sanz
12-21 04:40 PM
Good to know someone at least thought about our poor souls
http://www.informationweek.com/blog/main/archives/2009/12/kundras_managem.html;jsessionid=VEGR0THB1JIVRQE1GH OSKHWATMY32JVN
Kundra's Management Challenges
Posted by J. Nicholas Hoover on December 21, 2009 03:17 PM
Federal CIO Vivek Kundra's job is different from others whom we’ve named as InformationWeek’s Chief of the Year in the past in a few big ways that make it especially challenging.
The 2009 chief of the year (read our story here) is certainly younger, and the federal government’s $76 billion IT budget dwarfs those of any other organization. However, Kundra’s two big biggest differences are that first, his job isn’t driven by traditional profit motives and second, many of his subordinates report to him only via a dotted line. In some ways, these two issues play together, and they've been challenges that have played a role in creating what top officials like OMB director Peter Orszag note as a gap between IT in the private and public sectors.
Unlike in the private sector, where Wall Street can make or break IT decisions, the government doesn’t have the same forcing mechanisms for IT performance and for determining what should be the next project to pursue. Second, the reporting structure in the federal government is one of typical bureaucracy. Dozens of federal agency CIOs report to Kundra, but only indirectly. That means that while Kundra sits as chair of the federal CIO council, there are limits of what he can require of agencies or demand of budget and system decisions.
Kundra's peers say he stands out in his ability not only to strategize, but to execute. Take his ability to understand that a drop of sunshine can go a long way when it’s tax dollars and not supply and demand at work, and that citizen engagement is the name of the game, which has played out in his use of dashboards and full embrace of the administration’s transparency initiatives, both as federal CIO and before as CTO of Washington, D.C.
“His goal has never been innovation merely for innovations’ sake, but innovation to get results in service to the public,” Virginia governor Tim Kaine said in an e-mail that didn’t make it into our story. “Vivek has a limitless imagination, and combined with his agility in the structures of government, I have the utmost confidence that he will continue to do great work for President Obama.”
One story, which also didn’t make it into our feature, is particularly telling. Earlier this year, President Obama called on the United States Citizenship and Immigration Services to partner with Kundra, federal CTO Aneesh Chopra, and federal chief performance officer Jeff Zients to find ways to improve the immigrant application experience.
Kundra took an idea and ran with it. "Vivek very quickly helped to think through how transparency and open government could instill more confidence if we could publish average turnaround times in a forum online for visa and other application processing time, by office," Chopra says.
The effect would be two-fold, Kundra thought. First, immigrants could now find out exactly where they stood in line to get their green card or visa and check on processing times for specific forms at US-CIS field offices around the country, comparing them with national averages and national goals. Second, placing that data online at the hands of the public could put pressure on US-CIS field offices to make them more efficient.
Kundra then acknowledged the need to separate this effort from a larger, more complex modernization project currently underway at US-CIS. "When you have a multi-year project plan, it's challenging to thoughtfully introduce any new innovation without disrupting or adjusting requirements," Chopra says. And yet, that's exactly what happened: the team delivered the site within 90 days, and though it required shifting some money around, it didn't end up requiring any additional budget expenditure.
"When you put it together, he sees the ability for something like the IT Dashboard to really jump start his larger strategy for how to change the way IT projects are done and then puts his head down and gets it done within 10 weeks," Zients says.
http://www.informationweek.com/blog/main/archives/2009/12/kundras_managem.html;jsessionid=VEGR0THB1JIVRQE1GH OSKHWATMY32JVN
Kundra's Management Challenges
Posted by J. Nicholas Hoover on December 21, 2009 03:17 PM
Federal CIO Vivek Kundra's job is different from others whom we’ve named as InformationWeek’s Chief of the Year in the past in a few big ways that make it especially challenging.
The 2009 chief of the year (read our story here) is certainly younger, and the federal government’s $76 billion IT budget dwarfs those of any other organization. However, Kundra’s two big biggest differences are that first, his job isn’t driven by traditional profit motives and second, many of his subordinates report to him only via a dotted line. In some ways, these two issues play together, and they've been challenges that have played a role in creating what top officials like OMB director Peter Orszag note as a gap between IT in the private and public sectors.
Unlike in the private sector, where Wall Street can make or break IT decisions, the government doesn’t have the same forcing mechanisms for IT performance and for determining what should be the next project to pursue. Second, the reporting structure in the federal government is one of typical bureaucracy. Dozens of federal agency CIOs report to Kundra, but only indirectly. That means that while Kundra sits as chair of the federal CIO council, there are limits of what he can require of agencies or demand of budget and system decisions.
Kundra's peers say he stands out in his ability not only to strategize, but to execute. Take his ability to understand that a drop of sunshine can go a long way when it’s tax dollars and not supply and demand at work, and that citizen engagement is the name of the game, which has played out in his use of dashboards and full embrace of the administration’s transparency initiatives, both as federal CIO and before as CTO of Washington, D.C.
“His goal has never been innovation merely for innovations’ sake, but innovation to get results in service to the public,” Virginia governor Tim Kaine said in an e-mail that didn’t make it into our story. “Vivek has a limitless imagination, and combined with his agility in the structures of government, I have the utmost confidence that he will continue to do great work for President Obama.”
One story, which also didn’t make it into our feature, is particularly telling. Earlier this year, President Obama called on the United States Citizenship and Immigration Services to partner with Kundra, federal CTO Aneesh Chopra, and federal chief performance officer Jeff Zients to find ways to improve the immigrant application experience.
Kundra took an idea and ran with it. "Vivek very quickly helped to think through how transparency and open government could instill more confidence if we could publish average turnaround times in a forum online for visa and other application processing time, by office," Chopra says.
The effect would be two-fold, Kundra thought. First, immigrants could now find out exactly where they stood in line to get their green card or visa and check on processing times for specific forms at US-CIS field offices around the country, comparing them with national averages and national goals. Second, placing that data online at the hands of the public could put pressure on US-CIS field offices to make them more efficient.
Kundra then acknowledged the need to separate this effort from a larger, more complex modernization project currently underway at US-CIS. "When you have a multi-year project plan, it's challenging to thoughtfully introduce any new innovation without disrupting or adjusting requirements," Chopra says. And yet, that's exactly what happened: the team delivered the site within 90 days, and though it required shifting some money around, it didn't end up requiring any additional budget expenditure.
"When you put it together, he sees the ability for something like the IT Dashboard to really jump start his larger strategy for how to change the way IT projects are done and then puts his head down and gets it done within 10 weeks," Zients says.
wallpaper Prelude Type SH from 1997
kumarc123
06-18 03:00 PM
Guys,
you all re jumping to conclusions based on opinions, have you forgoteen what OBAMA had been saying about immigration?
1. Address legal immigration first
2. Illegals will have to stand behind the ones who came in this country legally.
Do you really think, that they will totoaly ignore legal immigrants and work on illegal. Obama has been talking about this process since his days of presidentail campaign,
We all need to have faith and work towards making IV and its goal attainable.
you all re jumping to conclusions based on opinions, have you forgoteen what OBAMA had been saying about immigration?
1. Address legal immigration first
2. Illegals will have to stand behind the ones who came in this country legally.
Do you really think, that they will totoaly ignore legal immigrants and work on illegal. Obama has been talking about this process since his days of presidentail campaign,
We all need to have faith and work towards making IV and its goal attainable.
a_yaja
01-08 11:01 AM
Thank you for the quick response.
You said there are 3 copies of AP. But my lawyer sent me only 2 copies. Is that a problem???
I don't think so. I applied for AP on my own - and I got only 2 copies, not three.
You said there are 3 copies of AP. But my lawyer sent me only 2 copies. Is that a problem???
I don't think so. I applied for AP on my own - and I got only 2 copies, not three.
2011 2001 Honda Prelude Type SH
ski_dude12
12-26 12:21 AM
What is the name of your employer? Atleast that will help other members in making the right choice.
Thank You all for your support by answering my queries. Will keep you posting the progress. Hope things will work out fine.
Sure, would contribute to IV, you are doing great service.
Thank You all for your support by answering my queries. Will keep you posting the progress. Hope things will work out fine.
Sure, would contribute to IV, you are doing great service.
more...
gc_bulgaria
10-09 04:18 PM
http://www.immigration-law.com/
10/08/2007: I-140 Portability After 180 Days of 485 Filing and Service Centers Standard Procedure of Review and Adjudication
When there is a retrogression of visa numbers and anticipated long delays in 485 adjudication due to the massive July VB fiasco 485 filings, it is anticipated that there will be a substantial number of 485 applicants who may have to change employment along the way, either voluntarily or involuntarily, under AC 21 Section 106(c) provision. Accordingly, whether one reports the change of employment proactively or not, one should learn the internal review and adjudication procedures within the Service Center which are adopted by the adjudicators in adjudicating such I-485 applications.
The good material to review on this procedure is the USCIS Standard Operating Procedure for the adjudicators. The SOP states that "If the alien is using the portability provisions of AC21 106(c), the adjudicator must determine that both the ported labor certification and the ported I-140 are still valid under the current employer, especially in regards to the continual payment of the prevailing wage, similar occupation classification, and the employer’s ability to pay the prevailing wage."
(1) Prevailing Wage Payment: The AC 21 106(c) does not specifically require that the new employer pays the prevailing wage or higher wage for portability. However, the adjudicators review the wage as part of their determination of "continuing validity" of the ported certified labor certification application and I-140 petition. When the applicant stays with the same employer without changing employer, payment of wage less than the prevailing wage should not present any serious issue inasmuch as the employer establishes that the employer was financially able to pay the prevailing wage and is continuously able to pay the prevailing wage until the green card is approved. However, when there is a change of employer who pays less than the prevailing wage, there is no clear-cut rule with reference to this issue. Payment of less than prevailing wage thus potentially can raise two issues when there is a change of employer. One is the adjudicator's argument that there is no continuing validity of the labor certification or I-140 petition. The other is the argument that different wage reflects that the labor certification job and the new job with the new employer are two different occupational classifications.
(2) Similar occupational classification issue: The similarity of the two positions involves not the "jobs" but "occupational classification." Accordingly, the old and new positions do not necessarily have to match exactly in every details, especially specific skill sets. Currently, the USCIS is looking up the Labor Department SOC/OES classifications of occupations. When the two jobs fall under the same occupational classification in the DOL occupational definitions, the two jobs are generally considered "similar" occupational classification. As long as the two jobs belong to a similar occupational classification, the applicant can work for the new employer anywhere in the United States. There is no physical location restrictions.
(3) Employer's financial ability to pay the wage: Again, AC 21 106(c) does not specifically require that the new employer must prove that the new employer has and will have a financial ability to pay the prevailing wage. However, the adjudicators appear to review the portability case considering the new employer's ability to pay as well as part of review of continuing vality of labor certification and I-140 petition.
Remember that when there is a portability issue, two things can ensue. If one proactively reports the eligibility of portability meeting all the foregoing requirment, the adjudicators are likely to decide the pending I-485 application on the merit. However, if the 485 applicants do not report proactively change of employment and the USCIS somehow obtains information of the alien's change of employment, for instance, by employer's report of termination of employment or withdrawal of I-140 petition or substitution of alien beneficiary, then 485 applicants are likely to be served a notice of intent to deny I-485 applications or in most cases, the adjudicator transfers the I-485 file to the local district office for interview.
In AC 21 106(c) portability situation, the adjudicators also review the issue of the continuing validity of labor certification and I-140 petition involving the original employer, and are likely to raise similar issues which are described above. However, when the alien ports with the "approved" I-140 petition with a copy of the last paycheck and W-2, the adjudicators rarely revisit the original employer's foregoing issues in determining the 140 portability issue. The issues are raised when the alien ports before the I-140 petition is approved. Under the Yates Memorandum, when the alien ports before I-140 petition is approved, the alien has a burden of proof that the I-140 petition was approvable. Accordingly, inasmuch as I-140 petition was approvable and the alien ports after 180 days of I-485 filing, even if the original employer withdraws the I-140 petition, the pending I-485 will not be affected. Yates Memorandum indicates that in such a circumstance, the adjudicator should adjudicate the pending I-140 petition and if finds approvable, then recognizes 106(c) portability and continues to adjudicate the pending I-485 application. Without doubt, in the foregoing situation, the adjudicator will intensively and carefully review the issue of continuing validity of labor certification and I-140 petition issues which are specified above, particularly the employer's financial ability to pay the wage, and the applicant will have to overcome tremendous hurdles to deal with the challenges by the USCIS. Accordingly, people should not port before I-140 petition is approved unless they are assured that the original employer will continuously cooperate and support his/her green card process.
10/08/2007: I-140 Portability After 180 Days of 485 Filing and Service Centers Standard Procedure of Review and Adjudication
When there is a retrogression of visa numbers and anticipated long delays in 485 adjudication due to the massive July VB fiasco 485 filings, it is anticipated that there will be a substantial number of 485 applicants who may have to change employment along the way, either voluntarily or involuntarily, under AC 21 Section 106(c) provision. Accordingly, whether one reports the change of employment proactively or not, one should learn the internal review and adjudication procedures within the Service Center which are adopted by the adjudicators in adjudicating such I-485 applications.
The good material to review on this procedure is the USCIS Standard Operating Procedure for the adjudicators. The SOP states that "If the alien is using the portability provisions of AC21 106(c), the adjudicator must determine that both the ported labor certification and the ported I-140 are still valid under the current employer, especially in regards to the continual payment of the prevailing wage, similar occupation classification, and the employer’s ability to pay the prevailing wage."
(1) Prevailing Wage Payment: The AC 21 106(c) does not specifically require that the new employer pays the prevailing wage or higher wage for portability. However, the adjudicators review the wage as part of their determination of "continuing validity" of the ported certified labor certification application and I-140 petition. When the applicant stays with the same employer without changing employer, payment of wage less than the prevailing wage should not present any serious issue inasmuch as the employer establishes that the employer was financially able to pay the prevailing wage and is continuously able to pay the prevailing wage until the green card is approved. However, when there is a change of employer who pays less than the prevailing wage, there is no clear-cut rule with reference to this issue. Payment of less than prevailing wage thus potentially can raise two issues when there is a change of employer. One is the adjudicator's argument that there is no continuing validity of the labor certification or I-140 petition. The other is the argument that different wage reflects that the labor certification job and the new job with the new employer are two different occupational classifications.
(2) Similar occupational classification issue: The similarity of the two positions involves not the "jobs" but "occupational classification." Accordingly, the old and new positions do not necessarily have to match exactly in every details, especially specific skill sets. Currently, the USCIS is looking up the Labor Department SOC/OES classifications of occupations. When the two jobs fall under the same occupational classification in the DOL occupational definitions, the two jobs are generally considered "similar" occupational classification. As long as the two jobs belong to a similar occupational classification, the applicant can work for the new employer anywhere in the United States. There is no physical location restrictions.
(3) Employer's financial ability to pay the wage: Again, AC 21 106(c) does not specifically require that the new employer must prove that the new employer has and will have a financial ability to pay the prevailing wage. However, the adjudicators appear to review the portability case considering the new employer's ability to pay as well as part of review of continuing vality of labor certification and I-140 petition.
Remember that when there is a portability issue, two things can ensue. If one proactively reports the eligibility of portability meeting all the foregoing requirment, the adjudicators are likely to decide the pending I-485 application on the merit. However, if the 485 applicants do not report proactively change of employment and the USCIS somehow obtains information of the alien's change of employment, for instance, by employer's report of termination of employment or withdrawal of I-140 petition or substitution of alien beneficiary, then 485 applicants are likely to be served a notice of intent to deny I-485 applications or in most cases, the adjudicator transfers the I-485 file to the local district office for interview.
In AC 21 106(c) portability situation, the adjudicators also review the issue of the continuing validity of labor certification and I-140 petition involving the original employer, and are likely to raise similar issues which are described above. However, when the alien ports with the "approved" I-140 petition with a copy of the last paycheck and W-2, the adjudicators rarely revisit the original employer's foregoing issues in determining the 140 portability issue. The issues are raised when the alien ports before the I-140 petition is approved. Under the Yates Memorandum, when the alien ports before I-140 petition is approved, the alien has a burden of proof that the I-140 petition was approvable. Accordingly, inasmuch as I-140 petition was approvable and the alien ports after 180 days of I-485 filing, even if the original employer withdraws the I-140 petition, the pending I-485 will not be affected. Yates Memorandum indicates that in such a circumstance, the adjudicator should adjudicate the pending I-140 petition and if finds approvable, then recognizes 106(c) portability and continues to adjudicate the pending I-485 application. Without doubt, in the foregoing situation, the adjudicator will intensively and carefully review the issue of continuing validity of labor certification and I-140 petition issues which are specified above, particularly the employer's financial ability to pay the wage, and the applicant will have to overcome tremendous hurdles to deal with the challenges by the USCIS. Accordingly, people should not port before I-140 petition is approved unless they are assured that the original employer will continuously cooperate and support his/her green card process.
deecha
07-16 01:25 PM
Hello,
I have a general question on EB# to EB2 porting and was hoping if I could get any advice here. I have a labor filed under EB3 in 2005. I got my EAD in 2007 (thanks to the floodgates that opened in July). Now I am planning to move to a different employer in a much better role. The future employer is a startup, and is a little hesitant on transferring H1B, but will file for my labor in EB2 category and will work on porting my priority date.
That means, I will have to drop my H1 (valid through 2012) and will be on EAD. Is it possible to file for EB2 and port from EB3 later on, if H1 visa is dropped and I am in solely on EAD?
Thanks for going through my post.
This is a huge gray area and I find myself in a similar predicament. According to AC21 if you change jobs, you must be in the same or similar occupation. Now, if you're going to file EB2, then obviously the job has different requirements. If you can somehow prove that the new job is "similar" to the old position, yet it requires some kind of advancement to justify EB2, you can do what you're attempting to do. Maybe software engineer --> technical architect is justified under AC21, however technical architect needs (say) 7 years of experience + Bachelors in CS. I believe in such a situation, you should be ok. However I don't think you can count any experience in your new company towards the EB2 sponsored in your new company.
In any case, I am not a lawywer. It's best to consult an experienced attorney and get this sorted out.
One more thing, I would highly appreciate it if you could post your findings in this thread/forum.
I have a general question on EB# to EB2 porting and was hoping if I could get any advice here. I have a labor filed under EB3 in 2005. I got my EAD in 2007 (thanks to the floodgates that opened in July). Now I am planning to move to a different employer in a much better role. The future employer is a startup, and is a little hesitant on transferring H1B, but will file for my labor in EB2 category and will work on porting my priority date.
That means, I will have to drop my H1 (valid through 2012) and will be on EAD. Is it possible to file for EB2 and port from EB3 later on, if H1 visa is dropped and I am in solely on EAD?
Thanks for going through my post.
This is a huge gray area and I find myself in a similar predicament. According to AC21 if you change jobs, you must be in the same or similar occupation. Now, if you're going to file EB2, then obviously the job has different requirements. If you can somehow prove that the new job is "similar" to the old position, yet it requires some kind of advancement to justify EB2, you can do what you're attempting to do. Maybe software engineer --> technical architect is justified under AC21, however technical architect needs (say) 7 years of experience + Bachelors in CS. I believe in such a situation, you should be ok. However I don't think you can count any experience in your new company towards the EB2 sponsored in your new company.
In any case, I am not a lawywer. It's best to consult an experienced attorney and get this sorted out.
One more thing, I would highly appreciate it if you could post your findings in this thread/forum.
more...
sr77
09-26 08:32 PM
Don't be. You will be current in Oct and I believe going forward (chances of retrogressing to 2005 is very slim if at all there is any retrogression).
That said, don't wait for USCIS. Be proactive and do all you can. I would suggest
1. Calling the USCIS customer service (get hold of level 2 rep by telling the level 1 your case is outside normal processing time) and try to get the status of your case. Might take few tries before you can get some info.
2. Open an SR.
3. Do the above for your dependents if any.
4. Make infopass (you have already done this).
5. Contact local congress man/woman.
6. Send mail to CIS Ombudsman
7. If your security check is not cleared yet, you can contact FBI (by phone) and find out the status.
(more information on all these can be gotten from simple google search. If not, post here and some one here should be able to help you.)
Good luck.
Thanks for the advice. I appreciate your insight.
I am going all in now.
1. I will call the Customer Service Line tomorrow.
2. I already got the InfoPass for 10/6
3. The letter for my senator is drafted. It will be sent tomorrow.
4. Finally, an email to the Ombudsman has been sent.
Hopefully, there is be some movement.
That said, don't wait for USCIS. Be proactive and do all you can. I would suggest
1. Calling the USCIS customer service (get hold of level 2 rep by telling the level 1 your case is outside normal processing time) and try to get the status of your case. Might take few tries before you can get some info.
2. Open an SR.
3. Do the above for your dependents if any.
4. Make infopass (you have already done this).
5. Contact local congress man/woman.
6. Send mail to CIS Ombudsman
7. If your security check is not cleared yet, you can contact FBI (by phone) and find out the status.
(more information on all these can be gotten from simple google search. If not, post here and some one here should be able to help you.)
Good luck.
Thanks for the advice. I appreciate your insight.
I am going all in now.
1. I will call the Customer Service Line tomorrow.
2. I already got the InfoPass for 10/6
3. The letter for my senator is drafted. It will be sent tomorrow.
4. Finally, an email to the Ombudsman has been sent.
Hopefully, there is be some movement.
2010 1999 Honda Prelude Type SH.
Raju
06-10 07:35 PM
My 6 years end today and my extension filing is already in and pending since April. I wonder if they would entertain people who already filed and are waiting.
I can't believe I am saying this but I hope my H1 extension does not get approved until I can file premium. :-)
You do not qualify for this at least according to the above statement. You do not need 140 approved for h extension. You will automatically get the h extension based on the fact that you labor was filed 365 days prior to your H expiration. This is for folks who need 140 approved for H extension
I can't believe I am saying this but I hope my H1 extension does not get approved until I can file premium. :-)
You do not qualify for this at least according to the above statement. You do not need 140 approved for h extension. You will automatically get the h extension based on the fact that you labor was filed 365 days prior to your H expiration. This is for folks who need 140 approved for H extension
more...
unseenguy
06-22 07:33 PM
...and the boss goes back and continues eating samosas :)
Pls replace samosas with burger and french fries. Boss in Nebraska may not like samosas or may find it too hot to handle resulting in additional 2-3 sick days.
Pls replace samosas with burger and french fries. Boss in Nebraska may not like samosas or may find it too hot to handle resulting in additional 2-3 sick days.
hair Honda Prelude Si Type-SH 2.2
Texascitypaul
02-23 04:24 PM
I just like to add that if your wife is not making enough money, then you have to find someone who can provide affidavit of support along with the filing of green card for you.
1. You are entitled to file adjustment of status application.
2. Affidavit of support is required for anyone who files green card application.
Good luck.
Just to clarify
I can file for AOS even though i am well over my 194 and came in under the VWP from the uk?
Finding a sponsor for me would not be difficult though i was led to believe it had to be my spouse is this not the case?
Thankyou very much for your response it is much appreciated
Paul.
1. You are entitled to file adjustment of status application.
2. Affidavit of support is required for anyone who files green card application.
Good luck.
Just to clarify
I can file for AOS even though i am well over my 194 and came in under the VWP from the uk?
Finding a sponsor for me would not be difficult though i was led to believe it had to be my spouse is this not the case?
Thankyou very much for your response it is much appreciated
Paul.
more...
deepuv
09-16 12:30 PM
As I was checking these forums and since one of my colleague received an RFE asking the company's ability to pay the proffered wage for all the 140 filed by the company I wonder if you can enlighten me with any idea on how to respond to the request? and how severely would it effect the other's in the same process with in the company.
Thank you for help in advance.
Thank you for help in advance.
hot 2001 Prelude Type SH - SOLD
jnayar2006
12-28 05:40 PM
Some in this situation are planning to do the full time MBA from the IIMs / ISB under NRI quota
I am not sure how useful doing an MBA from an Indian school would be if one is planning to get back to the U.S. (or the western world in general) I did mine from IIM Ahmedabad, and find it pretty much worthless here.
I am not sure how useful doing an MBA from an Indian school would be if one is planning to get back to the U.S. (or the western world in general) I did mine from IIM Ahmedabad, and find it pretty much worthless here.
more...
house 2001 Honda Prelude 2 Dr Type
gc_rip
08-10 08:53 PM
Oh you are talking about that 5658 one.. It's already been discussed in these forums. Someone pointed out that this was crafted by a senator who is about to retire, and has a co-sponsor from Hawaii. So it doesn't appear to be very strong and would most probably just die silently
Why can't democrats come up with a bill like this, good for EB immigration? And what would be a reason for Democrats to vote out this bill?
Why can't democrats come up with a bill like this, good for EB immigration? And what would be a reason for Democrats to vote out this bill?
tattoo HondaShowOff.com - Vic Singh#39;s: 1997 Honda Prelude Type SH
pappu
07-31 02:27 PM
Six flags can make lot of money by basing a dangerous and wild ride based on VB dates Graph. :)
http://immigrationvoice.org/wiki/index.php/Past_Visa_Bulletin_Data
They will have to put just one warning.
"Beware: Once you start the ride....
Only luckiest of you will be able to get out safely.
Most of you will be on this ride which has an endless loop.
Only real option for people who would like to end the ride would be to jump from the ride. We are certain there will damages but we are not responsible for them.
And yes we intentionally put this warning after the start of ride. Otherwise you wouldn't have decided to ride on it.
"
Love the analogy.
Thanks Coopheal for leaving the IV wiki effort.
http://immigrationvoice.org/wiki/index.php/Past_Visa_Bulletin_Data
They will have to put just one warning.
"Beware: Once you start the ride....
Only luckiest of you will be able to get out safely.
Most of you will be on this ride which has an endless loop.
Only real option for people who would like to end the ride would be to jump from the ride. We are certain there will damages but we are not responsible for them.
And yes we intentionally put this warning after the start of ride. Otherwise you wouldn't have decided to ride on it.
"
Love the analogy.
Thanks Coopheal for leaving the IV wiki effort.
more...
pictures 1998 Honda Prelude Type SH
kishdam
03-17 10:18 AM
I was reading at immigration-law.com that a new bill SUSTAIN act is introduced by Lamar Smith in the house and is referred to the judiciary committee. This bill seems proposing the increase of H1B numbers from 65k to 195k. Does this bill have any EB related measures? This bill may be unlikely to get voted anytime soon but if it has some EB measures at least we get some exposure.
dresses 99 Prelude Type-SH Sunday.
GotFreedom?
07-30 10:49 PM
The date will move to sept 2002 since this is my PD and then it will stuck for another 5 years.
lol, but you have got to specify the exact date and time of your PD coz' the pace it moves at, ever second matters.
They did mention in one of the other threads that it will touch 2003 for ROW so I do not see any light at the end of the tunnel for EB3 I folks.
lol, but you have got to specify the exact date and time of your PD coz' the pace it moves at, ever second matters.
They did mention in one of the other threads that it will touch 2003 for ROW so I do not see any light at the end of the tunnel for EB3 I folks.
more...
makeup 1998 Honda Prelude 2 Dr Type
singhsa3
11-15 09:56 AM
As I've said earlier. IV is you, you are IV. If you are in the similar situation as we are and by expressing your desire to do something about it, you automatically become a member of IV.
But we do use this yahoo group http://groups.yahoo.com/group/immigrationvoiceny/
to communicate with our members. So please sign up...
Hello IV members : I am mad about discrimination agst Indian and China born applicants for GC processing times. I have read many posts in here and it states to join tri-state chapters .. What does it mean? How can we be part of this.. Pls. elaborate.
Thanks
But we do use this yahoo group http://groups.yahoo.com/group/immigrationvoiceny/
to communicate with our members. So please sign up...
Hello IV members : I am mad about discrimination agst Indian and China born applicants for GC processing times. I have read many posts in here and it states to join tri-state chapters .. What does it mean? How can we be part of this.. Pls. elaborate.
Thanks
girlfriend Honda Prelude Cold Air Intake
desi3933
06-23 12:38 PM
Port 2003 PD at the time of filing 2nd I-140, keep copies of old labor + 140 and new approved labor and a cover letter should specify that the beneficiary for both is the same ie YOU and you are not doing labor subsititution. I have been successful porting my pd from 03- the only difference was that my job classification was the same and salary for 2nd job was more
A
This is correct.
However, it does not matter if it is labor substitution (you can still do PD porting). Job Description changes do not matter.
The only requirement is the other I-140 must be approved and active
and it must belong to same beneficiary.
Not a legal advice.
A
This is correct.
However, it does not matter if it is labor substitution (you can still do PD porting). Job Description changes do not matter.
The only requirement is the other I-140 must be approved and active
and it must belong to same beneficiary.
Not a legal advice.
hairstyles -1997 type SH ecu SOLD
gsc999
06-29 01:41 AM
Sure. Tell me exactly day and time. I will make sure I am miles away from that. I just don't want to be identified with the "amnesty bill" since that is getting increasingly unpopular these days.
---
Yes, once "They" identify "You" the consequences can be severe.:rolleyes:
Beware! Big Brother is watching.
That is the reason I didn't support the US soccer team at World Cup.
US team is so unpopular in Europe :p Given a choice between popularity and doing the right thing, I guess popularity always wins :D
Hilarious! Couldn't resist :o
---
Yes, once "They" identify "You" the consequences can be severe.:rolleyes:
Beware! Big Brother is watching.
That is the reason I didn't support the US soccer team at World Cup.
US team is so unpopular in Europe :p Given a choice between popularity and doing the right thing, I guess popularity always wins :D
Hilarious! Couldn't resist :o
Desi Unlucky
09-22 02:27 PM
I hope you meant people who filed for GC. I do not think IV has much in terms of goals to alleviate the issue with H-1
I asked 6 other H1B ppl today to register to this site.
I asked 6 other H1B ppl today to register to this site.
h1techSlave
07-17 11:24 AM
It is difficult to arrive at hard numbers using these kinds of analysis.
For example you say "Supposed 30K unskilled (or low skilled) labor is added (which neither creates jobs nor are employed). Now if they are added, the rate becomes 330000/10030000 or ~ 3.3%".
In reality there are no such human being exist. When a person comes here, he/she does contribute to the society. The person may not be in any official pay roll, but he buys stuff, he does work (in the house at least), he consumes services etc. Now such behavior by the hypothetically low skilled person has a positive contribution to the economy. May be the person took care of the house hold chorus of a young family, enabling the mom to take a Masters in computer science. Fast forward two years, the couple starts a successful software company which employs dozens of Americans.
The story line that you give is the same argument that NumbersUSA gives, which is that an additional person is just a job stealer; but I disagree.
Hello All,
I want to start an interesting discussion - not sure whether a thread already exists or a similar discussion has already taken place.
We all know about the current state of the economy and current unfortunate unemployment rate. We all also know that majority jobs lost are in construction, manufacturing etc. We also know that some people (who have no other choice) are targetting legal EB community as if they are responsible for all this mess.
I want people to discuss the other things like DV Lottery, Chain Family Migration or any other popular programs from labor/unemployment point of view. Please no intent to discuss it from any other angle at all.
These forms of migration bring a lot of uneducated (or less educated), unskilled (or low skilled) population/labor into the country which contribute higher for the unemployment rate (for both numerator and denomenator - rate = # unemployed/# total).
example: suppose in a hypothetical community of 10000000, 300000 are unemployed. They have 3% of unemployement rate.
Supposed 30K unskilled (or low skilled) labor is added (which neither creates jobs nor are employed). Now if they are added, the rate becomes 330000/10030000 or ~ 3.3%
This can be bad example but it was just to put a point forward.
Are there any statistics (again?) available about the effect of DV, chain family migration or any such program in the last 10-15 years towards the unemployment rate today? A lot of unskilled (or low skilled) labor was added to the economy which was OK during upward economy but cannot sustain at all in down economy like this.
Thanks,
M.
For example you say "Supposed 30K unskilled (or low skilled) labor is added (which neither creates jobs nor are employed). Now if they are added, the rate becomes 330000/10030000 or ~ 3.3%".
In reality there are no such human being exist. When a person comes here, he/she does contribute to the society. The person may not be in any official pay roll, but he buys stuff, he does work (in the house at least), he consumes services etc. Now such behavior by the hypothetically low skilled person has a positive contribution to the economy. May be the person took care of the house hold chorus of a young family, enabling the mom to take a Masters in computer science. Fast forward two years, the couple starts a successful software company which employs dozens of Americans.
The story line that you give is the same argument that NumbersUSA gives, which is that an additional person is just a job stealer; but I disagree.
Hello All,
I want to start an interesting discussion - not sure whether a thread already exists or a similar discussion has already taken place.
We all know about the current state of the economy and current unfortunate unemployment rate. We all also know that majority jobs lost are in construction, manufacturing etc. We also know that some people (who have no other choice) are targetting legal EB community as if they are responsible for all this mess.
I want people to discuss the other things like DV Lottery, Chain Family Migration or any other popular programs from labor/unemployment point of view. Please no intent to discuss it from any other angle at all.
These forms of migration bring a lot of uneducated (or less educated), unskilled (or low skilled) population/labor into the country which contribute higher for the unemployment rate (for both numerator and denomenator - rate = # unemployed/# total).
example: suppose in a hypothetical community of 10000000, 300000 are unemployed. They have 3% of unemployement rate.
Supposed 30K unskilled (or low skilled) labor is added (which neither creates jobs nor are employed). Now if they are added, the rate becomes 330000/10030000 or ~ 3.3%
This can be bad example but it was just to put a point forward.
Are there any statistics (again?) available about the effect of DV, chain family migration or any such program in the last 10-15 years towards the unemployment rate today? A lot of unskilled (or low skilled) labor was added to the economy which was OK during upward economy but cannot sustain at all in down economy like this.
Thanks,
M.
No comments:
Post a Comment