hiralal
07-27 06:31 AM
I personally think it is the worst thing that a person can do - I have done some research on the money that you can make on such pyramid businesses and it is pitiful ..maybe a beggar makes more. it comes to around 2 -3 percent cash and when you add the time you lose standing in walmarts, temples etc, the loss of your time, loss of friends, loss of time towards your kids and you can make out that it is a BIG WASTE. in the end it is a pyramid and ponzi scheme ...those who join late will always be the LOSER's. you can make more money by working part-time even in some super mart's.
wallpaper selena gomez new haircut 2010.
needhelp!
09-23 05:28 PM
Fifteen minutes is well worth the time to influence a $2 trillion enterprise.
garybanz
12-14 02:35 PM
I still dont see any discrimination on the existing laws. The number of visas divided equally to all countries.
Why not divide equally across all races? or all kind of jobs? or different ages? or color of eyes? ...left hand right hand? Yankee fans and red sox fans?
Why not divide all the jobs in USA equally among some of the above categories?
EEO does not say take the total pool of jobs and divide it exactly equally among all the race, color, religion, sex, and national origin or for that matter any of the categories I mentioned. EEO says every one gets an equal shot at the job.
Do you understand the discrimination now?
Why not divide equally across all races? or all kind of jobs? or different ages? or color of eyes? ...left hand right hand? Yankee fans and red sox fans?
Why not divide all the jobs in USA equally among some of the above categories?
EEO does not say take the total pool of jobs and divide it exactly equally among all the race, color, religion, sex, and national origin or for that matter any of the categories I mentioned. EEO says every one gets an equal shot at the job.
Do you understand the discrimination now?
2011 2011 makeup 2011 selena gomez
Caliber
09-04 12:11 PM
It is a shame for IV.
You have 352 posts and not one dollar contribution. Are you talking about shame on IV?
You have 352 posts and not one dollar contribution. Are you talking about shame on IV?
more...
delax
07-25 09:47 AM
IMO, both arguments and are valid as far as speculations are concerned. It all depends on perspective. In this thread, we are focusing on statistics and calculations. I my self did lot of calculations. However, objectively looking at Ron's comments, it appears like his concern and underlying message is what if USCIS won't adjudicate enough numbers and wastes visa numbers as it did lot of times. He is basing his prediction on years of experience. With recent pressure on DOS/USCIS to use visa number, I think, they are making an attempt to use up all numbers and that will definitely bring life to our calculations. But what If they do not do that.....and their 'target' is a low number.
What you say can certainly happen, but I beleive that the pressure on USCIS is exponentially greater after last summer. People are watching their every step very closely. They got away with their inefficiency in prior years because the bottleneck was not USCIS - it was DOL that took a zillion years to clear labor petitions. Additionally the visa recapture of 2000 ensured no retrogression until 2005. Even after 2005 there were very few 485's to approve because of a) very low perm applications/approvals in 2005 and early 2006 and b) all the 2003/2004 labors were stuck in BEC's and were approved only in late 2006 or early 2007 (like yours truly - mine was actually an RIR but the BEC classified it as Traditional Recruitment and began recruiting for the position - but thats another story).
Net net; USCIS inefficiency was masked under DOL's backlog - but now their transgressions are out in the open and they cant hide anymore behind DOL especially after last summer.
As much as Ron Gotcher has been accurate in the past, I think he is missing the point this time. At an ulterior level he needs to show USCIS in poor light because he only recommends CP for his clients. If I were his client and I hear him say that this year USCIS is different then I am bound to switch over from CP to AOS!
What you say can certainly happen, but I beleive that the pressure on USCIS is exponentially greater after last summer. People are watching their every step very closely. They got away with their inefficiency in prior years because the bottleneck was not USCIS - it was DOL that took a zillion years to clear labor petitions. Additionally the visa recapture of 2000 ensured no retrogression until 2005. Even after 2005 there were very few 485's to approve because of a) very low perm applications/approvals in 2005 and early 2006 and b) all the 2003/2004 labors were stuck in BEC's and were approved only in late 2006 or early 2007 (like yours truly - mine was actually an RIR but the BEC classified it as Traditional Recruitment and began recruiting for the position - but thats another story).
Net net; USCIS inefficiency was masked under DOL's backlog - but now their transgressions are out in the open and they cant hide anymore behind DOL especially after last summer.
As much as Ron Gotcher has been accurate in the past, I think he is missing the point this time. At an ulterior level he needs to show USCIS in poor light because he only recommends CP for his clients. If I were his client and I hear him say that this year USCIS is different then I am bound to switch over from CP to AOS!
gonecrazyonh4
03-16 12:23 PM
All the people in the piple line are saved, but atleast it will prevent further misuse of this loophole.
There should be some enquiry or auditing done on the old LC substituion cases and green cards revoked for those whose received theirs illegally and those visa numbers added back (wishful thinking).
Any auditing done on these cases would reveal lots of scams and possibily avert others from being unscrupulous.
Its so unfair that people jumb ahead of the que for upto 5 years using LC substitution.
There should be some enquiry or auditing done on the old LC substituion cases and green cards revoked for those whose received theirs illegally and those visa numbers added back (wishful thinking).
Any auditing done on these cases would reveal lots of scams and possibily avert others from being unscrupulous.
Its so unfair that people jumb ahead of the que for upto 5 years using LC substitution.
more...
mrajatish
07-11 06:07 PM
I know people who got their GC in 7 months from the date they filed PERM. and then there are many people getting GCs every month. There are both good stories and bad stories to tell about getting GC in US.
There were times when H1 quota never reached the limit during the whole fiscal year, now they get used in just 2 days. This mess in GC process is a result mainly due to our own actions (temporary workers and consulting companies hiring temporary workers). Do you think majority of us once we get GC, stay with the consulting company that filed for our GC? When a consulting company files for PERM, they already have a foreign national working under H-1B in that position. So where is the real intent to hire an American when some foreigner is already working at that position?
This employment based GC is a way for us foreigners to immigrate to US easily at one point. Now due to our extreme usage and abuse of this process, there are genuine people who are being sponsored to immigrate to US are also suffering. In a true employment GC scenario, the company should be desperate to keep you for a long time (more than 6 years after H-1B is maxed) for your valuable skills that they were unable to find in others. But in most GC cases, looks like we temporary workers are more desperate than our employers for the GC? aren't we? Do you see any companies sweating on how to retain you with them, because you H-1B is expiring and they have no way to keep you?
Do not put all the blame on US immigration system, the majority of the blame should fall on us and the companies who are helping us to get GCs when our cases are not based on genuine sponsors.
Do you see any companies sweating on how to retain you with them, because you H-1B is expiring and they have no way to keep you?
This was true in my case at least - my compay worked hard to keep me around when my H1 was expiring.
There were times when H1 quota never reached the limit during the whole fiscal year, now they get used in just 2 days. This mess in GC process is a result mainly due to our own actions (temporary workers and consulting companies hiring temporary workers). Do you think majority of us once we get GC, stay with the consulting company that filed for our GC? When a consulting company files for PERM, they already have a foreign national working under H-1B in that position. So where is the real intent to hire an American when some foreigner is already working at that position?
This employment based GC is a way for us foreigners to immigrate to US easily at one point. Now due to our extreme usage and abuse of this process, there are genuine people who are being sponsored to immigrate to US are also suffering. In a true employment GC scenario, the company should be desperate to keep you for a long time (more than 6 years after H-1B is maxed) for your valuable skills that they were unable to find in others. But in most GC cases, looks like we temporary workers are more desperate than our employers for the GC? aren't we? Do you see any companies sweating on how to retain you with them, because you H-1B is expiring and they have no way to keep you?
Do not put all the blame on US immigration system, the majority of the blame should fall on us and the companies who are helping us to get GCs when our cases are not based on genuine sponsors.
Do you see any companies sweating on how to retain you with them, because you H-1B is expiring and they have no way to keep you?
This was true in my case at least - my compay worked hard to keep me around when my H1 was expiring.
2010 makeup 2010 selena gomez new
shukla77
07-29 12:27 PM
I think what Ron is saying does make sense.
more...
olivetheoil
02-13 10:13 PM
Count me in!
hair selena gomez Bilder. ilder på
Rb_newsletter
01-21 06:15 PM
I got the below email from multiple friends. I don't know what is the source, who wrote this analysis because there is no links. I did NOT mean to spread the fear. Just sharing the contents unaltered.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
However, this is how many could read RECENT (Jan 8, 2010) actions / announcement by USCIS towards Consulting companies, which engages or merely places their employees at the client sites for various projects.
� No new H1B application will be approved, as per the new guidelines provided USCIS on Jan 08, 2010 memorandum � for 3rd Party Consulting company.
� No new H1B extension/stamping will be approved, as per the new guidelines provided USCIS on Jan 08, 2010 memorandum � for 3rd Party Consulting company.
� If an employee has H1B approved or extension approved, and if he/she comes back to US from a vacation or from an emergency, he/she would be deported back to his/her home country from the Port of Entry (PoE) � for 3rd Party Consulting company.
Why?
Because of 2 recent events:
1) USCIS gave new memorandum (which is now guidelines for USCIS professionals working on the H1B petitions/extensions) on Jan 08th, 2010. (Attached the PDF file for the memorandum).
2) Recently (Jan 2010) several H1B Employees were sent back (in some forum, its mentioned � all of them) to their home country from Newark, NJ and JFK, NY Port of Entry � these were the H1B employees, who went to spend Christmas/New Year vacation to their home countries.
What does the memorandum mention, specifically, about 3rd Party Consulting companies?
Link to the memorandum (PDF attached) � http://www.uscis.gov/USCIS/Laws/Memoranda/2010/H1B%20Employer-Employee%20Memo010810.pdf
Employer-Employee Relationship:
As per the memorandum, some previous H1B Law defines, the definition of an �US Employer�. Somewhere in that definition (Page 2 of memo), it mentions the word �Employer-Employee relationship�. Till now, it seems that there was no clear guidance on what kind of relationship was considered having Employer-Employee relationship. So, it was being, probably, interpreted independently or ambiguously. Now, on Jan 8th, 2010, USCIS has published this memorandum for TRAINING USCIS OFFICIALS about understanding, Employer-Employee relationship. The memorandum seems to have been prepared with a clear understanding about it, along with the specific EXAMPLES.
Memorandum has given few specific examples, which would QUALIFY for having Employer-Employee relationship, on Page 4-5 of the Memo � including the nature of the job/business. On Page 5-6, memorandum gives few specific examples, which would NOT QUALIFY for having Employer-Employee relationship. Third Party Placement / �Job-Shop� (better version of �Body-shop�, probably) is NOT QUALIFIED for meeting Employer-Employee Relationships � meaning, 3rd Party placement (which most of the small consulting companies do) doesn�t meet H1B requirement, as defined by the law � meaning for this job, the new H1B or Extension or Stamping petitions CANNOT be approved!! Period !!
This is how memorandum has identified 3rd Party Placements and in Bold letters, why it disqualifies for the H1B petitions (comments are in Red):
�The petitioner is a computer consulting company (which is what all small consulting do). The petitioner has contract with numerous outside companies in which it supplies these companies with employee to fulfill specific staffing needs. The specific positions are not outlined in the contract between the petitioner and the third-party company but are staffed on an as-needed basis (this is nothing but, Service Agreement between the petitioner and the mid-vendor!). The beneficiary is a computer analyst (which is what many small consulting company�s employee are). The beneficiary has been assigned to work for the third-party company to fill a core position to maintain the third-party company�s payroll (this nothing but, Mid-Vendor�s or so-called Prime-Vendor�s or Consulting Partner�s Revenue). Once placed at the client company, the beneficiary reports to a manager who works for the third-party company (as it happens, when Consulting partner hires employee as a contractor). The beneficiary does not report to the petitioner for work assignments, and all work assignments are determined by the third-party company (petitioner just runs pay-rolls!). The petitioner does not control how the beneficiary will complete daily tasks, and no propriety information of the petitioner is used by the beneficiary to complete any work assignments (petitioner just runs pay-rolls!). The beneficiary�s end-product, the payroll (payroll of mid-vendor/prime vendor/consulting partner), is not in any way related to the petitioner�s line of business, which is computer consulting. The beneficiary�s progress reviews are completed by the client company, not the petitioner (petitioner just runs pay-rolls!). [Petitioner Has No Right to Control; No Exercise of Control].�
Right to Control:
Supreme Court has stated the definition of Employer-Employee Relationship (Page 3 of Memo), and there it was mentioned to have �Right to Control� over the work of the employee by the employer. From the entire memo, it sounds that Right control is well-established, ONLY WHEN, at least one supervisor from the petitioner�s company works with the beneficiary at the end-client site, and supervises beneficiary�s day-to-day work. So, big Consulting companies such as Wipro, Infosys, Accenture, Deloitte etc. will be good, as they would meet �Right to Control� and that way, they will satisfy H1B requirement by law, and their petitions for similar 3rd party consulting work, will be APPROVED, but not in case of, small consulting companies!! This is because, big consulting companies such as Accenture � have their entire or partial team � along with managers etc. � working at the same client site, where the beneficiary would be working, so they could supervise their work and so exercise control over their work etc., but that cannot be the case with the small consulting � because, their actual business has been, so far, to place employees and run pay-roll � not to get the client projects!
Why one could think that there are slim chances for this memorandum to get reversed in favor of small consulting companies?
This memorandum took care of big consulting companies such as Wipro, Infosys, Cognizant, Accenture etc. � meaning, these companies and their employees are NOT impacted. They can travel freely to-and-fro their home country etc. Since, big companies are not impacted, there will not be any big lobbying or oppositions to this memorandum, per say!! There don�t seem to be a platform for small consulting companies to gather and lobby, plus most the small consulting may not get involved, with fear of exposing themselves more to other issues!! So, it might be east to assume that this memorandum is permanent and not temporary. The recent deportation also indicates that the changes like this memorandum is for serious, not just the warning!
How this memorandum relates to the recent deportation events from NY and NJ airports?
There seems to be an anticipated link between these 2 events � Memorandum and recent Deportations � kind of an indication about the current level of government scrutiny and seriousness of the H1B program. Hence, there have been advices by others that � each employer and employee should operate by strictly following the H1B program requirements.
Link to Murthy.com front page posting about this � MurthyDotCom : NewsFlash! Note to H1Bs Traveling to U.S., Working for Consulting Companies (http://www.murthy.com/nflash/nf_h1conc.html)
What one could predict as happening sooner (trend)?
� Since, it seems big consulting companies (having their own consulting projects)/full-time end-clients and their beneficiaries are not impacted with these changes � there could be trend � employee moving from small companies to big companies for a better shelter for full-time positions � especially, when small consulting company�s immediate preventions / actions to this memo cannot ensure safety.
� Big consulting companies could buy small consulting companies or small consulting companies could sell their companies to big consulting companies (having their own consulting projects), to save their employee�s future/transition etc.
Good Luck my Friends....!!
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
However, this is how many could read RECENT (Jan 8, 2010) actions / announcement by USCIS towards Consulting companies, which engages or merely places their employees at the client sites for various projects.
� No new H1B application will be approved, as per the new guidelines provided USCIS on Jan 08, 2010 memorandum � for 3rd Party Consulting company.
� No new H1B extension/stamping will be approved, as per the new guidelines provided USCIS on Jan 08, 2010 memorandum � for 3rd Party Consulting company.
� If an employee has H1B approved or extension approved, and if he/she comes back to US from a vacation or from an emergency, he/she would be deported back to his/her home country from the Port of Entry (PoE) � for 3rd Party Consulting company.
Why?
Because of 2 recent events:
1) USCIS gave new memorandum (which is now guidelines for USCIS professionals working on the H1B petitions/extensions) on Jan 08th, 2010. (Attached the PDF file for the memorandum).
2) Recently (Jan 2010) several H1B Employees were sent back (in some forum, its mentioned � all of them) to their home country from Newark, NJ and JFK, NY Port of Entry � these were the H1B employees, who went to spend Christmas/New Year vacation to their home countries.
What does the memorandum mention, specifically, about 3rd Party Consulting companies?
Link to the memorandum (PDF attached) � http://www.uscis.gov/USCIS/Laws/Memoranda/2010/H1B%20Employer-Employee%20Memo010810.pdf
Employer-Employee Relationship:
As per the memorandum, some previous H1B Law defines, the definition of an �US Employer�. Somewhere in that definition (Page 2 of memo), it mentions the word �Employer-Employee relationship�. Till now, it seems that there was no clear guidance on what kind of relationship was considered having Employer-Employee relationship. So, it was being, probably, interpreted independently or ambiguously. Now, on Jan 8th, 2010, USCIS has published this memorandum for TRAINING USCIS OFFICIALS about understanding, Employer-Employee relationship. The memorandum seems to have been prepared with a clear understanding about it, along with the specific EXAMPLES.
Memorandum has given few specific examples, which would QUALIFY for having Employer-Employee relationship, on Page 4-5 of the Memo � including the nature of the job/business. On Page 5-6, memorandum gives few specific examples, which would NOT QUALIFY for having Employer-Employee relationship. Third Party Placement / �Job-Shop� (better version of �Body-shop�, probably) is NOT QUALIFIED for meeting Employer-Employee Relationships � meaning, 3rd Party placement (which most of the small consulting companies do) doesn�t meet H1B requirement, as defined by the law � meaning for this job, the new H1B or Extension or Stamping petitions CANNOT be approved!! Period !!
This is how memorandum has identified 3rd Party Placements and in Bold letters, why it disqualifies for the H1B petitions (comments are in Red):
�The petitioner is a computer consulting company (which is what all small consulting do). The petitioner has contract with numerous outside companies in which it supplies these companies with employee to fulfill specific staffing needs. The specific positions are not outlined in the contract between the petitioner and the third-party company but are staffed on an as-needed basis (this is nothing but, Service Agreement between the petitioner and the mid-vendor!). The beneficiary is a computer analyst (which is what many small consulting company�s employee are). The beneficiary has been assigned to work for the third-party company to fill a core position to maintain the third-party company�s payroll (this nothing but, Mid-Vendor�s or so-called Prime-Vendor�s or Consulting Partner�s Revenue). Once placed at the client company, the beneficiary reports to a manager who works for the third-party company (as it happens, when Consulting partner hires employee as a contractor). The beneficiary does not report to the petitioner for work assignments, and all work assignments are determined by the third-party company (petitioner just runs pay-rolls!). The petitioner does not control how the beneficiary will complete daily tasks, and no propriety information of the petitioner is used by the beneficiary to complete any work assignments (petitioner just runs pay-rolls!). The beneficiary�s end-product, the payroll (payroll of mid-vendor/prime vendor/consulting partner), is not in any way related to the petitioner�s line of business, which is computer consulting. The beneficiary�s progress reviews are completed by the client company, not the petitioner (petitioner just runs pay-rolls!). [Petitioner Has No Right to Control; No Exercise of Control].�
Right to Control:
Supreme Court has stated the definition of Employer-Employee Relationship (Page 3 of Memo), and there it was mentioned to have �Right to Control� over the work of the employee by the employer. From the entire memo, it sounds that Right control is well-established, ONLY WHEN, at least one supervisor from the petitioner�s company works with the beneficiary at the end-client site, and supervises beneficiary�s day-to-day work. So, big Consulting companies such as Wipro, Infosys, Accenture, Deloitte etc. will be good, as they would meet �Right to Control� and that way, they will satisfy H1B requirement by law, and their petitions for similar 3rd party consulting work, will be APPROVED, but not in case of, small consulting companies!! This is because, big consulting companies such as Accenture � have their entire or partial team � along with managers etc. � working at the same client site, where the beneficiary would be working, so they could supervise their work and so exercise control over their work etc., but that cannot be the case with the small consulting � because, their actual business has been, so far, to place employees and run pay-roll � not to get the client projects!
Why one could think that there are slim chances for this memorandum to get reversed in favor of small consulting companies?
This memorandum took care of big consulting companies such as Wipro, Infosys, Cognizant, Accenture etc. � meaning, these companies and their employees are NOT impacted. They can travel freely to-and-fro their home country etc. Since, big companies are not impacted, there will not be any big lobbying or oppositions to this memorandum, per say!! There don�t seem to be a platform for small consulting companies to gather and lobby, plus most the small consulting may not get involved, with fear of exposing themselves more to other issues!! So, it might be east to assume that this memorandum is permanent and not temporary. The recent deportation also indicates that the changes like this memorandum is for serious, not just the warning!
How this memorandum relates to the recent deportation events from NY and NJ airports?
There seems to be an anticipated link between these 2 events � Memorandum and recent Deportations � kind of an indication about the current level of government scrutiny and seriousness of the H1B program. Hence, there have been advices by others that � each employer and employee should operate by strictly following the H1B program requirements.
Link to Murthy.com front page posting about this � MurthyDotCom : NewsFlash! Note to H1Bs Traveling to U.S., Working for Consulting Companies (http://www.murthy.com/nflash/nf_h1conc.html)
What one could predict as happening sooner (trend)?
� Since, it seems big consulting companies (having their own consulting projects)/full-time end-clients and their beneficiaries are not impacted with these changes � there could be trend � employee moving from small companies to big companies for a better shelter for full-time positions � especially, when small consulting company�s immediate preventions / actions to this memo cannot ensure safety.
� Big consulting companies could buy small consulting companies or small consulting companies could sell their companies to big consulting companies (having their own consulting projects), to save their employee�s future/transition etc.
Good Luck my Friends....!!
more...
unseenguy
08-16 12:52 AM
Indians are masters in creating unnecessary ourage. Look what a big deal the Indian media made of students being attacked in Australia. Indians declared Australia as a racist country and they branded Britain also as racist when Shilpa Shetty episode took place. Now also they are making a non-issue as a big deal. It seems that Indians thinking is buillt around that all the world is racist and biased toward India. But, when it comes to showing ourage to genuine issues they are always silent. So many horrible things happen to millions of Indians everyday but no body cares about them. Also, when chinese think tank published a report last week about breaking India in many states, there was no outrage. As compared to this news SRK news is nothing. The reason is simple chinese will shut Indians out because they know what works while dealing with Indians.
Anti.... welcome to 21st century assertive Indianness. We fight for our rights!
Anti.... welcome to 21st century assertive Indianness. We fight for our rights!
hot gomez new haircut. selena
gc28262
01-13 03:06 PM
There is lot of non-sense happening in USCIS with union man, Grassley friendly, president in white house.
Looks like this memo is inspired by anti-immigrant lawmaker Grassley's recent questions to USCIS director. I doubt USCIS has such wide powers as to define employee/employer relationship.
Looks like this memo is inspired by anti-immigrant lawmaker Grassley's recent questions to USCIS director. I doubt USCIS has such wide powers as to define employee/employer relationship.
more...
house makeup gomez new haircut
venetian
05-12 01:40 PM
If you are talking about SL Tamils, they are not immigrants but are the native sons of northern part of the present geographical area known as Sri Lanka. Before Europeans came, they had their own kingdom but when finally British left, they left it with hands of the narrow minded majority, who started to discriminate ingenious Tamils left and right.
Of course there are Indian Tamils in Sri Lanka who were taken by British to work in the tea plantations.
Current issue in Sri Lanka is between native Tamils and Sinhalese. Indian Tamils factor very minimal.
Do some research before making a comment about entire ethnicity.
Can I ask a question - tangential, maybe, but not by much. Why do Tamils have such a problem assimilating? Why don't they learn the local language and respect the local culture when they immigrate? Their motto seems to be "In Rome, be a Raman".
And the opposite is true when people speaking other languages settle in Tamil majority areas - they are, dare I say, forced to integrate, because that is the only way one can manage to live on a day-to-day basis. Would Tamils ever allow a non-Tamil minority to gain even a tiny foothold in their areas where the Tamil writ would not run? I doubt it.
Note that I am a firm believer of learning and respecting the local culture and integration. One does have a 'right' to propagate one's own language and culture, but they lose that right substantially when they emigrate to an alien land - whether it is within the same country or not.
To extend the logic, when we (mostly people of Indian origin in this group, I would assume) immigrate to the US, while we may try to conserve our heritage in private, we cannot impose it on the locals. That is when you end up creating ill-will against immigrants among the native population. America has been a great melting-pot, and has had great success assimilating great waves of immigrants from various countries including Italy, Ireland, Scandinavia, Germany etc, and the reason it succeeded was that in a couple of generations, there was total integration into the American culture. We owe it to our adopted country to do the same.
Of course there are Indian Tamils in Sri Lanka who were taken by British to work in the tea plantations.
Current issue in Sri Lanka is between native Tamils and Sinhalese. Indian Tamils factor very minimal.
Do some research before making a comment about entire ethnicity.
Can I ask a question - tangential, maybe, but not by much. Why do Tamils have such a problem assimilating? Why don't they learn the local language and respect the local culture when they immigrate? Their motto seems to be "In Rome, be a Raman".
And the opposite is true when people speaking other languages settle in Tamil majority areas - they are, dare I say, forced to integrate, because that is the only way one can manage to live on a day-to-day basis. Would Tamils ever allow a non-Tamil minority to gain even a tiny foothold in their areas where the Tamil writ would not run? I doubt it.
Note that I am a firm believer of learning and respecting the local culture and integration. One does have a 'right' to propagate one's own language and culture, but they lose that right substantially when they emigrate to an alien land - whether it is within the same country or not.
To extend the logic, when we (mostly people of Indian origin in this group, I would assume) immigrate to the US, while we may try to conserve our heritage in private, we cannot impose it on the locals. That is when you end up creating ill-will against immigrants among the native population. America has been a great melting-pot, and has had great success assimilating great waves of immigrants from various countries including Italy, Ireland, Scandinavia, Germany etc, and the reason it succeeded was that in a couple of generations, there was total integration into the American culture. We owe it to our adopted country to do the same.
tattoo selena gomez new haircut
sachug22
09-15 01:53 PM
Jerome and scchug22, Would you mind kindly reconcile or revela source.
My data is for all approved PERM case all countries in 2005 (so is incomplete).
My data is for all approved PERM case all countries in 2005 (so is incomplete).
more...
pictures hairstyles selena gomez new
lalithkx
07-15 06:04 PM
Hi,
I found that priority date field on my I-140 receipt is empty. Will this create any problem??
I filed concurrently lasy july and MY PD will be current next month. I applied at NSC but got transferred to TSC.
Thanks for the answers
I found that priority date field on my I-140 receipt is empty. Will this create any problem??
I filed concurrently lasy july and MY PD will be current next month. I applied at NSC but got transferred to TSC.
Thanks for the answers
dresses Selena Gomez gets bangs!
mirage
03-31 09:22 PM
You don't want to give any credit to 'Modi' than by your logic, Chandrababu Naidu shouldn't be give credit of 'Andhra' turnaround, Vajpayee shouldn't be given credit for Infrastructure turnaround...In India Politics & Politicians are so important, until they are pro-work, nothing works. UPA govt's attitude was sit & watch for Orders from 10 Janpath, so all of us know how they performed..A person who assists in the murder of people whom he has taken an oath to protect, cannot be really thinking about the country or for its development. By saying that HE is responsible for the development is clearly under estimating the capabilities of the gujrati people. The gujratis and rajasthanis are leaders in creating wealth and they did that for thousands of years successfully with world's envy before this ugly Indian came into picture. With your logic fodder eating Lalu is the smartest politician ever born....remember his $20Billion revenue he is bringing in from railways....never heard of from any sector...leave alone the ever losing railways...the only thing lalu can be given credit for is...not stopping the elite civil services managing directors and the academia (IIM, ISB) from doing their work...which they have been trying to for several decades....so I dont think the theory is right that one person (call him black spot of India) had done something....when each individual in the state is born with the blood which carries enterpreneurship.....kudos to all gujaratis....
more...
makeup selena gomez new haircut bob.
ilikekilo
07-10 11:32 AM
Wish you the very best byeusa......
I might be moving to Canada next summer if there is no progress in my case here...My PD is Nov 2003 EB-3...I got my Canadian PR in May 2005 and I have until May 2008 to move.....So keeping my fingers crossed..I too work for a Canadian company in US.....Wish you good luck...
how long did it take you get your canadian PR adn when did u apply? please share
I might be moving to Canada next summer if there is no progress in my case here...My PD is Nov 2003 EB-3...I got my Canadian PR in May 2005 and I have until May 2008 to move.....So keeping my fingers crossed..I too work for a Canadian company in US.....Wish you good luck...
how long did it take you get your canadian PR adn when did u apply? please share
girlfriend Selena Gomez HairStyles
michellezbb
07-03 06:37 PM
please at least send out to your state's senator.
http://www.senate.gov/general/contact_information/senators_cfm.cfm
Dear Mr. Senator,
My name is xxx, and I’m working as an xx in xx,xx.
I am sending this letter in strong protest of the outrageous bait-and-switch melodrama that the US Department of State and the United States Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) have put on recently. Specifically, on June 13, 2007, the State Department announced that people seeking permanent residence based on employment would be allowed to proceed to file their applications starting on July 2, 2007
As a result, I took immediate action, spending a huge amount of time and effort preparing all the required documents and having them sent out to my attorney ASAP. However, on the very morning of July 2, the US Department of State announced that they just changed their mind and decided to reject all applications. This is such a ridiculous hoax, and it’s particularly shocking when you realize that such nonsensical and willy-nilly decisions came from the US Department of State!
As a hard-working student, I got my graduate education in this great country and was fortunate enough to get a job upon graduation. As a law-abiding individual, I have been waiting patiently in line for years to file my application for permanent residence. Yet what I’ve just seen and experienced is more than disappointing not only to me, but to thousands upon thousands of legal immigrants just like me who have struggled so hard to deal with all kinds of difficulties for years and have been doing it the right way.
I have below questions needed to be clarified:
1. How many applications have USCIS received during the period 6/14/2007 through 6/30/2007? This number is critical because apparently this number has changed the US Department of State’s opinion about the visa availability from available to unavailable in 15 days. And a more interesting question is that is this number predictable? In another word, did the US Department of US take this number in consideration when they determine that the visa will be available to all employment-based immigrants on June 13, 2007?
2. The announcement of the revised July visa availability was made in the earlier morning of July 2, 2007. Apparently, the decision was made before but not in the morning of July 2, 2007. Then, why didn’t the US Department of State release the news as soon as the decision was made in a good faith effort to inform all potential applicants at the first time? It should be anticipated that a lot of applicants would their application at the very beginning of the month. As you can imagine, all those effort are just wasted. And the worst of all is the feeling of being cheated and being fooled around.
3. My application was prepared to send to USCIS on July based on the best information available at that point of time. However, the application will be rejected/returned in accordance with the sudden announcement made in the morning of 7/2/2007. Does the US Department of State have the legal right to revise the cut-off date without going through certain procedures? Can we still trust and rely on the visa bulletin issued by the US Department of State to prepare our change of status application in the future?
Again, this is such a ridiculous hoax and it’s hard to believe the US Department of State just ate its own word like that. That is why I would like to take the liberty of writing to you about my outrage. I sincerely hope that you can take some precious time looking into this, and also at the current immigration system, which I believe is seriously flawed and patently unfair.
Thanks and best regards,
xx
http://www.senate.gov/general/contact_information/senators_cfm.cfm
Dear Mr. Senator,
My name is xxx, and I’m working as an xx in xx,xx.
I am sending this letter in strong protest of the outrageous bait-and-switch melodrama that the US Department of State and the United States Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) have put on recently. Specifically, on June 13, 2007, the State Department announced that people seeking permanent residence based on employment would be allowed to proceed to file their applications starting on July 2, 2007
As a result, I took immediate action, spending a huge amount of time and effort preparing all the required documents and having them sent out to my attorney ASAP. However, on the very morning of July 2, the US Department of State announced that they just changed their mind and decided to reject all applications. This is such a ridiculous hoax, and it’s particularly shocking when you realize that such nonsensical and willy-nilly decisions came from the US Department of State!
As a hard-working student, I got my graduate education in this great country and was fortunate enough to get a job upon graduation. As a law-abiding individual, I have been waiting patiently in line for years to file my application for permanent residence. Yet what I’ve just seen and experienced is more than disappointing not only to me, but to thousands upon thousands of legal immigrants just like me who have struggled so hard to deal with all kinds of difficulties for years and have been doing it the right way.
I have below questions needed to be clarified:
1. How many applications have USCIS received during the period 6/14/2007 through 6/30/2007? This number is critical because apparently this number has changed the US Department of State’s opinion about the visa availability from available to unavailable in 15 days. And a more interesting question is that is this number predictable? In another word, did the US Department of US take this number in consideration when they determine that the visa will be available to all employment-based immigrants on June 13, 2007?
2. The announcement of the revised July visa availability was made in the earlier morning of July 2, 2007. Apparently, the decision was made before but not in the morning of July 2, 2007. Then, why didn’t the US Department of State release the news as soon as the decision was made in a good faith effort to inform all potential applicants at the first time? It should be anticipated that a lot of applicants would their application at the very beginning of the month. As you can imagine, all those effort are just wasted. And the worst of all is the feeling of being cheated and being fooled around.
3. My application was prepared to send to USCIS on July based on the best information available at that point of time. However, the application will be rejected/returned in accordance with the sudden announcement made in the morning of 7/2/2007. Does the US Department of State have the legal right to revise the cut-off date without going through certain procedures? Can we still trust and rely on the visa bulletin issued by the US Department of State to prepare our change of status application in the future?
Again, this is such a ridiculous hoax and it’s hard to believe the US Department of State just ate its own word like that. That is why I would like to take the liberty of writing to you about my outrage. I sincerely hope that you can take some precious time looking into this, and also at the current immigration system, which I believe is seriously flawed and patently unfair.
Thanks and best regards,
xx
hairstyles Selena Gomez (Selena
PlainSpeak
01-14 10:06 AM
Plainspeak wasting time.
He was member 2006 onward. Did nothing. Wasted time. Now facing job problem. Need Greencard and now want IV to do for him.
Typical of some lowskill EB3I do nothing and blame. Go do something. Learn some . Become expert and apply EB1 if you so bright. IV does not value Plainspeak. See no reply from admin yet. Proves he wasting his time.
He was member 2006 onward. Did nothing. Wasted time.
Yes i am a meber since 2006 and yes helping others does not just mean be an IV DONOR and volunteer. Helping others can be done is other ways also
Now facing job problem. Need Greencard and now want IV to do for him. My friend it is because my job has become secure now is teh reasn why i am able to concentrate more on this. IV does not do anything for anyone. We do it for ourselves and the we includes not just you but even me my friend
Go do something. Learn some . Become expert and apply EB1 if you so bright. IV does not value Plainspeak. See no reply from admin yet. Proves he wasting his time.
As i said it before i started a GC process once and i am damn well NOT going to start a new process. Why should i start a new process in EB2 or EB1. I wil lfight for this EB3 gc even if it takes 10 years (Who am i kindding it will takle more than that but th espirit to fight i never diminished)
Typical of some lowskill EB3I do nothing and blame.
To get to the point my friend there is a saying in America called as DIGNITY OF LABOUR. What is means (And i have to explain to you bceause obviously you do not undestand) what ever the skills and labour a person is doing whether he is a rocket scientist or whether he si a garbage collector every job is a lobour of hard work and every job deserves a respect. Now that we go that out of the way what was that you were saying about my low skills EB3I. Are you even aware of what you are doing. You are abusing a person for being EB3I. That is not there on IV charter. You are going against the charter
Ok i am waiting for all the senior members and donors to jump inhere an do the right thing. Dont you always talk about righta nd wrong and that therte is no difference between EB2 and EB3 and here you havea guy abusing some one jst becasue he is EB3India
Sileeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeence croack croack No Reply
He was member 2006 onward. Did nothing. Wasted time. Now facing job problem. Need Greencard and now want IV to do for him.
Typical of some lowskill EB3I do nothing and blame. Go do something. Learn some . Become expert and apply EB1 if you so bright. IV does not value Plainspeak. See no reply from admin yet. Proves he wasting his time.
He was member 2006 onward. Did nothing. Wasted time.
Yes i am a meber since 2006 and yes helping others does not just mean be an IV DONOR and volunteer. Helping others can be done is other ways also
Now facing job problem. Need Greencard and now want IV to do for him. My friend it is because my job has become secure now is teh reasn why i am able to concentrate more on this. IV does not do anything for anyone. We do it for ourselves and the we includes not just you but even me my friend
Go do something. Learn some . Become expert and apply EB1 if you so bright. IV does not value Plainspeak. See no reply from admin yet. Proves he wasting his time.
As i said it before i started a GC process once and i am damn well NOT going to start a new process. Why should i start a new process in EB2 or EB1. I wil lfight for this EB3 gc even if it takes 10 years (Who am i kindding it will takle more than that but th espirit to fight i never diminished)
Typical of some lowskill EB3I do nothing and blame.
To get to the point my friend there is a saying in America called as DIGNITY OF LABOUR. What is means (And i have to explain to you bceause obviously you do not undestand) what ever the skills and labour a person is doing whether he is a rocket scientist or whether he si a garbage collector every job is a lobour of hard work and every job deserves a respect. Now that we go that out of the way what was that you were saying about my low skills EB3I. Are you even aware of what you are doing. You are abusing a person for being EB3I. That is not there on IV charter. You are going against the charter
Ok i am waiting for all the senior members and donors to jump inhere an do the right thing. Dont you always talk about righta nd wrong and that therte is no difference between EB2 and EB3 and here you havea guy abusing some one jst becasue he is EB3India
Sileeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeence croack croack No Reply
amitga
02-15 08:32 AM
Very well said & I just feel the same...I have already lost hope on this GC and can not predict how long its going to take but for sure before I leave this place and go back to home country I will contribute my best of share in this fight for justice and full support...count me in with out any doubt!!
The current situation is a gross voilation of the constitutional right of employment at will. This amounts to Involuntary servitude which is a more techincal term for slavery. Read yourself the definition of both and make your own judgement.
In my view (though crazy and totaly impractical) the law suit should be against all the employers because they are the one who represent Govt/USCIS in processing our Green cards. Employers told us that we will process your greencard and you will be a PR in x number of years and now that x is infinite.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/At-will (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/At-will)
At-will employment is a doctrine of American law that defines an employment relationship in which either party can terminate the relationship with no liability if there was no express contract for a definite term governing the employment relationship. Under this legal doctrine:
“ any hiring is presumed to be "at will"; that is, the employer is free to discharge individuals "for good cause, or bad cause, or no cause at all," and the employee is equally free to quit, strike, or otherwise cease work.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Involuntary_servitude :
Involuntary servitude is a United States legal and constitutional term for a person laboring against that person's will to benefit another, under some form of coercion. While laboring to benefit another occurs in the condition of slavery, involuntary servitude does not necessarily connote the complete lack of freedom experienced in chattel slavery; involuntary servitude may also refer to other forms of unfree labor. Involuntary servitude is not dependent upon compensation or its amount.
The current situation is a gross voilation of the constitutional right of employment at will. This amounts to Involuntary servitude which is a more techincal term for slavery. Read yourself the definition of both and make your own judgement.
In my view (though crazy and totaly impractical) the law suit should be against all the employers because they are the one who represent Govt/USCIS in processing our Green cards. Employers told us that we will process your greencard and you will be a PR in x number of years and now that x is infinite.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/At-will (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/At-will)
At-will employment is a doctrine of American law that defines an employment relationship in which either party can terminate the relationship with no liability if there was no express contract for a definite term governing the employment relationship. Under this legal doctrine:
“ any hiring is presumed to be "at will"; that is, the employer is free to discharge individuals "for good cause, or bad cause, or no cause at all," and the employee is equally free to quit, strike, or otherwise cease work.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Involuntary_servitude :
Involuntary servitude is a United States legal and constitutional term for a person laboring against that person's will to benefit another, under some form of coercion. While laboring to benefit another occurs in the condition of slavery, involuntary servitude does not necessarily connote the complete lack of freedom experienced in chattel slavery; involuntary servitude may also refer to other forms of unfree labor. Involuntary servitude is not dependent upon compensation or its amount.
newtogc
10-02 11:39 PM
Hi All,
One company offered me pre-approved labour, with PD as Dec-2004. They are mentioning that I can file i140 immediately as soon as my H1-B transffered to new company.
I have been hearing the news about LC substitution elimination. Any authentic news regarding this? Even if the USCIS publish the news regarding the elimination of LC substitution, Will it undergo the hearing / comment process. During this time can I apply for i140?
Is it better to take this LC( all the criteria required for sub is matched) or apply a new labour under PERM process.
Currently I am in my first H1-B and valid till Oct 2007.
In similar line, what are 45 day letters? Does it apply to my case.
Please need experts advice in this regard.
Thanks,
BNR.
One company offered me pre-approved labour, with PD as Dec-2004. They are mentioning that I can file i140 immediately as soon as my H1-B transffered to new company.
I have been hearing the news about LC substitution elimination. Any authentic news regarding this? Even if the USCIS publish the news regarding the elimination of LC substitution, Will it undergo the hearing / comment process. During this time can I apply for i140?
Is it better to take this LC( all the criteria required for sub is matched) or apply a new labour under PERM process.
Currently I am in my first H1-B and valid till Oct 2007.
In similar line, what are 45 day letters? Does it apply to my case.
Please need experts advice in this regard.
Thanks,
BNR.
No comments:
Post a Comment