gc_chahiye
11-02 01:05 PM
The GC system is entirely in our favor. It really does not benefit America in any significant way.
nope, if the alternative to the GC system is outsourcing (as you yourself mentioned) all the profits go to big corporations and our salaries are spent in India. The corporations are notorious for avoiding taxes so teh government gets nothing. By making us stay here longer (on H1 or GC) we end up spending our salaries here, paying taxes, paying social security, paying medicare.
65K H1-Bs earning 70k a year is 4.5 billion dollars. 140K new GC holders each year earning the same comes out to 10 billion dollars. Out of that taxes alone are an easy couple of billion or more dollars. Then take into account the side-effect (we buy cars, we buy appliances, we rent apartments) and the contributions we make to this economy are a lot.
And to say that we are stealing jobs is also inaccurate. There is nothing called stealing-a-job. In general every job is worth how much someone is willing to be paid to do it. If an American citizen wants 100K and the GC holder wants 90K and the H1-B visa guy wants 80K (and all of them are going to work in the same city and same office) the job is worth 80K. The H1-B visa holder is not stealing a job. The days of knowing HTML tags and commanding a salary of 100K a year (1999-2000) are long gone and now replaced by 'that kind of work gets done in India or Ukraine for 10k a year'. Looking at the resumes we got in response to job ads placed in the last 3 companies I worked for, there are simply not enough qualified americans interested. Thats a fact. So the IT sector needs help from abroad to get the job done. They can either send the work over, or bring the people here. Bringing the people here also benefits the rest of the economy.
nope, if the alternative to the GC system is outsourcing (as you yourself mentioned) all the profits go to big corporations and our salaries are spent in India. The corporations are notorious for avoiding taxes so teh government gets nothing. By making us stay here longer (on H1 or GC) we end up spending our salaries here, paying taxes, paying social security, paying medicare.
65K H1-Bs earning 70k a year is 4.5 billion dollars. 140K new GC holders each year earning the same comes out to 10 billion dollars. Out of that taxes alone are an easy couple of billion or more dollars. Then take into account the side-effect (we buy cars, we buy appliances, we rent apartments) and the contributions we make to this economy are a lot.
And to say that we are stealing jobs is also inaccurate. There is nothing called stealing-a-job. In general every job is worth how much someone is willing to be paid to do it. If an American citizen wants 100K and the GC holder wants 90K and the H1-B visa guy wants 80K (and all of them are going to work in the same city and same office) the job is worth 80K. The H1-B visa holder is not stealing a job. The days of knowing HTML tags and commanding a salary of 100K a year (1999-2000) are long gone and now replaced by 'that kind of work gets done in India or Ukraine for 10k a year'. Looking at the resumes we got in response to job ads placed in the last 3 companies I worked for, there are simply not enough qualified americans interested. Thats a fact. So the IT sector needs help from abroad to get the job done. They can either send the work over, or bring the people here. Bringing the people here also benefits the rest of the economy.
wallpaper creepy clown makeup.
smisachu
08-01 05:34 PM
Hi smisachu,
Could you explain what you mean by this? Are you referring to "Flash Trading"
or the whole of HFT?
Yes Flash trading, ELP (enhanced liquidity program), direct access trading and even other program trading. The programs seek out discreet blocks that are being routed into the market and front run them. The main culprit according to many is GS. And to acheive a significant alpha the size and leverage are huge. Some program with a bug will dump a lot of shares on the market some day and before any one can react. Here is an article on some info that was made available only to bloomberg users.
"Lime Brokerage: "The Next 'Long Term Capital' Meltdown Will Happen In
A Five-Minute Time Period."
Posted by Tyler Durden at 11:25 AM
A recent Bloomberg piece that for some reason was made available only
to terminal subscribers, provides a very interesting discussion on the
dangers of sponsored access, how the associated pre-trade vs post-
trade monitoring deliberations by "regulators" will influence short
selling curbs, and not surprisingly, the desire by Goldman to not only
dominate this yet another aspect of high-frequency trading, but to
dictate market policy at will.
What is sponsored access:
In sponsored access, a broker-dealer lends its market participation
identification (MPID) number to clients for them to trade on exchanges
without going through the broker's trading system, to avoid slowing
down the execution. That places responsibility on the broker-dealer to
make sure the participant abides by securities regulations, and that
its trading, which can involve hundreds or thousands of orders a
second, does not run amok.
Is it thus surprising, that none other than Goldman Sachs is muscling
its way into providing not only a sponsored access platform to its
clients, but a new form of sponsored access that needs the blessing of
regulators:
Wall Street heavyweight Goldman Sachs, now launching its own sponsored-
access service to lend clients its identification to access securities
exchanges directly, said last week it favors monitoring client orders
prior to execution.
"Our view is that there is a real need for pre-trade checks in the use
of sponsored access to fulfill [broker-dealers'] regulatory
responsibilities," said Greg Tusar, managing director at Goldman.
Goldman's stand in favor of pre-trade instead of post-trade monitoring
of sponsored clients' activity is one side of a debate in which
regulators may choose a middle ground. The regulators' decision on how
to monitor sponsored access may also influence their deliberations on
restricting short sales.
What is the difference between pre-trade and post-trade monitoring? In
brief:
Pre-trade
Compliant with Reg SHO
Nip problems before they happen
View activity across exchanges
Post-trade
Faster order executions
Pre-trade systems still fallible
And another tidbit:
In traditional sponsored-access arrangements, a broker-dealer
determines a client's suitability to access market centers directly
and then allows the client to trade without monitoring its individual
orders prior to execution.
In other words, the Goldman endorsed pre-trade approach will allow
"monitoring of individual orders prior to execution." Whether or not
pre-trade checks provide the capacity to observe not just wholesale
exchange activity in the context of sponsored access but from a much
broader market angle is a discussion for another time, although this
could be one place where Sergey Aleynikov could shed an infinite
amount of light, especially as pertains to Goldman's sponsored-access
service. Conveniently, his gag order will prevent him from saying much
if anything until such time as there is an appetizing settlement to
keep him gagged in perpetuity. The bottom line is that with a pre-
trade environment, the sponsored access providers will be able to have
the potential to front run all those who use their platforms. The
residual question of how far they go to comply with regulations to
prevent this from happening, and remain true to their ethics standards
is also a topic for another day.
Going back to the topic at hand. Here is why sponsored access could
easily be quite a bother to capital markets sooner rather than later:
Unchecked errors or unintended repeat orders could deplete broker-
dealers' capital, and potentially wreak havoc in the broader market.
Concerns have arisen, however, about whether all broker-dealers are
able to fulfill that duty in today's electronic trading environment,
and according to which standards.
And here Goldman chimes in to not only promote their proposed
architecture but to expound on the virtues of pre-trade checking.
"In the case of high-frequency trading, in particular guarding against
technology failures, oversized orders and other situations where
there's potentially systemic market impact, we believe strongly that
pre-trade checks are a prerequisite," Tusar says.
Nasdaq's proposal as well as Securities and Exchange Commission
officials' speeches a few months ago appeared to lean toward
bolstering the traditional approach.
"We don't believe that's strong enough or what the regulators want
now, because of the potentially dire consequences, and because we-as
broker-dealers-bear much of that risk," Tusar says.
Now the reason why this is very relevant in the context of not just
potential front running, but also market structure is that Regulation
SHO, which is the primary regulatory framework for short selling (and
the purvey of potential Uptick Rule reinstatement, which will happen
once the market is allowed to hit a bid) is a post-trade
architecture.
Wedbush [Morgan] routinely tests clients' systems to ensure they are
compliant with Reg SHO. In addition, he says, the brokerage sets
limits on clients available locates-as well as credit and trading
limits--before the start of each trading day that its system tracks,
prohibiting shorts without locates and providing a type of pre-trade
check.
Or as has recently become the case, seeing rolling buy ins in the
middle of the day as borrowable shares in even the most liquid stocks
mysteriously disappear (look at today's market action for yet another
blatant example of this practice).
Anticipating the regulators' likely response, one should not be
surprised to see them siding with Goldman and against shorters:
As the SEC also seeks to appease investor concerns over rampant short
selling, especially naked short selling, new sponsored-access
standards may provide part of the solution. Given that day-traders may
be the last remaining culprits of such activity,, increasing and
standardizing scrutiny over their trading may reduce uncovered (and
illegal) shorts even further.
How about appeasing concerns over rampant, unjustified buying? When
will the downtick buy rule be implemented? But we jest.
And I digress again. Why should all this be concerning to advocates of
stability of high-frequency trading:
The mother of all concerns is a sponsored firm's algorithm going awry
and executing thousands of problematic trades across a range of
securities and market centers.
Well, this is not really a problem when it happens to the upside as
has been the case for months now - it is only a threat when Joe
Sixpack's 401(k) may be impacted, i.e., to the downside.
And here is where a SEC Comment submitted by broker Lime Brokerage is
a very troubling must read by all who naively claim that High-
frequency trading is a boon to an efficient market (which doesn't
provide . Well, yes and no - it is, until such moment that it causes
the market to, literally, break. I will post a critical excerpt from
the Lime submission, and leave the rest to our readers' independent
analysis:
Lime's familiarity with high speed trading allows us to benchmark some
of the fastest computer traders on the planet, and we have seen CDT
(Computerized Day Trading) order placement rates easily exceed 1,000
orders per second. Should a CDT algorithm go awry, where a large
amount of orders are placed erroneously or where the orders should not
have passed order validation, the Sponsor will incur a substantial
timelag in addressing the issue. From the moment the Sponsor�s
representative detects the problem until the time the problematic
orders can be addressed by the Sponsor, at least two mintues will have
passed. The Sponsor�s only tools to control Sponsored Access flow are
to log into the Trading Center�s website (if available), place a phone
call to the Trading Center, or call the Sponsee to disable trading and
cancel these erroneous orders � all sub-optimal processes which
require human intervention. With a two minute delay to cancel these
erroneous orders, 120,000 orders could have gone into the market and
been executed, even though an order validation problem was detected
previously. At 1,000 shares per order and an average price of $20 per
share, $2.4 billion of improper trades could be executed in this short
timeframe. The sheer volume of activity in a concentrated period of
time is extremely disruptive to the process of maintaining a �fair and
orderly� market. This shortcoming needs to be addressed if the
practice of Naked Access is going to be permitted to continue;
otherwise, the next �Long Term Capital� meltdown will happen in a five-
minute time period.
Could you explain what you mean by this? Are you referring to "Flash Trading"
or the whole of HFT?
Yes Flash trading, ELP (enhanced liquidity program), direct access trading and even other program trading. The programs seek out discreet blocks that are being routed into the market and front run them. The main culprit according to many is GS. And to acheive a significant alpha the size and leverage are huge. Some program with a bug will dump a lot of shares on the market some day and before any one can react. Here is an article on some info that was made available only to bloomberg users.
"Lime Brokerage: "The Next 'Long Term Capital' Meltdown Will Happen In
A Five-Minute Time Period."
Posted by Tyler Durden at 11:25 AM
A recent Bloomberg piece that for some reason was made available only
to terminal subscribers, provides a very interesting discussion on the
dangers of sponsored access, how the associated pre-trade vs post-
trade monitoring deliberations by "regulators" will influence short
selling curbs, and not surprisingly, the desire by Goldman to not only
dominate this yet another aspect of high-frequency trading, but to
dictate market policy at will.
What is sponsored access:
In sponsored access, a broker-dealer lends its market participation
identification (MPID) number to clients for them to trade on exchanges
without going through the broker's trading system, to avoid slowing
down the execution. That places responsibility on the broker-dealer to
make sure the participant abides by securities regulations, and that
its trading, which can involve hundreds or thousands of orders a
second, does not run amok.
Is it thus surprising, that none other than Goldman Sachs is muscling
its way into providing not only a sponsored access platform to its
clients, but a new form of sponsored access that needs the blessing of
regulators:
Wall Street heavyweight Goldman Sachs, now launching its own sponsored-
access service to lend clients its identification to access securities
exchanges directly, said last week it favors monitoring client orders
prior to execution.
"Our view is that there is a real need for pre-trade checks in the use
of sponsored access to fulfill [broker-dealers'] regulatory
responsibilities," said Greg Tusar, managing director at Goldman.
Goldman's stand in favor of pre-trade instead of post-trade monitoring
of sponsored clients' activity is one side of a debate in which
regulators may choose a middle ground. The regulators' decision on how
to monitor sponsored access may also influence their deliberations on
restricting short sales.
What is the difference between pre-trade and post-trade monitoring? In
brief:
Pre-trade
Compliant with Reg SHO
Nip problems before they happen
View activity across exchanges
Post-trade
Faster order executions
Pre-trade systems still fallible
And another tidbit:
In traditional sponsored-access arrangements, a broker-dealer
determines a client's suitability to access market centers directly
and then allows the client to trade without monitoring its individual
orders prior to execution.
In other words, the Goldman endorsed pre-trade approach will allow
"monitoring of individual orders prior to execution." Whether or not
pre-trade checks provide the capacity to observe not just wholesale
exchange activity in the context of sponsored access but from a much
broader market angle is a discussion for another time, although this
could be one place where Sergey Aleynikov could shed an infinite
amount of light, especially as pertains to Goldman's sponsored-access
service. Conveniently, his gag order will prevent him from saying much
if anything until such time as there is an appetizing settlement to
keep him gagged in perpetuity. The bottom line is that with a pre-
trade environment, the sponsored access providers will be able to have
the potential to front run all those who use their platforms. The
residual question of how far they go to comply with regulations to
prevent this from happening, and remain true to their ethics standards
is also a topic for another day.
Going back to the topic at hand. Here is why sponsored access could
easily be quite a bother to capital markets sooner rather than later:
Unchecked errors or unintended repeat orders could deplete broker-
dealers' capital, and potentially wreak havoc in the broader market.
Concerns have arisen, however, about whether all broker-dealers are
able to fulfill that duty in today's electronic trading environment,
and according to which standards.
And here Goldman chimes in to not only promote their proposed
architecture but to expound on the virtues of pre-trade checking.
"In the case of high-frequency trading, in particular guarding against
technology failures, oversized orders and other situations where
there's potentially systemic market impact, we believe strongly that
pre-trade checks are a prerequisite," Tusar says.
Nasdaq's proposal as well as Securities and Exchange Commission
officials' speeches a few months ago appeared to lean toward
bolstering the traditional approach.
"We don't believe that's strong enough or what the regulators want
now, because of the potentially dire consequences, and because we-as
broker-dealers-bear much of that risk," Tusar says.
Now the reason why this is very relevant in the context of not just
potential front running, but also market structure is that Regulation
SHO, which is the primary regulatory framework for short selling (and
the purvey of potential Uptick Rule reinstatement, which will happen
once the market is allowed to hit a bid) is a post-trade
architecture.
Wedbush [Morgan] routinely tests clients' systems to ensure they are
compliant with Reg SHO. In addition, he says, the brokerage sets
limits on clients available locates-as well as credit and trading
limits--before the start of each trading day that its system tracks,
prohibiting shorts without locates and providing a type of pre-trade
check.
Or as has recently become the case, seeing rolling buy ins in the
middle of the day as borrowable shares in even the most liquid stocks
mysteriously disappear (look at today's market action for yet another
blatant example of this practice).
Anticipating the regulators' likely response, one should not be
surprised to see them siding with Goldman and against shorters:
As the SEC also seeks to appease investor concerns over rampant short
selling, especially naked short selling, new sponsored-access
standards may provide part of the solution. Given that day-traders may
be the last remaining culprits of such activity,, increasing and
standardizing scrutiny over their trading may reduce uncovered (and
illegal) shorts even further.
How about appeasing concerns over rampant, unjustified buying? When
will the downtick buy rule be implemented? But we jest.
And I digress again. Why should all this be concerning to advocates of
stability of high-frequency trading:
The mother of all concerns is a sponsored firm's algorithm going awry
and executing thousands of problematic trades across a range of
securities and market centers.
Well, this is not really a problem when it happens to the upside as
has been the case for months now - it is only a threat when Joe
Sixpack's 401(k) may be impacted, i.e., to the downside.
And here is where a SEC Comment submitted by broker Lime Brokerage is
a very troubling must read by all who naively claim that High-
frequency trading is a boon to an efficient market (which doesn't
provide . Well, yes and no - it is, until such moment that it causes
the market to, literally, break. I will post a critical excerpt from
the Lime submission, and leave the rest to our readers' independent
analysis:
Lime's familiarity with high speed trading allows us to benchmark some
of the fastest computer traders on the planet, and we have seen CDT
(Computerized Day Trading) order placement rates easily exceed 1,000
orders per second. Should a CDT algorithm go awry, where a large
amount of orders are placed erroneously or where the orders should not
have passed order validation, the Sponsor will incur a substantial
timelag in addressing the issue. From the moment the Sponsor�s
representative detects the problem until the time the problematic
orders can be addressed by the Sponsor, at least two mintues will have
passed. The Sponsor�s only tools to control Sponsored Access flow are
to log into the Trading Center�s website (if available), place a phone
call to the Trading Center, or call the Sponsee to disable trading and
cancel these erroneous orders � all sub-optimal processes which
require human intervention. With a two minute delay to cancel these
erroneous orders, 120,000 orders could have gone into the market and
been executed, even though an order validation problem was detected
previously. At 1,000 shares per order and an average price of $20 per
share, $2.4 billion of improper trades could be executed in this short
timeframe. The sheer volume of activity in a concentrated period of
time is extremely disruptive to the process of maintaining a �fair and
orderly� market. This shortcoming needs to be addressed if the
practice of Naked Access is going to be permitted to continue;
otherwise, the next �Long Term Capital� meltdown will happen in a five-
minute time period.
reddymjm
09-25 11:46 AM
Was that a U turn. I did not get that meaning B4.
2011 of Walken in clown makeup
vbkris77
04-27 03:14 PM
Below is the text for Waivers.. My understanding is that if end Client gives a letter to DOL stating that they don't layoffs due to this H1B and it is a temp. labor requirement etc.. It is still harsh considering anti-immigration climate.. What is feared asked in a Visa interview will be asked by DOL for extensions. So, H1B can't be on an auto-pilot mode..
``(I) the employer with whom the H-1B nonimmigrant would be placed has not displaced, and does not intend to displace, a United States worker employed by the employer within the period beginning 180 days before and ending 180 days after the date of the placement of the nonimmigrant with the employer;
``(II) the H-1B nonimmigrant will not be controlled and supervised principally by the employer with whom the H-1B nonimmigrant would be placed; and
``(III) the placement of the H-1B nonimmigrant is not essentially an arrangement to provide labor for hire for the employer with whom the H-1B nonimmigrant will be placed.
``(I) the employer with whom the H-1B nonimmigrant would be placed has not displaced, and does not intend to displace, a United States worker employed by the employer within the period beginning 180 days before and ending 180 days after the date of the placement of the nonimmigrant with the employer;
``(II) the H-1B nonimmigrant will not be controlled and supervised principally by the employer with whom the H-1B nonimmigrant would be placed; and
``(III) the placement of the H-1B nonimmigrant is not essentially an arrangement to provide labor for hire for the employer with whom the H-1B nonimmigrant will be placed.
more...
Vexir
06-16 07:57 PM
I'd buy it ..
LMAO!
LMAO!
pd_recapturing
03-31 08:27 AM
This is definitely scary. I think, we need to kick start our campaign again in full throttle. Last time, we thought, things were changing and we kind of stopped our campaign. There was a Ombudsman link where they suggested to contact them if 485 is wrongfully denied. Did someone contact them?
more...
ElectricGrandpa
06-15 01:05 AM
Ok here's a much better one than my last one, I'd like this one in the poll...
-Matt
-Matt
2010 Lost as an evil clown,
ars01
07-18 11:01 AM
I don't know why but we tend to be satisfied with lsmall benefits...
I agree with you "something (EAD and AP) is better than nothing"
But i bet you ..you will find your self in the same situation of agony and endless waiting for the final Green card.
I bet most of the people don't use your ead and AP as it puts you in a gray "Adjustment of status". They are good to have though. But you will see...how painful it is to decide to use them or not..
What i want to say is that being able to apply for EAD and AP is not the end of the battle..you will be stuck in a depressing situation waiting for the final green card.How do i know? .. I went through it...waiting for GC for the past 4 years.
I dont know its FBI or its just the USCIS incompetence but waiting in the final stage is horrible. Every time you travel you are scared...AP as for as my lawyer goes IT does not guarantee 100% entry in to the country.
After you apply for AP its only 1 year H1 increments.
What i am saying why dont we try for the overall improvement of the GC processing. Why dont we be firm about not wasting the GC numbers and recapturing the unused numbers.
We had a small revolt (peaceful way) and its successful.We dont want to stop there.
LETS FIGHT FOR THE OVERALL IMPROVEMENT OF THE GC PROCESSING
I hope you guys are with me..looking for your comments
I agree. The short term relief will be short term. After a year or so we all will be frustrated with the delay in getting GC as that point we will already be tired of renewing EAD (and Advance Parole??) every year. We must work on capturing the unused visas. Otherwise the feeling is correct, no GC for several years after filing.
USCIS allowed filing but there is no guarantee they will open those envelops and starts working on that. They have a good excuse and that is called THE BACKLOG. I think we should suggest Dipa Nair to make a move named "The Backlog" and I am sure bollywood in India can do a nice entertaing job for that as well.
Rahul
I agree with you "something (EAD and AP) is better than nothing"
But i bet you ..you will find your self in the same situation of agony and endless waiting for the final Green card.
I bet most of the people don't use your ead and AP as it puts you in a gray "Adjustment of status". They are good to have though. But you will see...how painful it is to decide to use them or not..
What i want to say is that being able to apply for EAD and AP is not the end of the battle..you will be stuck in a depressing situation waiting for the final green card.How do i know? .. I went through it...waiting for GC for the past 4 years.
I dont know its FBI or its just the USCIS incompetence but waiting in the final stage is horrible. Every time you travel you are scared...AP as for as my lawyer goes IT does not guarantee 100% entry in to the country.
After you apply for AP its only 1 year H1 increments.
What i am saying why dont we try for the overall improvement of the GC processing. Why dont we be firm about not wasting the GC numbers and recapturing the unused numbers.
We had a small revolt (peaceful way) and its successful.We dont want to stop there.
LETS FIGHT FOR THE OVERALL IMPROVEMENT OF THE GC PROCESSING
I hope you guys are with me..looking for your comments
I agree. The short term relief will be short term. After a year or so we all will be frustrated with the delay in getting GC as that point we will already be tired of renewing EAD (and Advance Parole??) every year. We must work on capturing the unused visas. Otherwise the feeling is correct, no GC for several years after filing.
USCIS allowed filing but there is no guarantee they will open those envelops and starts working on that. They have a good excuse and that is called THE BACKLOG. I think we should suggest Dipa Nair to make a move named "The Backlog" and I am sure bollywood in India can do a nice entertaing job for that as well.
Rahul
more...
jchan
04-27 09:54 PM
Yes, that is my understanding at this point based on the language . As soon as the bill goes into effect, you will need to stop working at the client site if the bill passes in its current form AND you are working as a FT employee (w-2) of a mere placement company (aka agent or desi consulting). If you are an FT employee of big consulting company then until they get waiver for you AND your current client proves that no layoffs were done at the client site in the last 180 days, you will need to stop working.
I read the text again, and found that text is under 'Sub Title A - H1B Application Requirement', does that mean the new application has to meet the requirement but existing H1B holders are allowed to work until the end of their I-94 date? It would create a turmoil to stop all H1B contractor all in a sudden.
Anyway, let's hope the professional analysis from Pappu and attorney come out early
I read the text again, and found that text is under 'Sub Title A - H1B Application Requirement', does that mean the new application has to meet the requirement but existing H1B holders are allowed to work until the end of their I-94 date? It would create a turmoil to stop all H1B contractor all in a sudden.
Anyway, let's hope the professional analysis from Pappu and attorney come out early
hair Scary+clown+makeup
akp
07-14 09:14 PM
akred, Thank you for helping to promote this petition. I think that when we have enough signatures we must also release this letter in parallel to media outlets while we send it to CNN execs. This will make the folks at CNN more answerable to this petition. However in order to do this we require the backing of IV core and utilize their contacts with the media. An individual like you and me can only go so far. Backing of IV core will provide us with maximum traction to evince response from CNN.
Signed.
Signed.
more...
priti8888
10-16 06:24 PM
How do we know we're stuck in the namecheck process?
Does the on-line status state that the application is in the namecheck 'phase' or something to that effect?
Thanks,
NO..online status wont chnage.
U can either call the 1-800 # or make an infopass appointment 4-6 Months after your first FP. If u plan to call, make sure u call 3-4 times because you might get conflicting info
Does the on-line status state that the application is in the namecheck 'phase' or something to that effect?
Thanks,
NO..online status wont chnage.
U can either call the 1-800 # or make an infopass appointment 4-6 Months after your first FP. If u plan to call, make sure u call 3-4 times because you might get conflicting info
hot Evil Clown Foam Appliance
DesiGuy
09-17 01:50 PM
LINK?
http://judiciary.edgeboss.net/real-live/judiciary/17223/56_judiciary-coj_2141_070212.smi
http://judiciary.edgeboss.net/real-live/judiciary/17223/56_judiciary-coj_2141_070212.smi
more...
house with sick clown makeup,
arc
02-01 01:20 PM
Yes I agree with you legal immigration is not only EB category, but EB+spouse+child category is the largest when we say Legal Immigration, plus questions are posed by Engineers & Doctors and that automatically tells the person who is reading that it is about EB category. But you are welcome to form your questions and post and we will make sure that that becomes popular. If you see the situation from where I am standing the glass is half full my friend!
Hope things are going well with you, your research and wisdom is always appriciated.
----------
Employment based immigration is a very small part of legal immigration.
Here is a break down of legal immigration #s for 2006 according to Yearbook of Immigration Statistics, published by Department of Homeland Security's (DHS) Office of Immigration Statistics (OIS) (available at Spotlight on Legal Immigration to the United States (http://www.migrationinformation.org/USfocus/display.cfm?id=651) By Gretchen Reinemeyer and Jeanne Batalova | Migration Policy Institute, November 2007).
1,266,264 immigrants were granted legal residence in 2006.
159,081 immigrants who received green cards through sponsorship from their US employers accounted for 12.6% of all legal permanent residents.
However, 87,702 (or 55.1%) of the employment-sponsored immigrants were spouses and children of principal applicants.
The share of employment-preference immigrants has varied between 3.3 percent (59,525) in 1991 and 22 percent (246,878) in 2005.
The other categories are family preference (802,712), refugee + asylee (216,454), Immigration Reform and Control Act (IRCA) of 1986 + parolees (43,546) and Diversity Lottery (44,471).
Employment based immigration is legal. However, it may help to add legal to the title.
Employment based immigration is skilled. I think employment based immigration includes cooks, priests, .... They consider themselves to be skilled just like everyone else!
If you just ask for improving legal immigration, they will improve family based or asylum.
As some persons learnt yesterday, legal immigration has very low priority as compared to undocumented. Similarly, employment based immigration has no priority in legal immigration!
Hope things are going well with you, your research and wisdom is always appriciated.
----------
Employment based immigration is a very small part of legal immigration.
Here is a break down of legal immigration #s for 2006 according to Yearbook of Immigration Statistics, published by Department of Homeland Security's (DHS) Office of Immigration Statistics (OIS) (available at Spotlight on Legal Immigration to the United States (http://www.migrationinformation.org/USfocus/display.cfm?id=651) By Gretchen Reinemeyer and Jeanne Batalova | Migration Policy Institute, November 2007).
1,266,264 immigrants were granted legal residence in 2006.
159,081 immigrants who received green cards through sponsorship from their US employers accounted for 12.6% of all legal permanent residents.
However, 87,702 (or 55.1%) of the employment-sponsored immigrants were spouses and children of principal applicants.
The share of employment-preference immigrants has varied between 3.3 percent (59,525) in 1991 and 22 percent (246,878) in 2005.
The other categories are family preference (802,712), refugee + asylee (216,454), Immigration Reform and Control Act (IRCA) of 1986 + parolees (43,546) and Diversity Lottery (44,471).
Employment based immigration is legal. However, it may help to add legal to the title.
Employment based immigration is skilled. I think employment based immigration includes cooks, priests, .... They consider themselves to be skilled just like everyone else!
If you just ask for improving legal immigration, they will improve family based or asylum.
As some persons learnt yesterday, legal immigration has very low priority as compared to undocumented. Similarly, employment based immigration has no priority in legal immigration!
tattoo As a clown
cal97
07-19 07:58 PM
Did not quite understand your response. I looked in immigration.com before requesting you. If you know the thread please let me know I can look further by myself.
Thanks!
Look in home and post.
Thanks!
Look in home and post.
more...
pictures Evil. Clowns. For. The. Win.
rkotamurthy
02-13 03:25 PM
I absolutely agree with Logiclife and all posts supporting him/her. IV Core, you guys rock. There is no question about your integrity or selflessness. I understand the Time, Money, Effort and Sacrifices many of you have made to fight for this common cause. Please do not get discouraged by some mindless posts. Remember that for every single disgruntled voice on this forum, there are hundreds of supporters. Albeit, some silent and some active.
dresses Evil Clown No 1 - clown, evil,
spdy_mn
06-14 01:34 PM
This is how it works. If you file for your 485 now, the next thing that is expected from you is to wait for the receipt, that would take 3 to 4 weeks. Then you will get finger print notice, that might come in three months time. Once you are done with all this then check the processing date of the respective service centre where you have filed your 485 application.
Now coming to the question of unmarried filers, if the principal aplicant's date of marriage is beofe his or her 485 adjudication of adjustment of status, there are two ways principal applicant file for 485 for his or her spouse. The spouse can travel to US on H4 and file for 485 or the principal applicant can do consular processing. Now consular processing is good for those cases whosw w PD is current but since retrogression can kick in anytime it is better to travel to US on H4 and file for 485.
Another important aspect is if you file 485, EAD, Advance Parole and you use EAD, you loose your H1 status, hence on EAD you can not bring in your wife. So unmarried filersn it goes like thisn you go ahead and fileyour 485, then go to your home country brng in your wife on H4n as you have aleast s months of time if NSC, TSC or CSC 485 processing is not current and it is hown 1 month for receipt of 485, three months of time for getting the finger print notice and you can postpone by another month of FP by rescheduling it to another month. So literally you have 4 to 5 months to get married and by that time the dates will retrogress again. So dont worry, just go ahead file your 485 and start looking to get married. But try to bring in your spouse asap so that you can file for your spouses 485 also till the time PD is current. If you are not able to file for 485 for your spouse and you have filed for yourself and whenthe dates retrogresses again when your spouse comed to US you would not be able to use EAD as using EAD nullifies H1 and H4 status. So desi consulting companies will keep on sucking your blood as you cannot change job using EAD. If you need more info on this let me know I have gone through this and waited for almost three years to file for my spouse I resheduled my FP notice in 2004 to get married by the time my wife came retrogression kicked in and waited till June 2007 to file for my wife. My PD june 2002 still waiting
That explains almost every thing. Thanks so much
Now coming to the question of unmarried filers, if the principal aplicant's date of marriage is beofe his or her 485 adjudication of adjustment of status, there are two ways principal applicant file for 485 for his or her spouse. The spouse can travel to US on H4 and file for 485 or the principal applicant can do consular processing. Now consular processing is good for those cases whosw w PD is current but since retrogression can kick in anytime it is better to travel to US on H4 and file for 485.
Another important aspect is if you file 485, EAD, Advance Parole and you use EAD, you loose your H1 status, hence on EAD you can not bring in your wife. So unmarried filersn it goes like thisn you go ahead and fileyour 485, then go to your home country brng in your wife on H4n as you have aleast s months of time if NSC, TSC or CSC 485 processing is not current and it is hown 1 month for receipt of 485, three months of time for getting the finger print notice and you can postpone by another month of FP by rescheduling it to another month. So literally you have 4 to 5 months to get married and by that time the dates will retrogress again. So dont worry, just go ahead file your 485 and start looking to get married. But try to bring in your spouse asap so that you can file for your spouses 485 also till the time PD is current. If you are not able to file for 485 for your spouse and you have filed for yourself and whenthe dates retrogresses again when your spouse comed to US you would not be able to use EAD as using EAD nullifies H1 and H4 status. So desi consulting companies will keep on sucking your blood as you cannot change job using EAD. If you need more info on this let me know I have gone through this and waited for almost three years to file for my spouse I resheduled my FP notice in 2004 to get married by the time my wife came retrogression kicked in and waited till June 2007 to file for my wife. My PD june 2002 still waiting
That explains almost every thing. Thanks so much
more...
makeup naughty clown by alana janesse
leoindiano
12-02 06:16 PM
Freinds,
got CPO email yesterday, status was post decision activity
today, status changed to notice sent, status moved back to decision
I believe there will be another email with welcome notice?
Nov 2004, EB2-I, Texas
Thanks for all your help.
I tried 3 pronged strategy around nov. 10th, finally case moved
1)Applied for AP renewal
2)wrote to napolitano
3)wrote to ombudsman
got CPO email yesterday, status was post decision activity
today, status changed to notice sent, status moved back to decision
I believe there will be another email with welcome notice?
Nov 2004, EB2-I, Texas
Thanks for all your help.
I tried 3 pronged strategy around nov. 10th, finally case moved
1)Applied for AP renewal
2)wrote to napolitano
3)wrote to ombudsman
girlfriend Christina#39;s evil clown
shreekarthik
01-31 12:24 PM
1. As for as I can see the 45-day rule comes in to force only after the rule is published in federal register. So all LCs approved after this publication will have 45days of life and has to be used by the original applicant. It's still a grey area as to how LCs approved before the rule publication will be affected. From immigration-law.com, my understanding is that all the LCs approved before this publication will have 45 days from the date of publication and if the I140 is not filed by then they'll expire. So all LCs approved so far will have 45days from the date of publication. Now to Labor sub.
2. Substitution of labor can be done by 2 methods
a. by amending the existing labor certification before approval
b. by substituting after approval.
3. When u do either 2.a or 2.b DoL stamps a substitution approved stamp on the LC.
4. If you are doing a labor sub and u fail to get this stamp before the rules goes in to effect then ur lab sub will be automatically rejected.
5. If your labor sub is approved before the rule is published in the federal registrar then u go ahead and file I140.
2. Substitution of labor can be done by 2 methods
a. by amending the existing labor certification before approval
b. by substituting after approval.
3. When u do either 2.a or 2.b DoL stamps a substitution approved stamp on the LC.
4. If you are doing a labor sub and u fail to get this stamp before the rules goes in to effect then ur lab sub will be automatically rejected.
5. If your labor sub is approved before the rule is published in the federal registrar then u go ahead and file I140.
hairstyles evil clown makeup.
pappu
04-24 06:54 PM
Here is the Durbin Grassley outsourcing bill. We will be providing our analysis soon
http://immigrationvoice.org/media/forums/iv/temp/forum_attach/outsourcingbill.pdf
http://immigrationvoice.org/media/forums/iv/temp/forum_attach/outsourcingbill.pdf
soma
03-13 10:06 AM
Are we sure that consular processing dates are mirror of AOS bulletin?
I am sure it is, I am a CP candidate, till now AOS dates mirrored CP dates and vice versa, so this time also it has to be true!!! Usually consulates get the dates b4hand from DOS, as they have to schedule interviews. I hope I'll be scheduled for the interview this april.
I am sure it is, I am a CP candidate, till now AOS dates mirrored CP dates and vice versa, so this time also it has to be true!!! Usually consulates get the dates b4hand from DOS, as they have to schedule interviews. I hope I'll be scheduled for the interview this april.
boreal
06-13 05:15 PM
Called them all, had to leave a VM for Gary Miller, but for all others, i was able to talk to one of the staff, who were glad to pass the message along.
No comments:
Post a Comment