sanju
03-06 03:22 PM
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Please DO NOT join this selfish effort aimed at fixing the country limits till MIRAGE gets his green card.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Removal of country limits temporarily and permanently, will both require the support of the majority of both houses of the congress. It will require as much effort to to remove country limits temporarily as it will require to remove country limits permanently.
Some folks here just wants to remove country limits till the time they get their agree card i.e. for the span of 2 years. If removal of country limits is good for EB community and America, then why only remove it for 2 years ONLY.
Such a campaign is likely to divide this community. PLEASE DO NOT divide the community by supporting this mis-directed agenda.
If country caps can be removed temporarily then they can be removed permanently. But asking for less than what key lawmakers have already proposed less than 6 months back is like shooting ourselves in the foot. PLEASE DO NOT throw others under the bus. PLEASE!!!!
Just a little update, Called up my Senator's office this morning..Started talking about country Cap issue, the guy knew everything about it, he took notes & promised he will pass it on to the Senator. Here's what I suggested him
1) Lift the Country Cap for Temporary period of time, may be just for 2 years.
2) Limit the Maximum waiting time, say if one applicant is waiting for 5 years than country cap should be exempted and he should be given a preference over a person who�s PD is just 1 year old.
He specifically told me 'your second point is very good, I'll certainly share these with the Senator'...
I urge you guys to contact your senators & Congressmen/Congresswomen
We have a group which is focusing on this issue, if you want to join us here's the link
Please DO NOT join this selfish effort aimed at fixing the country limits till MIRAGE gets his green card.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Removal of country limits temporarily and permanently, will both require the support of the majority of both houses of the congress. It will require as much effort to to remove country limits temporarily as it will require to remove country limits permanently.
Some folks here just wants to remove country limits till the time they get their agree card i.e. for the span of 2 years. If removal of country limits is good for EB community and America, then why only remove it for 2 years ONLY.
Such a campaign is likely to divide this community. PLEASE DO NOT divide the community by supporting this mis-directed agenda.
If country caps can be removed temporarily then they can be removed permanently. But asking for less than what key lawmakers have already proposed less than 6 months back is like shooting ourselves in the foot. PLEASE DO NOT throw others under the bus. PLEASE!!!!
Just a little update, Called up my Senator's office this morning..Started talking about country Cap issue, the guy knew everything about it, he took notes & promised he will pass it on to the Senator. Here's what I suggested him
1) Lift the Country Cap for Temporary period of time, may be just for 2 years.
2) Limit the Maximum waiting time, say if one applicant is waiting for 5 years than country cap should be exempted and he should be given a preference over a person who�s PD is just 1 year old.
He specifically told me 'your second point is very good, I'll certainly share these with the Senator'...
I urge you guys to contact your senators & Congressmen/Congresswomen
We have a group which is focusing on this issue, if you want to join us here's the link
wallpaper Wavy Hairstyles With Bangs
jk999
08-18 02:40 PM
How do you know that people with more recent priority dates are getting approved and you have been left out? You know this because these members of IV share this info with you and you are talking about using this info against them.
I won't be surprised if this will discourage people to just silently leave the forum after getting approvals.
I won't be surprised if this will discourage people to just silently leave the forum after getting approvals.
desi3933
06-28 06:46 AM
desi3933,
Here is the part of the law that says a job aspirant should not be discriminated by his/her immigration status as long as he/she has a valid work permit( H1B/GC/EAD/Citizenship).
"(1) GENERAL RULE. -- It is an unfair immigration-related employment practice for a person or other entity to discriminate against any individual (other than an unauthorized alien) with respect to the hiring, or recruitment or referral for a fee, of the individual for employment or the discharging of the individual from employment --
The only individual that can be discriminated against is an unauthorized alien. H1B/GC/EAD/Citizen does not fall in this category.
Thanks for your reply.
H-1B visa holder is not authorized alien to work for any employer. Employer can not be asked to provide H-1B sponsorship.
Infact H-1B worker has lot of restrictions related to his work. H1-B worker has to work only in his job location and pay range as specified in LCA. Any significant changes in job location, job duties, and/or salary requires LCA and H-1B petition amendment. H-1B worker is out of status when out of job for any reason. EAD holders, OPT are immigrants, who are not permanent resident, but they do not have such restrictions. And, thats why, they are authorized alien to work for any employer. (Hint: SSN card for H-1B holder has line - work with USCIS authorization only whereas GC/EAD holder does not have that line on their SSN card).
Authorized alien include EAD holders, GC holders, OPT, and US citizens. If you don't believe me, feel free to put this question in lawyer's forum and let me know what response you get.
Now, coming back to your quote
"(1) GENERAL RULE. -- It is an unfair immigration-related employment practice for a person or other entity to discriminate against any individual (other than an unauthorized alien) with respect to the hiring, or recruitment or referral for a fee, of the individual for employment or the discharging of the individual from employment --This simply means that Employer can not discriminate for hiring (or other aspects of hiring) any individual because of Immigration status (i.e. GC, EAD, OPT). For an employer, two applicants can not be discriminated because of their immigrant status, as long as they are authorized to work for the employer.
In fact, from legal pont of view, applicant requiring H-1B sponsorship can br refused without assigning any reason beyond employer can not sponsor H-1B visa at this time.
It is legal to advertise job that this job position is open for workers who have unrestricted work authorization. EAD is nonrestrictive work authorization in spite of its expiration date.
Walking dude's effort will at least highlight the fact that H1Bs are not preferred over GCs/Citizens. In fact it is the other way around. One of my colleague who recently got his GC, was surprised to see so many job offers opening up for him just because he was a GC holder.
Again, this is because, as GC holder and H-1B worker are not at par due to restrictions in work authorization. Employers can not be asked to apply for H-1B visa. Most employers would like to avoid hassle of visa sponsorship (additional paper work and legal requirements) and they prefer hiring H-1B worker as contractor through consulting company instead of employee.
_______________________
Not a legal advice.
US citizen of Indian origin
Here is the part of the law that says a job aspirant should not be discriminated by his/her immigration status as long as he/she has a valid work permit( H1B/GC/EAD/Citizenship).
"(1) GENERAL RULE. -- It is an unfair immigration-related employment practice for a person or other entity to discriminate against any individual (other than an unauthorized alien) with respect to the hiring, or recruitment or referral for a fee, of the individual for employment or the discharging of the individual from employment --
The only individual that can be discriminated against is an unauthorized alien. H1B/GC/EAD/Citizen does not fall in this category.
Thanks for your reply.
H-1B visa holder is not authorized alien to work for any employer. Employer can not be asked to provide H-1B sponsorship.
Infact H-1B worker has lot of restrictions related to his work. H1-B worker has to work only in his job location and pay range as specified in LCA. Any significant changes in job location, job duties, and/or salary requires LCA and H-1B petition amendment. H-1B worker is out of status when out of job for any reason. EAD holders, OPT are immigrants, who are not permanent resident, but they do not have such restrictions. And, thats why, they are authorized alien to work for any employer. (Hint: SSN card for H-1B holder has line - work with USCIS authorization only whereas GC/EAD holder does not have that line on their SSN card).
Authorized alien include EAD holders, GC holders, OPT, and US citizens. If you don't believe me, feel free to put this question in lawyer's forum and let me know what response you get.
Now, coming back to your quote
"(1) GENERAL RULE. -- It is an unfair immigration-related employment practice for a person or other entity to discriminate against any individual (other than an unauthorized alien) with respect to the hiring, or recruitment or referral for a fee, of the individual for employment or the discharging of the individual from employment --This simply means that Employer can not discriminate for hiring (or other aspects of hiring) any individual because of Immigration status (i.e. GC, EAD, OPT). For an employer, two applicants can not be discriminated because of their immigrant status, as long as they are authorized to work for the employer.
In fact, from legal pont of view, applicant requiring H-1B sponsorship can br refused without assigning any reason beyond employer can not sponsor H-1B visa at this time.
It is legal to advertise job that this job position is open for workers who have unrestricted work authorization. EAD is nonrestrictive work authorization in spite of its expiration date.
Walking dude's effort will at least highlight the fact that H1Bs are not preferred over GCs/Citizens. In fact it is the other way around. One of my colleague who recently got his GC, was surprised to see so many job offers opening up for him just because he was a GC holder.
Again, this is because, as GC holder and H-1B worker are not at par due to restrictions in work authorization. Employers can not be asked to apply for H-1B visa. Most employers would like to avoid hassle of visa sponsorship (additional paper work and legal requirements) and they prefer hiring H-1B worker as contractor through consulting company instead of employee.
_______________________
Not a legal advice.
US citizen of Indian origin
2011 Long curly hair with forehead
abracadabra
07-07 11:03 PM
Where you getting your number from? Did you already set up poll?
I appreciate your time in answering in asking this question. I am real serious about this issue. I am positive I can get more, as you know we desi have a very sleepy community, if we kick their as*** they all will come.
I appreciate your time in answering in asking this question. I am real serious about this issue. I am positive I can get more, as you know we desi have a very sleepy community, if we kick their as*** they all will come.
more...
oliTwist
08-24 09:27 PM
AOS applied on July 2
EAD arrived on Aug23
Waiting for AP card & AOS receipts
EAD arrived on Aug23
Waiting for AP card & AOS receipts
unitednations
03-08 10:26 PM
While your story is interesting, but I beg to differ again, because, immigration is not something which would be discussed in the Congress for the first time, if we are successfull in bringing something. Each and every single lawmaker in this country understand immigration to the extent that you may not even start to guess...People who oppose us have been putting their restrictive bills again and again so they are going to continue doing that despite of us do something or sleep, do you think Numbersusa wait for us to do something, their anti.... mill will keep churning.
Well,
Good luck to you then. :)
Well,
Good luck to you then. :)
more...
tabletpc
12-15 10:45 PM
Never make anything a weakness....thats when you will feel you have everything to lose if you don't get it.
2010 The medium curly hairstyle can
nosightofgc
11-17 03:12 PM
Done. Also forwarded the message to colleagues.
more...
Administrator2
11-18 09:46 AM
Blacktongue : There is no harm in trying. Leave no stone unturned. Chey Chey.:)
"There is no harm in trying. Leave no stone unturned."
This may sound optimistic and promising, but in essence sending random rhetoric using off message statements like "Erase Backlog Now" conflicts with our targeted messaging. To the observer on the Hill (i.e. in Congress) it all sounds more like a noise without a coherent message.
I'm sure you would agree that "no harm in trying" and "Leave no stone unturned" doesn't mean diluting our effort or sending incoherent message. That is why we need to have a single voice sending the same targeted message each time, otherwise we will just sound like awkward noise.
"There is no harm in trying. Leave no stone unturned."
This may sound optimistic and promising, but in essence sending random rhetoric using off message statements like "Erase Backlog Now" conflicts with our targeted messaging. To the observer on the Hill (i.e. in Congress) it all sounds more like a noise without a coherent message.
I'm sure you would agree that "no harm in trying" and "Leave no stone unturned" doesn't mean diluting our effort or sending incoherent message. That is why we need to have a single voice sending the same targeted message each time, otherwise we will just sound like awkward noise.
hair with Bangs for 2010. Image
saimrathi
07-02 08:37 AM
Sent by UPS on June 30. UPS website shows recd at Lincoln, NE at 7.30am on 7/2/07 signed by Hindera.
more...
485Mbe4001
09-09 07:26 PM
<Rant>There is not mistake, i always feel that there is some @#$hole at the USCIS or state dept whose only goal in life is to get a sadistic kick by toying with the dates. How can these @#$@#@'s not realize that there is a person behind each visa number </Rant>
Like my title says - Could it be a mistake on their part for EB3 I ? Was it meant to be 15th April 2002 ?
In March of This year it was 15th Oct 2001. Then it goes to U for untli Oct and now its 15th April 2001 (gone back 6 months !!!!) This seems odd for a new fiscal year with new Visa Quota however small EB3I may be - are there still that many 2000-2001 applications pre-adjudicated in the system waiting for a visa that they had to roll it back ?
Like my title says - Could it be a mistake on their part for EB3 I ? Was it meant to be 15th April 2002 ?
In March of This year it was 15th Oct 2001. Then it goes to U for untli Oct and now its 15th April 2001 (gone back 6 months !!!!) This seems odd for a new fiscal year with new Visa Quota however small EB3I may be - are there still that many 2000-2001 applications pre-adjudicated in the system waiting for a visa that they had to roll it back ?
hot Long hair. Hairstyles 2011:
EB3_SEP04
08-15 05:40 PM
Guys,
I am in the process of applying for EAD renewal. I have few questions:
On the I-765 form,
Q.11 if applied for EAD before , complete below.
But there is nothing below other than your signature and date. It does not ask you of previous EAD information. What does "complete below" means?
Q.16 The Eligibility here would (c) (9) for I-485 applications correct?
Where do I mail this application . My AOS is pending at TSC.
Thanks.
You need I765 instructions:
www.uscis.gov/files/form/I-765instr.pdf
BTW, this thread is for those who already paper filed to Texas, your Q should have been in some other thread.
I am in the process of applying for EAD renewal. I have few questions:
On the I-765 form,
Q.11 if applied for EAD before , complete below.
But there is nothing below other than your signature and date. It does not ask you of previous EAD information. What does "complete below" means?
Q.16 The Eligibility here would (c) (9) for I-485 applications correct?
Where do I mail this application . My AOS is pending at TSC.
Thanks.
You need I765 instructions:
www.uscis.gov/files/form/I-765instr.pdf
BTW, this thread is for those who already paper filed to Texas, your Q should have been in some other thread.
more...
house formal homecoming hairstyles
saileshdude
09-24 12:11 PM
Surabhi,
Actually that is the more reasonable thing to do but USCIS has again disconnected these two things and left a loophole which makes it eligible to port an earlier priority date irrespective of whether it is EB2 or EB3. That is a flaw in the system in the same way it was in labor substitution. I don't mind people porting to Eb2 as long as they go back in the queue where they were really qualified to be in EB2. Say if you had experience BS+5 before filing in EB3 and for some reason because of employer or attorney you filed in EB3 but now want to go back to earlier date that is fair enough. What is not fair is someone who filed in EB3 because they were in BS+2 in say 2003, become eligible for Eb2 in 2006 but now decide to port in 2010 and are given the priority date of 2003. The fair thing would be to give the PD to that person of 2006 and not 2003 just because they have an approved I-140 of EB-3 from 2003.
That being said, I also believe that the spillover be distributed properly and not just given to EB2. That is also unfair. These are some loopholes that are left when these laws are made. Some category get benefited and some are left out. So if EB3 people start porting we should not be complaining because they have also suffered because of inappropriate spillover rules and is justified if they want to take advantage of this loophole.
I have no problem with porting, but the priority date should be starting from when they acquired required qualifications for the job.
Example, if someone with B.S and 2 years experience had applied in EB3 in 2005 and tries to port now I think it is fair to have the ported PD not in 2005, but 2008 when the person acquired B.S + 5 years experience.
This would automatically address all those folks who deserved to be in EB2 but couldnt either becuase lawyer screwed up or issues with sponsoring company.
Actually that is the more reasonable thing to do but USCIS has again disconnected these two things and left a loophole which makes it eligible to port an earlier priority date irrespective of whether it is EB2 or EB3. That is a flaw in the system in the same way it was in labor substitution. I don't mind people porting to Eb2 as long as they go back in the queue where they were really qualified to be in EB2. Say if you had experience BS+5 before filing in EB3 and for some reason because of employer or attorney you filed in EB3 but now want to go back to earlier date that is fair enough. What is not fair is someone who filed in EB3 because they were in BS+2 in say 2003, become eligible for Eb2 in 2006 but now decide to port in 2010 and are given the priority date of 2003. The fair thing would be to give the PD to that person of 2006 and not 2003 just because they have an approved I-140 of EB-3 from 2003.
That being said, I also believe that the spillover be distributed properly and not just given to EB2. That is also unfair. These are some loopholes that are left when these laws are made. Some category get benefited and some are left out. So if EB3 people start porting we should not be complaining because they have also suffered because of inappropriate spillover rules and is justified if they want to take advantage of this loophole.
I have no problem with porting, but the priority date should be starting from when they acquired required qualifications for the job.
Example, if someone with B.S and 2 years experience had applied in EB3 in 2005 and tries to port now I think it is fair to have the ported PD not in 2005, but 2008 when the person acquired B.S + 5 years experience.
This would automatically address all those folks who deserved to be in EB2 but couldnt either becuase lawyer screwed up or issues with sponsoring company.
tattoo Medium Wavy Hair Styles
nepaliboy
05-21 07:45 PM
Thanks
but when you can see ?
i see some are posting same day they saw lud but mine is already 24 hours , still nothing going on >
but when you can see ?
i see some are posting same day they saw lud but mine is already 24 hours , still nothing going on >
more...
pictures prom hairstyles for medium
collkaverill
07-02 09:24 AM
Sent on Jun 29th. I don't know when it has reached. My dates were available in June. I am hoping it should have reached Jun 30th.
Anyone know if they accept packages on Saturday?
I'm in very similar situation. My dates were available for June as well. My HR/Attorneys did this long and painful bureaucratic process. We have an internal website which says that my case was �filed� on Jun-29th. Don�t know what the fuck that means. Whether it was sent on 29th or received on 29th? Couldn�t get HR to answer.Don�t have direct communication lines with Attorneys... If it�s sent on 29th, does USCIS take packages on Saturday or Sunday? If they take only on Monday, will they throw it out because it reached in July? Oh well, just have to wait and see...
Anyone know if they accept packages on Saturday?
I'm in very similar situation. My dates were available for June as well. My HR/Attorneys did this long and painful bureaucratic process. We have an internal website which says that my case was �filed� on Jun-29th. Don�t know what the fuck that means. Whether it was sent on 29th or received on 29th? Couldn�t get HR to answer.Don�t have direct communication lines with Attorneys... If it�s sent on 29th, does USCIS take packages on Saturday or Sunday? If they take only on Monday, will they throw it out because it reached in July? Oh well, just have to wait and see...
dresses Medium Trendy Hairstyles 2011
cool_desi_gc
03-25 09:02 PM
Dec 2002...This calendar year..You made my day.
PD: Dec 2002 EB3 India
PD: Dec 2002 EB3 India
more...
makeup Haircuts Wavy Hair Bangs
sankap
07-10 01:04 AM
[QUOTE=desi3933;486996]1. You can be self employed on c-corp as well. Please go to bank of your choice and you will get the answer. I do have business accounts and speaking from my own experience.
Here are the IRS guidelines on filing taxes as an Independent Contractor (Self-Employed) or Employee: Independent Contractor (Self-Employed) or Employee? (http://www.irs.gov/businesses/small/article/0,,id=99921,00.html)
2. Here is one RFE issued by USCIS. This should answer that AC-21 job must be permanent and match your labor/I-140
Since nowhere do USCIS/DOL explain as to what constitutes a "permanent" job, one can *assume* that being self-employed (or working for a staffing company on contract) is a "permanent" job, regardless of the project's duration, and mention that on EVL. IRS guidelines could help: http://www.irs.gov/businesses/small/article/0,,id=154770,00.html
3. See point 2.
4. Contract extension does not mean job is permanent. And, yes, 6 year contract job is temporary in nature. Permanent job can not have end date. Period.
I didn't imply that "contract extension means job is permanent," as you inferred. Also, can you point us to a USCIS/DOL resource to confirm that definition of a "permanent" job?
5. Dual intent visa means that it can be issued even if I-140 or I-130 has been filed on your behalf. Nothing more than that. GC job is independent of H-1B job.
Yes, GC is always for a future job--it's got nothing to do with your H1B job. And here's what I saw on dual-intent visas:
"Under the Dual Intent Doctrine, some nonimmigrants are allowed to enter and/or remain in the U.S. temporarily with a nonimmigrant visa even though they have expressed a long term intent to remain permanently. Presently, only E, H-1 and L category visa holders are allowed to remain nonimmigrants while simultaneously pursuing permanent resident status. Other nonimmigrant visa holders may be denied extensions or re-issuance of a nonimmigrant visa if they appear to have a dual intent of coming to the U.S. temporarily while pursuing permanent resident status."
6. Again, Permanent job is a job that is expected to last unknown term and is not defined for a period.
Can you point us to a USCIS/DOL resource to confirm that definition of "permanent "job?
H-1B job is not permanent since they have end date specified by LCA and H-1B visa petition.
If *no* H1B job is "permanent," as you say, then how can that job be permanent after filing PERM or I-140? Second, following your argument, if you're on H-1B and changed employers using AC21, the new job wouldn't be considered "permanent," right? Third, if H-1B job is not "permanent," then which one is?
7. Here is a case for I-140 that was denied, since offered I-140 job was not permanent full-time job. Read for yourself
Link to case (http://www.uscis.gov/err/B6%20-%20Skilled%20Workers,%20Professionals,%20and%20Oth er%20Workers/Decisions_Issued_in_2009/Jan022009_06B6203.pdf)
Please read the document fully. It says the petition was denied because "the petitioner has not established its ability to pay the
proffered wages to the beneficiaries of the other petitions or the proffered wage for the instant beneficiary." Nothing related to whether the job was "permanent," FT. Also, As I said, there's a difference between being on a "permanent" future job (for which I-140 was filed) and being on a "permanent" job using AC21 provision.
Here are the IRS guidelines on filing taxes as an Independent Contractor (Self-Employed) or Employee: Independent Contractor (Self-Employed) or Employee? (http://www.irs.gov/businesses/small/article/0,,id=99921,00.html)
2. Here is one RFE issued by USCIS. This should answer that AC-21 job must be permanent and match your labor/I-140
Since nowhere do USCIS/DOL explain as to what constitutes a "permanent" job, one can *assume* that being self-employed (or working for a staffing company on contract) is a "permanent" job, regardless of the project's duration, and mention that on EVL. IRS guidelines could help: http://www.irs.gov/businesses/small/article/0,,id=154770,00.html
3. See point 2.
4. Contract extension does not mean job is permanent. And, yes, 6 year contract job is temporary in nature. Permanent job can not have end date. Period.
I didn't imply that "contract extension means job is permanent," as you inferred. Also, can you point us to a USCIS/DOL resource to confirm that definition of a "permanent" job?
5. Dual intent visa means that it can be issued even if I-140 or I-130 has been filed on your behalf. Nothing more than that. GC job is independent of H-1B job.
Yes, GC is always for a future job--it's got nothing to do with your H1B job. And here's what I saw on dual-intent visas:
"Under the Dual Intent Doctrine, some nonimmigrants are allowed to enter and/or remain in the U.S. temporarily with a nonimmigrant visa even though they have expressed a long term intent to remain permanently. Presently, only E, H-1 and L category visa holders are allowed to remain nonimmigrants while simultaneously pursuing permanent resident status. Other nonimmigrant visa holders may be denied extensions or re-issuance of a nonimmigrant visa if they appear to have a dual intent of coming to the U.S. temporarily while pursuing permanent resident status."
6. Again, Permanent job is a job that is expected to last unknown term and is not defined for a period.
Can you point us to a USCIS/DOL resource to confirm that definition of "permanent "job?
H-1B job is not permanent since they have end date specified by LCA and H-1B visa petition.
If *no* H1B job is "permanent," as you say, then how can that job be permanent after filing PERM or I-140? Second, following your argument, if you're on H-1B and changed employers using AC21, the new job wouldn't be considered "permanent," right? Third, if H-1B job is not "permanent," then which one is?
7. Here is a case for I-140 that was denied, since offered I-140 job was not permanent full-time job. Read for yourself
Link to case (http://www.uscis.gov/err/B6%20-%20Skilled%20Workers,%20Professionals,%20and%20Oth er%20Workers/Decisions_Issued_in_2009/Jan022009_06B6203.pdf)
Please read the document fully. It says the petition was denied because "the petitioner has not established its ability to pay the
proffered wages to the beneficiaries of the other petitions or the proffered wage for the instant beneficiary." Nothing related to whether the job was "permanent," FT. Also, As I said, there's a difference between being on a "permanent" future job (for which I-140 was filed) and being on a "permanent" job using AC21 provision.
girlfriend short curly hair styles
smuggymba
08-09 01:21 PM
Why fight among EB2 and EB3? EB1 should be also a part of this, that's what we are good at...right?
Is it fair that a EB1 from 2010 has a GC wheras an EB2 from 2005 is still waiting?
There is no reason people who are here from 1999, and still does not have a GC, for a person who is EB2- 2006 why USCIS give priority? Let EB2 and Eb3 category move hand in hand they already gave some relief to EB2, now they should move EB-3, people are waiting whose priroty dates are Year 2002, but if a EB-2 just came on 2007 gets Green Card that is unfair, One year gap is ok between Eb-2 & EB-3 but not 5 years.
I personally believe there are limitations for IV or any other organisation to influence the Political and Economic force that are existing in this world nowadays. Even if we lobby even if we talk, even if we gather, if those kind of forces are not benefitted in the form of votes(for power)(lobbying economically also depends on the personality of that person who you want to influence) nothing solid is going to happen. That is the TRUTH. But TRUTH sometimes is undigestable and it hurts a lot, and especially people who is having an agenda it hurts a lot! As always appreciate the work and sacrifices IV is doing for the immigrant community. Due to family and Work commitments could not involve actively.
Is it fair that a EB1 from 2010 has a GC wheras an EB2 from 2005 is still waiting?
There is no reason people who are here from 1999, and still does not have a GC, for a person who is EB2- 2006 why USCIS give priority? Let EB2 and Eb3 category move hand in hand they already gave some relief to EB2, now they should move EB-3, people are waiting whose priroty dates are Year 2002, but if a EB-2 just came on 2007 gets Green Card that is unfair, One year gap is ok between Eb-2 & EB-3 but not 5 years.
I personally believe there are limitations for IV or any other organisation to influence the Political and Economic force that are existing in this world nowadays. Even if we lobby even if we talk, even if we gather, if those kind of forces are not benefitted in the form of votes(for power)(lobbying economically also depends on the personality of that person who you want to influence) nothing solid is going to happen. That is the TRUTH. But TRUTH sometimes is undigestable and it hurts a lot, and especially people who is having an agenda it hurts a lot! As always appreciate the work and sacrifices IV is doing for the immigrant community. Due to family and Work commitments could not involve actively.
hairstyles Hairstyle: Natural Medium Curl
mpadapa
09-08 10:45 AM
Had a hard LUD on 9/5 for CPO EB3-I Jan 04 PD
RD: 7/21 (TSC)
RD: 7/21 (TSC)
senthil
08-08 11:14 AM
good luck to all & their families who have their I-485's approved lately
reddymjm
05-02 03:44 PM
openarms,
maybe there are not enough EB3- I cases in the queue ;) ..well one of my friends did get his GC during last fiasco ..eb3 - I, pd 2003. ofcourse there is no unity ..it is every man for himself (And hence save as much as you can while you enjoy life)..and hence don't worry too much ..GC will come when it has to (my friend told me that once ..and I found those words comforting) ...see few of the threads nearby ..people are content talking about dots (I guess since they know nothing will ever happen due to our actions :-) ..and I sort of agree).
I also guess there are not much cases of EB3 left, atleast till PD dec 2002. Jun filers who ever did not get their GC last summer or fall will be waiting.
maybe there are not enough EB3- I cases in the queue ;) ..well one of my friends did get his GC during last fiasco ..eb3 - I, pd 2003. ofcourse there is no unity ..it is every man for himself (And hence save as much as you can while you enjoy life)..and hence don't worry too much ..GC will come when it has to (my friend told me that once ..and I found those words comforting) ...see few of the threads nearby ..people are content talking about dots (I guess since they know nothing will ever happen due to our actions :-) ..and I sort of agree).
I also guess there are not much cases of EB3 left, atleast till PD dec 2002. Jun filers who ever did not get their GC last summer or fall will be waiting.
No comments:
Post a Comment