for permanent residence, thereby effecting a knowledge transfer to American colleagues that is good for the economy
Hira�s tool, a statistic he calls �immigration yield,� is simply a comparison of H-1B and L usage and the number of PERM applications filed by the highest users of those visas. He essentially concludes that because the highest users of H-1B�s and L�s are Indian consulting companies, and these companies have only a minimal number of PERM�s certified, they are using H�s and L�s as cheap temporary labor. He is unable to explain away the high number PERM filings of one of the IT consulting companies, and so he addresses this anomaly by saying �part of the explanation might be that it is headquartered in the United States.�
There are too many things wrong with this analysis to list in this blog, but here are a just a few ways in which Hira�s study is problematic:
Hira�s clear implication is that companies that don�t sponsor H-1B�s and L�s for PERM are using these workers instead of more expensive American labor. He ignores that fact the H-1B program has rules in place requiring payment of the prevailing wage to these workers. But even worse, he has not presented any data whatsoever on the average wages paid to these workers. He also doesn�t address the expense of obtaining such visas. He simply concludes that because they are here temporarily, they are underpaid.
Hira makes the argument that companies who use H-1B and L workers as temporary workers generally use their U.S. operations as a training ground for these workers and then send then back to their home countries to do the job that was once located here. Again, this assertion is not supported by any real statistical data about, or serious review of, the U.S. activities of such workers, but rather by anecdotal evidence and quotes from news stories taken out of context.
With respect to the fact that the L-1B visa requires specialized knowledge and so would normally preclude entry to the U.S. for the purpose of gaining training, Hira cites and outdated OIG report that alleges that adjudicators will approve any L-1B petition, because the standards are so broad. Those of use in the field struggling with the 10 page RFE�s typically issued automatically on any specialized knowledge petition would certainly beg to differ with that point.
Hira clearly implies that American jobs are lost because of H-1B and L �guest workers,� but has no direct statistical evidence of such job loss.
The fact is that usage of H-1B and L visas varies with the needs of the employer. Some employers use these programs to rotate experienced, professional workers into the United States and then send the workers abroad to continue their careers. Some employers bring H-1B�s and L�s into the U.S. to rely on their skills on a permanent basis. Judging from the fraud statistics as well as DOL enforcement actions, the majority of employers who use H-1B workers pay these workers adequate wages and comply with all of the DOL rules regarding use of these workers, whether the employers bring them in for temporary purposes or not. By the same token, the minority of employers who seek to abuse H and L workers may well do so, whether they intend to sponsor them for permanent residence or not. Indeed, arguably, the potential for long-term abuse is much worse in the situation in which a real �bad guy� employer is sponsoring an employee for a green card, because of the inordinate length of time it takes for many H-1B and L workers to obtain permanent residency due to backlogs.
Hira does make that last point, and it is just about the only one we agree on. Congress needs to create a streamlined way for employers to access and retain in the U.S. foreign expertise and talent, without at 10-15 year wait for permanent residence. But our economy still needs the ability for business to nimbly move talent to the U.S. on a temporary basis when needed, or to rotate key personnel internationally. In a world where global mobility means increased competitiveness, Hira�s �statistics� simply don�t support elimination of these crucial capability.https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/tracker/186823568153827945-6000198492670312275?l=ailaleadership.blogspot.com
More... (http://ailaleadership.blogspot.com/2010/02/epis-latest-study-of-h-1b-and-l-usage.html)
https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhfkv8aJLt-n8znzkAw4_aPhSZhs4brNenQ06_Xsh6QGydMI1P0YLqwQw43sHGMtDS7jjlPc2HlNbG28N10kh2OxG4vK3_EruxKG4PVIliEHGfS8Nhi270Qr4lCrViw8UFWQa9QYwf7nis/s320/2010-02-23+Magnifying+Glass.jpg (https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhfkv8aJLt-n8znzkAw4_aPhSZhs4brNenQ06_Xsh6QGydMI1P0YLqwQw43sHGMtDS7jjlPc2HlNbG28N10kh2OxG4vK3_EruxKG4PVIliEHGfS8Nhi270Qr4lCrViw8UFWQa9QYwf7nis/s1600-h/2010-02-23+Magnifying+Glass.jpg)
By Eleanor Pelta, AILA First Vice President
The latest salvo in the war against H-1B workers and their employers (and this time, they�ve thrown L-1�s in just for fun,) is the Economic Policy Institute�s briefing paper by Ron Hira, released last week, which concludes that the practice of using H-1B and L-1 workers and then sending them back to their home countries is bad for the economy. While Hira�s findings are certainly headline-grabbing, the road that Hira takes to get there is filled with twists, turns and manipulations and simply lacks real data.
Hira starts with the premise that some employers use H-1B�s and L visas as a bridge to permanent residence, and some employers use those categories for temporary worker mobility. (His particular political bent is belied by his constant usage of the term �guest-worker status��a term that brings with it the politically charged connotations of the European guest worker programs for unskilled workers�for the practice of bringing H-1B�s and L�s in to the U.S. on a temporary basis.) After examining his �data,� he divides the world of employers into two broad categories:
� Bad guys (generally foreign employers, no surprise, or U.S. employers with off-shore companies in India) that bring in H-1B and L workers for temporary periods, exploit them, underpay them and send them home after they get training from the American workers whose jobs they will outsource when they return home
� Good guys (U.S. corporations �Hira uses the more genteel label, �firms with traditional business models�) that bring H-1B and L workers to the U.S., pay them adequate wages, and sponsor them for permanent residence, thereby effecting a knowledge transfer to American colleagues that is good for the economy
Hira�s tool, a statistic he calls �immigration yield,� is simply a comparison of H-1B and L usage and the number of PERM applications filed by the highest users of those visas. He essentially concludes that because the highest users of H-1B�s and L�s are Indian consulting companies, and these companies have only a minimal number of PERM�s certified, they are using H�s and L�s as cheap temporary labor. He is unable to explain away the high number PERM filings of one of the IT consulting companies, and so he addresses this anomaly by saying �part of the explanation might be that it is headquartered in the United States.�
There are too many things wrong with this analysis to list in this blog, but here are a just a few ways in which Hira�s study is problematic:
Hira�s clear implication is that companies that don�t sponsor H-1B�s and L�s for PERM are using these workers instead of more expensive American labor. He ignores that fact the H-1B program has rules in place requiring payment of the prevailing wage to these workers. But even worse, he has not presented any data whatsoever on the average wages paid to these workers. He also doesn�t address the expense of obtaining such visas. He simply concludes that because they are here temporarily, they are underpaid.
Hira makes the argument that companies who use H-1B and L workers as temporary workers generally use their U.S. operations as a training ground for these workers and then send then back to their home countries to do the job that was once located here. Again, this assertion is not supported by any real statistical data about, or serious review of, the U.S. activities of such workers, but rather by anecdotal evidence and quotes from news stories taken out of context.
With respect to the fact that the L-1B visa requires specialized knowledge and so would normally preclude entry to the U.S. for the purpose of gaining training, Hira cites and outdated OIG report that alleges that adjudicators will approve any L-1B petition, because the standards are so broad. Those of use in the field struggling with the 10 page RFE�s typically issued automatically on any specialized knowledge petition would certainly beg to differ with that point.
Hira clearly implies that American jobs are lost because of H-1B and L �guest workers,� but has no direct statistical evidence of such job loss.
The fact is that usage of H-1B and L visas varies with the needs of the employer. Some employers use these programs to rotate experienced, professional workers into the United States and then send the workers abroad to continue their careers. Some employers bring H-1B�s and L�s into the U.S. to rely on their skills on a permanent basis. Judging from the fraud statistics as well as DOL enforcement actions, the majority of employers who use H-1B workers pay these workers adequate wages and comply with all of the DOL rules regarding use of these workers, whether the employers bring them in for temporary purposes or not. By the same token, the minority of employers who seek to abuse H and L workers may well do so, whether they intend to sponsor them for permanent residence or not. Indeed, arguably, the potential for long-term abuse is much worse in the situation in which a real �bad guy� employer is sponsoring an employee for a green card, because of the inordinate length of time it takes for many H-1B and L workers to obtain permanent residency due to backlogs.
Hira does make that last point, and it is just about the only one we agree on. Congress needs to create a streamlined way for employers to access and retain in the U.S. foreign expertise and talent, without at 10-15 year wait for permanent residence. But our economy still needs the ability for business to nimbly move talent to the U.S. on a temporary basis when needed, or to rotate key personnel internationally. In a world where global mobility means increased competitiveness, Hira�s �statistics� simply don�t support elimination of these crucial capability.https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/tracker/186823568153827945-6000198492670312275?l=ailaleadership.blogspot.com
More... (http://ailaleadership.blogspot.com/2010/02/epis-latest-study-of-h-1b-and-l-usage.html)
perm2gc
05-31 12:18 PM
Recently joined.
Contributed $200.
Thank You.People who are just browsing the forum..please come forward..it is not only our issue but it is EVERYONE'S issue..if we don't act now..we will have no time to act in future.
Contributed $200.
Thank You.People who are just browsing the forum..please come forward..it is not only our issue but it is EVERYONE'S issue..if we don't act now..we will have no time to act in future.
more...
vinzak
03-07 02:44 PM
Hello all,
I filed for EAD renewal at TSC in early Jan 11. My current EAD expires end of April. I am just wondering how long TSC is currently taking to renew EADs.
Any experiences would be greatly appreciated. Thanks.
I filed for EAD renewal at TSC in early Jan 11. My current EAD expires end of April. I am just wondering how long TSC is currently taking to renew EADs.
Any experiences would be greatly appreciated. Thanks.
kondur_007
08-24 10:23 PM
I hate to give you the bad news, but as far as I know, if you filed 140 after the expiry date on Labor, it will be denied.
And yes, there is a rule about this that they came up with since past few months (?about a year now..)
I would suggest to start a new PERM ASAP and get a help of a good competent lawyer this time.
Good Luck.
(Although there are only a couple of days between the expiry date on your labor and 140; but if you really filed your 140 after the expiry of PERM, it will be denied. Are you sure of RD? if it is ND and your RD is within the expiry, it may still be valid).
And yes, there is a rule about this that they came up with since past few months (?about a year now..)
I would suggest to start a new PERM ASAP and get a help of a good competent lawyer this time.
Good Luck.
(Although there are only a couple of days between the expiry date on your labor and 140; but if you really filed your 140 after the expiry of PERM, it will be denied. Are you sure of RD? if it is ND and your RD is within the expiry, it may still be valid).
more...
optimystic
04-06 01:43 AM
I believe the general line of thought is any time between 6 to 12 months.
But I wonder how the AC21 affects this. It seems as though if you invoke AC21 and change employers before getting GC (following all rules like "similar job" etc) , you are not obligated to eventually join back the original GC sponsoring employer after one gets GC.
But if you stick with the same orginal GC sponsoring employer till you get GC, then you are obliged to show good faith intent and have to continue for 6-12 months (although technically USCIS/DOL don't give any specific limits). There is no AC21 kind of provision once you get GC !
But I wonder how the AC21 affects this. It seems as though if you invoke AC21 and change employers before getting GC (following all rules like "similar job" etc) , you are not obligated to eventually join back the original GC sponsoring employer after one gets GC.
But if you stick with the same orginal GC sponsoring employer till you get GC, then you are obliged to show good faith intent and have to continue for 6-12 months (although technically USCIS/DOL don't give any specific limits). There is no AC21 kind of provision once you get GC !
johny120
08-23 11:32 AM
No, I do not have a EAD or AP. I did not apply for them. I am planning to keep extending my H1 and not get into the hassle of EAD and AP every year.
more...
lostinbeta
09-06 04:01 PM
There are multiple ways of doing it. I use your way, but I was trying to go a way that was easier to explain so if anyone who is new to photoshop read this, they would understand.
saketkapur
02-07 10:53 AM
link??
more...
satishku_2000
07-28 06:30 PM
My prediction for this year..
EB1 = Current
EB2 = Jan 2003 (Because of BEC cases coming out, chance for them to file I-485 in October)
EB3 = U
EB3 India may show Jan 23 500 B.C , but cant be U because the quota starts fresh in October. They goto 'U' only when respective category numbers for the country are exhausted for the year. Usually numbers will become unavailable only in last quarter of the year.
EB1 = Current
EB2 = Jan 2003 (Because of BEC cases coming out, chance for them to file I-485 in October)
EB3 = U
EB3 India may show Jan 23 500 B.C , but cant be U because the quota starts fresh in October. They goto 'U' only when respective category numbers for the country are exhausted for the year. Usually numbers will become unavailable only in last quarter of the year.
pcs
04-17 02:14 PM
What do you mean by PERM was done in 60 days? Do you know the login name & password of the employer. I mean the IT guy will need the login name to answer any querry else he can not pull any info.
How come there was no receipt. Was it filed at all or was rejected by the computer & you do not know that?
How come there was no receipt. Was it filed at all or was rejected by the computer & you do not know that?
more...
Marphad
03-26 06:01 PM
I was on bench for 4 months in 2001. I have 2 times H1 transfer after that and visited India couple of times. I have regular pay stubs from 2002 onwards.
Can this create an issue while IO is working on my 485 application?
Can this create an issue while IO is working on my 485 application?
fide_champ
09-16 04:33 PM
here is an article from murthy about unemployment benefits:
MurthyDotCom : Unemployment Benefits and Impact on U.S. Immigration (http://www.murthy.com/news/n_unembe.html)
MurthyDotCom : Unemployment Benefits and Impact on U.S. Immigration (http://www.murthy.com/news/n_unembe.html)
more...
ArkBird
06-26 10:42 PM
If possible, try to get hospital record of live birth. Though it is not birth certificate, it may be used as secondary evidence.
I am thinking to get the AFFEDEVITS of my wife from her FATHER and MOTHER stating the inforation of my her BIRTH.
My wife was born in XYZ city but now her parents reside in ABC city. My question is will it be OK if her parents get the AFFEDEVIT from ABC city stating that she was born on XXX in XYZ city or does the AFFEDEVIT has to be made from XYZ city only.
I just thought of this and wasnt sure if its ok or not. Can any one please clarrify?
Thanks in advance. !!!!
I am thinking to get the AFFEDEVITS of my wife from her FATHER and MOTHER stating the inforation of my her BIRTH.
My wife was born in XYZ city but now her parents reside in ABC city. My question is will it be OK if her parents get the AFFEDEVIT from ABC city stating that she was born on XXX in XYZ city or does the AFFEDEVIT has to be made from XYZ city only.
I just thought of this and wasnt sure if its ok or not. Can any one please clarrify?
Thanks in advance. !!!!
ita
01-16 01:38 PM
I was trying to find out if it is possible to switch from H1-EAD-H1 all the while staying in the country.
If this switch is possible then will the EAD-H1 switch process be treated as 1 .transfer/ 2.new H1 application(subject to annual quota,lottery)/ 3.something else(recapture)? Though in all the three cases this new H1 will be valid for only whatever time that is left on H1 and not 6 years.
All these days I thought it would be treated as transfer (though there is a gap between the H1).
Thank you.
There is something called as recapturing of lost Days on H1. So for example you were out of USA for some time when you were on H1 you can recapture that period. Try googling "Recapturing of H1".
This way you will not be part of the New quota. Hope this helps
If this switch is possible then will the EAD-H1 switch process be treated as 1 .transfer/ 2.new H1 application(subject to annual quota,lottery)/ 3.something else(recapture)? Though in all the three cases this new H1 will be valid for only whatever time that is left on H1 and not 6 years.
All these days I thought it would be treated as transfer (though there is a gap between the H1).
Thank you.
There is something called as recapturing of lost Days on H1. So for example you were out of USA for some time when you were on H1 you can recapture that period. Try googling "Recapturing of H1".
This way you will not be part of the New quota. Hope this helps
more...
virtual55
05-06 10:55 AM
http://www.usabal.com/seminars/#a2
Michael Aytes, is one of the speaker in this conference
Michael Aytes, is one of the speaker in this conference
mattresscoil
12-09 07:58 AM
Hi,
I filed my I-140 and 485 concurrently using substitue labor by June'07. Still my I-140 is pending. Recently again I filed my Labor with the same company(No change in the compary ). it got approved last week. I am going to apply for new I-140. Can I port the previous PD?
Thanks
VK
Venkatanathen:
Your previous I140 needs to be approved. If it is pending, I dont think you can port a priority date from it. Again please have this answer qualified by an attorney.
I filed my I-140 and 485 concurrently using substitue labor by June'07. Still my I-140 is pending. Recently again I filed my Labor with the same company(No change in the compary ). it got approved last week. I am going to apply for new I-140. Can I port the previous PD?
Thanks
VK
Venkatanathen:
Your previous I140 needs to be approved. If it is pending, I dont think you can port a priority date from it. Again please have this answer qualified by an attorney.
madhu345
03-14 07:09 AM
From my experince you can earn referral fees but you have to file your taxes for that amount, send me PM if you need any further details.
-Madhu
I hope someone out there in a similar situation can help me out.
I have given my real estate agent several referrals and for each I receive a cash amount. I'm on an H1B visa, am I able to receive income from someone other than my employer?
I've searched the web and have been able to find out that this should be reported as taxable income, I'm just not sure if I can receive it due to my immigration status.
Any comments or tips are welcome.
-Madhu
I hope someone out there in a similar situation can help me out.
I have given my real estate agent several referrals and for each I receive a cash amount. I'm on an H1B visa, am I able to receive income from someone other than my employer?
I've searched the web and have been able to find out that this should be reported as taxable income, I'm just not sure if I can receive it due to my immigration status.
Any comments or tips are welcome.
whattodo
07-27 02:01 PM
If NSC had put all applications from July 2nd to July 17th on hold.
Did they open and timestamp it ? for received date ??????
If they did not , then I may be lucky.
Because my package had signatures and all other dates of June 29th . The day when we were planning to ship the package, but for july fiasco.
Do you guys think ? they might see this and enter it as received date ?
How stupid a person has to be to even ask a question like this???
Did they open and timestamp it ? for received date ??????
If they did not , then I may be lucky.
Because my package had signatures and all other dates of June 29th . The day when we were planning to ship the package, but for july fiasco.
Do you guys think ? they might see this and enter it as received date ?
How stupid a person has to be to even ask a question like this???
EkAurAaya
03-20 10:14 AM
I sold the house on H1 and there was nothing addition for H1 holder. It is just that if you have that property for less than 2 years then you pay tax.
Just thinking if the new law for GC approved like buy a house and get
GC then what will happen for those like us who have house since 2004 and sold one and bought another in that time period.
I am on EAD now. PD -Nov 2003
Can you please share what state? Thanks
Just thinking if the new law for GC approved like buy a house and get
GC then what will happen for those like us who have house since 2004 and sold one and bought another in that time period.
I am on EAD now. PD -Nov 2003
Can you please share what state? Thanks
No comments:
Post a Comment