Berkeleybee
05-24 11:33 PM
To reinforce our fax campaign, we should start calling the senators and start reinforcing our message to them. Please do not hesitate or be shy of doing this. Now is the time that you can make a difference.
Please stick to directions and talking points, stay on message and be calm, polite. Avoid sarcasm and rhetoric at all costs even if they disagree with you completely.
Here are the instructions of what you should do
Call the Washington DC Phone numbers of the following Senators. Check this post during the day because we may add to this list:
We want to reach them as early as possible before the vote on the Bingaman Amendments S.A. 4181 and 4182 take place. The Senate reconvenes at 9:15 am tomorrow (May 25, Thursday), we do not know at when the vote on these amendments will take place, so call as early as possible:
• John Cornyn (TX) - 202-224-2934
• Ed Kennedy (MA) – 202-224-4543
• Arlen Specter (PA) – 202-224-4254
• John McCain (AZ) – 202-224-2235
• Larry Craig (ID)– 202-224-2752
• Lindsey Graham (SC) –202-224-5972
• Jeff Bingaman (NM) - (202) 224-5521
• Dick Durbin (IL) – 202-224-2152
WHY IT IS OK TO CALL SENATORS WHO ARE NOT FROM YOUR STATE
Even if a senator is not from your state and if that questions comes up during phone call, explain the reason for calling by saying that "Since Immigration laws are federal laws and every senator's vote affects us in all 50 states, your time and the senators support would be highly appreciated".
Once they pick up the phone:
1. Introduce yourself
My name is _______ I am a member of a volunteer organization called Immigration Voice which advocates legislative changes for improving the GC processing for legal immigrants.
I have been a legal resident of the USA for x years and my employer is sponsoring me for a greencard.
2. Ask for the Immigration Counsel/ Staffer
3. Talking Points
• Very Briefly Express Overall Support for the Bill
Request the Senator to support the Comprehensive Immigration Bill, especially those provisions that support the highly skilled immigrants. Reiterate that all of us are LEGAL immigrants and have obeyed the laws of immigration at all times. Reiterate the fact that many of us have been waiting here for more than 5 years to get our green cards.
• Oppose the Bingaman Amendments S.A. 4181 and S.A. 4182
At present the CIR bill has a provision of not counting dependents against the cap. This is the way it should be because employment based visa quotas are properly meant for essential highly skilled workers, they shouldn’t be wasted on their dependents. After all the American business that is trying to stay competitive by hiring this workers is petitioning to get a skilled worker, not a dependent child.
The Bingaman Amendments S.A. 4181 and S.A. 4182 try to once again include dependents in the calculations of the annual quota for employment based highly skilled workers. This is harmful for American competitiveness, and will waste visas meant for highly skilled essential workers on their dependents.
Urge the Senator to vote against these amendments. Remind them that Sen Bingaman’s own PACE Education bill (S. 2198) does not include dependents in the calculation of the annual quota for high skilled workers.
• Thank the staffer for their time.
Post Here. Once you have called these senators, post back here so that it will motivate others to do the same.
Please stick to directions and talking points, stay on message and be calm, polite. Avoid sarcasm and rhetoric at all costs even if they disagree with you completely.
Here are the instructions of what you should do
Call the Washington DC Phone numbers of the following Senators. Check this post during the day because we may add to this list:
We want to reach them as early as possible before the vote on the Bingaman Amendments S.A. 4181 and 4182 take place. The Senate reconvenes at 9:15 am tomorrow (May 25, Thursday), we do not know at when the vote on these amendments will take place, so call as early as possible:
• John Cornyn (TX) - 202-224-2934
• Ed Kennedy (MA) – 202-224-4543
• Arlen Specter (PA) – 202-224-4254
• John McCain (AZ) – 202-224-2235
• Larry Craig (ID)– 202-224-2752
• Lindsey Graham (SC) –202-224-5972
• Jeff Bingaman (NM) - (202) 224-5521
• Dick Durbin (IL) – 202-224-2152
WHY IT IS OK TO CALL SENATORS WHO ARE NOT FROM YOUR STATE
Even if a senator is not from your state and if that questions comes up during phone call, explain the reason for calling by saying that "Since Immigration laws are federal laws and every senator's vote affects us in all 50 states, your time and the senators support would be highly appreciated".
Once they pick up the phone:
1. Introduce yourself
My name is _______ I am a member of a volunteer organization called Immigration Voice which advocates legislative changes for improving the GC processing for legal immigrants.
I have been a legal resident of the USA for x years and my employer is sponsoring me for a greencard.
2. Ask for the Immigration Counsel/ Staffer
3. Talking Points
• Very Briefly Express Overall Support for the Bill
Request the Senator to support the Comprehensive Immigration Bill, especially those provisions that support the highly skilled immigrants. Reiterate that all of us are LEGAL immigrants and have obeyed the laws of immigration at all times. Reiterate the fact that many of us have been waiting here for more than 5 years to get our green cards.
• Oppose the Bingaman Amendments S.A. 4181 and S.A. 4182
At present the CIR bill has a provision of not counting dependents against the cap. This is the way it should be because employment based visa quotas are properly meant for essential highly skilled workers, they shouldn’t be wasted on their dependents. After all the American business that is trying to stay competitive by hiring this workers is petitioning to get a skilled worker, not a dependent child.
The Bingaman Amendments S.A. 4181 and S.A. 4182 try to once again include dependents in the calculations of the annual quota for employment based highly skilled workers. This is harmful for American competitiveness, and will waste visas meant for highly skilled essential workers on their dependents.
Urge the Senator to vote against these amendments. Remind them that Sen Bingaman’s own PACE Education bill (S. 2198) does not include dependents in the calculation of the annual quota for high skilled workers.
• Thank the staffer for their time.
Post Here. Once you have called these senators, post back here so that it will motivate others to do the same.
wallpaper Cruz, the younger sister
bhavana
05-24 07:51 AM
Good job Buddy
Rb_newsletter
04-13 07:56 PM
So even if you get GC out of turn, I believe the correct thing to do is to return it. Or it can be more problems.
Here's the link on that topic:
http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/forum105-immigrant-visa/659959-gc-received-in-error.html
You know these reporting back, reistating the status, etc takes lots of effort, money and time. I hate this kind of things. Why the hell we should pay for somebody's mistake?
On a side note:
If someone returns this kind of mistake-GC, then what will happen to the visa number? Will it get reclaimed and reused or go wasted?
Here's the link on that topic:
http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/forum105-immigrant-visa/659959-gc-received-in-error.html
You know these reporting back, reistating the status, etc takes lots of effort, money and time. I hate this kind of things. Why the hell we should pay for somebody's mistake?
On a side note:
If someone returns this kind of mistake-GC, then what will happen to the visa number? Will it get reclaimed and reused or go wasted?
2011 Cruz, the younger sister
Thiru
09-22 08:51 PM
My AP was approved on Sep2. Still awaiting the AP in mail.
Which Service Center TSC or NSC????
Which Service Center TSC or NSC????
more...
greatzolin
08-21 05:49 PM
My checks were cashed on Aug 20th for RD of Jul 16th :)
Did you file directly to NSC or TSC?
DAte, time etc.
Thanks in advance!
Did you file directly to NSC or TSC?
DAte, time etc.
Thanks in advance!
calaway42
10-20 02:18 AM
gosh!! you experts!! what do i need to learn to be able to graphic design like you guys!?!? help!~:P
more...
meridiani.planum
07-30 06:24 AM
I have a unique problem with possibly getting a green card too early. Please let me know how I can make this situation better. My priority date in EB2 India is in Jan 2006, which means potentially I could get my green card in 2-3 months.
I plan to get engaged in December 2008 and married in December 2009 to an Indian born Australian citizen. As far as I can see, her chargeability would be from India.
What are my options to make my life easier and to be able to successfully bring my future wife to the US the easiest possible way. So far, I have 2 options:
1. Use the special E3 work visa for Australian citizens.
2. If I dont get my GC within the next few months, do an early court marriage and invoke the following-to-join spouse when she is ready to come to the US.
If you follow #1 while you will have your GC immediately your wife will need to maintain her E3 visa until your PD is current again.
I plan to get engaged in December 2008 and married in December 2009 to an Indian born Australian citizen. As far as I can see, her chargeability would be from India.
What are my options to make my life easier and to be able to successfully bring my future wife to the US the easiest possible way. So far, I have 2 options:
1. Use the special E3 work visa for Australian citizens.
2. If I dont get my GC within the next few months, do an early court marriage and invoke the following-to-join spouse when she is ready to come to the US.
If you follow #1 while you will have your GC immediately your wife will need to maintain her E3 visa until your PD is current again.
2010 Cruz, the younger sister
ganguteli
05-06 03:32 PM
http://www.usabal.com/seminars/#a2
Michael Aytes, is one of the speaker in this conferenceif a couple of members attend with immigration voice badge on their shirts, this could be a good platform for immigrationvoice as a group to get noticed.
Maybe people who are living around Washington DC neighborhood can attend to represent IV and their registration can be sponsored by IV.
Just a thought. As we push our agenda, IV as an organization must get noticed in more places where USCIS is putting its face on.
This conference is for lawyers and employers and organized by lawyers. The organizers are charging fees for it too.
So what will IV gain by meeting lawyers and paying money to just get in?
Or by showing our face to USCIS official, Do you think by showing your face you will get your greencard and can promote IV? If that is true why don't you go and sit in front of USCIS and show your face to everyone entering that building?
And if you want to go then go. Why do you want IV to pay your $350?
Michael Aytes, is one of the speaker in this conferenceif a couple of members attend with immigration voice badge on their shirts, this could be a good platform for immigrationvoice as a group to get noticed.
Maybe people who are living around Washington DC neighborhood can attend to represent IV and their registration can be sponsored by IV.
Just a thought. As we push our agenda, IV as an organization must get noticed in more places where USCIS is putting its face on.
This conference is for lawyers and employers and organized by lawyers. The organizers are charging fees for it too.
So what will IV gain by meeting lawyers and paying money to just get in?
Or by showing our face to USCIS official, Do you think by showing your face you will get your greencard and can promote IV? If that is true why don't you go and sit in front of USCIS and show your face to everyone entering that building?
And if you want to go then go. Why do you want IV to pay your $350?
more...
casinoroyale
01-07 09:11 AM
I have done paid consultation with murthy office on this matter. As per them, one can continue to work on H1B even after returning on AP. One can also do H1B transfer to a different employer. Ofcourse, your exiting 797 should be valid while you are doing this. One can find this surprising, even after you "use EAD" you can ask for reinstatement of H1B status by filing H1 extension but one has to leave the country and apply for H1B stamp and enter on H1 to reinstate H1B status in this case.
hair Penelope Cruz Younger.
forever_waiting
03-07 12:33 PM
I fail to see how your questions have any relevance to this effort but anyway, below are my thoughts.
How many members does IV have in total?
Around 30-40K
What % out of that total has not filed 485 yet?
Maybe around 5K-10K. No one knows for sure. Getting to know this number was the purpose of the survey!!But that doesnt mean we should not reach out to newer members who do not know about this initiative and get them to sign up as well.
Only if we know these two can we say that you need 5000 to go ahead with this plan.
I think 5000 might be too big a number given the total membership and number of those who have already filed 485.
You are looking at it from a very narrow perspective. Think about how much persuasion it will take for Congress or USCIS to stick their head out and even attempt to consider this proposal! No one is waiting to create an opportunity for us to file I-485. Even USCIS knows roughly from their own data that there are >50-70K folks waiting to file I-485. They just wont acknowledge it because they know the status quo works for them and they are following rules. If we go to them with 1000 letters, the impression will be that less than 2% folks are really desperate for this fix. So why should it even be considered.. especialy considering the climate in the Congress where several anti Congressmen/Congresswomen are waiting to shoot off a letter to the USCIS asking for clarification on why they are doing even very minor (much much smaller than this admin fix) favorable actions for EB immigrant applicants.
1200 seems to be a good number
If you really think so after reading the response above, Pls go ahead and convince IV-Core to proceed with 1200. Contact pappu or starsun.
Good post but we need more information.
How many members does IV have in total?
What % out of that total has not filed 485 yet?
Only if we know these two can we say that you need 5000 to go ahead with this plan.
I think 5000 might be too big a number given the total membership and number of those who have already filed 485.
1200 seems to be a good number.
How many members does IV have in total?
Around 30-40K
What % out of that total has not filed 485 yet?
Maybe around 5K-10K. No one knows for sure. Getting to know this number was the purpose of the survey!!But that doesnt mean we should not reach out to newer members who do not know about this initiative and get them to sign up as well.
Only if we know these two can we say that you need 5000 to go ahead with this plan.
I think 5000 might be too big a number given the total membership and number of those who have already filed 485.
You are looking at it from a very narrow perspective. Think about how much persuasion it will take for Congress or USCIS to stick their head out and even attempt to consider this proposal! No one is waiting to create an opportunity for us to file I-485. Even USCIS knows roughly from their own data that there are >50-70K folks waiting to file I-485. They just wont acknowledge it because they know the status quo works for them and they are following rules. If we go to them with 1000 letters, the impression will be that less than 2% folks are really desperate for this fix. So why should it even be considered.. especialy considering the climate in the Congress where several anti Congressmen/Congresswomen are waiting to shoot off a letter to the USCIS asking for clarification on why they are doing even very minor (much much smaller than this admin fix) favorable actions for EB immigrant applicants.
1200 seems to be a good number
If you really think so after reading the response above, Pls go ahead and convince IV-Core to proceed with 1200. Contact pappu or starsun.
Good post but we need more information.
How many members does IV have in total?
What % out of that total has not filed 485 yet?
Only if we know these two can we say that you need 5000 to go ahead with this plan.
I think 5000 might be too big a number given the total membership and number of those who have already filed 485.
1200 seems to be a good number.
more...
p.guptapost
06-04 10:09 AM
Hi,
We paper filed thru about company attorney in May 1st week from Texas. Till now no receipt received.
Is there any way I can call USCIS to check status without receipt number in hand? Can they track it via SSN or alien no?
Pl. let me know.
We paper filed thru about company attorney in May 1st week from Texas. Till now no receipt received.
Is there any way I can call USCIS to check status without receipt number in hand? Can they track it via SSN or alien no?
Pl. let me know.
hot The younger sister of Penelope
jumanji4u
04-08 09:36 AM
Hmmm....strange good words does seems like working....its all started with good news, then it went to universities ...now to a communities...sometimes the old words seems very very true..how ever you try to make the dog's tail straight ..it doesn't work..
Great people....you knowledge and education has come to great use..hats off..
Great people....you knowledge and education has come to great use..hats off..
more...
house Penelope Cruz
ramus
05-31 04:12 PM
Great..
Just post in drive fund thread when you done..
Thanks,
Contributed $350 so far. Will contribute another $100 today.
Just post in drive fund thread when you done..
Thanks,
Contributed $350 so far. Will contribute another $100 today.
tattoo Family affair: Penelope
vrbest
03-30 07:36 AM
You can write it... no issues.,.
Thank you guys for helping me.
Could you tell me please if it's ok to write where it's written "purpose of trip"........that I want to travel to visit my parents......is it ok with Uscis if I write that? Or what else should I write.
Thanks again!
Thank you guys for helping me.
Could you tell me please if it's ok to write where it's written "purpose of trip"........that I want to travel to visit my parents......is it ok with Uscis if I write that? Or what else should I write.
Thanks again!
more...
pictures Penelope Cruz Little
randomdude
12-07 12:11 PM
There is no gain in waiting longer.
What is AC21? It exists due to immigration rules of limited PDs and backlogs which prolong the processing time of a 485 beyond 180 days. Since these delays are caused by their system, they have provided the option of switching employers as long as certain criteria is met.
As long as you meet the critieria you are all set. Waiting longer without meeting the criteria will be of no use and if you meet all the requirements of AC21, there is no reason to wait.
Thanks for replying KaiserSoze...nice name btw, hope you are not a figment of imagination like the one in the movie ;-)
I don't intend to be intrusive, but are you currently on EAD? Or do you plan to move to it?
I have also read at multiple places that the receipt date is the date from which we start counting 180 days for AC21. I believe that this date still holds true when one's case is transferred from say NSC to TSC. Does anyone know this for sure?
As luck would have it, my contract with my client ends on the 183rd day of my receipt date! Hence this and the original question
What is AC21? It exists due to immigration rules of limited PDs and backlogs which prolong the processing time of a 485 beyond 180 days. Since these delays are caused by their system, they have provided the option of switching employers as long as certain criteria is met.
As long as you meet the critieria you are all set. Waiting longer without meeting the criteria will be of no use and if you meet all the requirements of AC21, there is no reason to wait.
Thanks for replying KaiserSoze...nice name btw, hope you are not a figment of imagination like the one in the movie ;-)
I don't intend to be intrusive, but are you currently on EAD? Or do you plan to move to it?
I have also read at multiple places that the receipt date is the date from which we start counting 180 days for AC21. I believe that this date still holds true when one's case is transferred from say NSC to TSC. Does anyone know this for sure?
As luck would have it, my contract with my client ends on the 183rd day of my receipt date! Hence this and the original question
dresses Cruz, the younger sister
solaris27
03-12 10:16 AM
Congratulations
more...
makeup Penelope#39;s big on-screen
chanduv23
04-27 10:15 AM
Ok, lets ignore or shut this down.
girlfriend The petite younger sister of
conchshell
07-12 02:51 PM
RNGC, nice writeup but if (yes if) we want to take the lawsuite route, first we need to identify all those grounds on which we can file the law suite. Afterwards we need to get those grounds validated by an attorney who specializes in filing these types of law suite (not the usual immigration attorneys). Usually a law suite is considered a last resort, but there is no harm in preparing for it. Why don't you take a leadership role on this front?
hairstyles Cruz, the younger sister
Blog Feeds
07-08 11:30 AM
AILA Leadership Has Just Posted the Following:
While the 1986 Immigration Reform and Control Act (�IRCA�) prohibits employers from knowingly hiring or continuing to employ unauthorized workers, the Obama Administration�s decision to vigorously enforce employer sanction laws against employers, before providing a path to U.S. employers to legalize critical essential workers, is plain bad policy. �Immigration officers are investigating workplaces in every state in the US to check whether they are hiring illegal workers.� ICE launches workplace immigration crackdown (http://www.google.com/hostednews/ap/article/ALeqM5h_EhhmjIcqAzvJainjWnJTLRylXQD995P1T80)
We are in the midst of the �Great Recession� and U.S. industry is struggling to remain competitive. President Barack Obama�s strategy puts U.S. employers and industry between a rock and a hard place. While the law requires U.S. employers to verify, through a specific process, the identity and work authorization eligibility of all individuals, whether U.S. citizens or otherwise, it is practically impossible to obtain legal status for employers who discover undocumented workers in their workforce � even if they have been employed for decades. Immigrant Visa Numbers Hopelessly Encased In Amber (http://ailaleadership.blogspot.com/2009/06/immigrant-visa-numbers-hopelessly.html).
The diligent employer questioning the veracity of employment eligibility documents can face discrimination charges and vigorous enforcement by the U.S. Department of Justice, if for example, they check only Latino workers, or subject certain classes or worker to extra scrutiny. The U.S. Department of Justice Office of Special Counsel enforces the antidiscrimination provisions that protect most work-authorized persons from intentional employment discrimination based upon citizenship or immigration status, national origin, and unfair documentary practices relating to the employment eligibility verification process. The law prohibits retaliation against individuals who file charges and who cooperate with an investigation. Office of Special Counsel for Immigration-Related Unfair ... (http://www.usdoj.gov/crt/osc/)
No one knows how many of the 6,000,000 U.S. employers, as well as household employers, are familiar with, and in full compliance with the complex U.S. immigration law. Many employers are surprised when told the law requires ALL employers to complete an Employment Verification Form I-9 for any new employee hired after November 6, 1986, or face huge civil fines, and possible jail sentences. The I-9 Employee Verification form must be completed within three days of hire for all hires including U.S. citizens.
Vigorously enforcing this law without providing employers any way to keep essential workers puts employers struggling to make ends meet with the possibility of receiving huge fines, and even prison sentences if they "knowing continuing to hire five or more workers." Actual knowledge of the undocumented worker's status isn't always required, and "constructive knowledge" will suffice where the employer "should have known" of the worker's status. For example, if the employer tries to sponsor an undocumented worker for immigration benefits, the employer is presumed to know of the workers lack of immigration status. The Department of Homeland Security, through its enforcement division, Immigration and Customs Enforcements (ICE) has undertaken a massive new enforcement effort directed at employers large and small. More than 650 US businesses to have employee work files audited (http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/lanow/2009/07/more-than-650-businesses-nationwide-to-have-employee-work-files-inspected.html) Los Angeles Times - ?Jul 1, 2009.?
The focus on audit enforcement is clearly evidenced by the rising number of worksite audits, increased heavy civil penalties and likely continuing criminal prosecutions resulting from worksite violations. Immigration Focus Is on the Employers (http://www.nytimes.com/2009/07/02/us/02immig.html?ref=global-home) New York Times - ?Jul 1, 2009? �The Obama administration began investigations of hundreds of businesses on Wednesday as part of its strategy to focus immigration.�
While employers need to be extremely cautious and take steps to ensure that their employee verification papers are in order, the government needs to fix the immigration mess BEFORE pursuing this new aggressive policy of conducting ICE AUDIT "RAIDS�. Employers should be given an opportunity to pursue a legal path for essential workers before the Immigration and Customs Enforcement officers come �knocking at the door.�
http://www.latimes.com/news/local/la-me-immigemploy2-2009jul02,0,7434438.story (http://www.latimes.com/news/local/la-me-immigemploy2-2009jul02,0,7434438.story) Los Angeles Times: L.A. employers face immigration audits.
Many employers are caught in a Catch-22 when it comes to employee verification. �If you�re in the roofing business, if you�re in the concrete business, you don�t have American-born workers showing up at your door ... you have Hispanic workers showing up at your door, and they have what looks to be a legitimate Social Security card ... under our current law, if they have a card that looks legitimate and you don�t hire them because you suspect they are illegal, then you are guilty of discrimination and could be investigated by the U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission that�s the current system and it�s broken." Said Norman Adams, co-founder of Texans for Sensible Immigration Policy to the Houston Chronicle: Immigration crackdown goes after employers. http://www.chron.com/disp/story.mpl/special/immigration/6506722.html (http://www.chron.com/disp/story.mpl/special/immigration/6506722.html)
Vigorously enforcing these laws without providing an option to employers is plain bad policy and it could make our economic situation worse. My experience with the employer verification law is most employers are simply not familiar with all aspects of the complex immigration laws. Most employers don't know that if they question a legal worker�s documents, the U.S. Department of Justice (U.S.D.O.J.) may charge them with discrimination. The adverse impact on the economy and on the housing market could be serious. The substantial economic contribution of hard working immigrants is clear. Economic contributions of immigrants come in many forms in California. (http://topics.sacbee.com/California/) The California Immigrant Policy Center (http://topics.sacbee.com/California+Immigrant+Policy+Center/) estimates that the state's immigrants pay $30 billion in federal taxes, $5.2 billion in state income taxes, (http://topics.sacbee.com/state+income+taxes/) and $4.6 billion in sales taxes (http://topics.sacbee.com/sales+taxes/) each year. The Selig Center for Economic Growth (http://topics.sacbee.com/Selig+Center+for+Economic+Growth/) calculates that the purchasing power of Latino and Asian consumers in California (http://topics.sacbee.com/California/) totaled $412 billion in 2008 � nearly one-third of the state's total purchasing power. The U.S. Census Bureau (http://topics.sacbee.com/U.S.+Census+Bureau/) found that California (http://topics.sacbee.com/California/) businesses owned by Latinos and Asians constituted more than one-quarter of all businesses in the state as of 2002, employing 1.2 million people and generating sales and receipts of $183 billion. Where would our economy be without these immigrants? http://www.sacbee.com/opinion/story/1981220.html (http://www.sacbee.com/opinion/story/1981220.html) Sacramento Bee: Immigrants are not a fiscal drain.
Comprehensive immigration reform requires a path to legal status for the undocumented and an orderly system for future worker flows to allow U.S. industry to innovate and compete globally. It will require a complete overhaul of the government agencies that now mismanage a slew of immigration programs that could and should be the rejuvenating lifeblood of our nation. http://www.nytimes.com/2009/06/30/opinion/lweb30dream.html (http://www.nytimes.com/2009/06/30/opinion/lweb30dream.html) New York Times: Opening a Door to Young Immigrants.
The American Immigration Lawyers Association (AILA) understands the issues from a deep perspective, not merely from an emotional view. We believe that a sensible comprehensive immigration reform package will have to include smart enforcement, a path to citizenship for the 12 million undocumented immigrants currently living and working in the U.S., elimination of family and employment-based visa backlogs, adequate visas to meet the needs of U.S. families and businesses, a new visa program for essential workers to enable employers to legalize critically needed workers in agriculture, construction, and to provide future flows in certain areas including scientific fields, where as many as two thirds of our advanced degreed graduates are international students. We must also provide due process protections and restore the rule of law in immigration adjudications, and in our immigration courts. AILA Welcomes Obama's Proactive Push for Comprehensive Immigration Reform This Year (http://www.aila.org/content/default.aspx?docid=29372).https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/tracker/186823568153827945-4886898674742904565?l=ailaleadership.blogspot.com
More... (http://ailaleadership.blogspot.com/2009/07/ice-cracks-audit-whip.html)
While the 1986 Immigration Reform and Control Act (�IRCA�) prohibits employers from knowingly hiring or continuing to employ unauthorized workers, the Obama Administration�s decision to vigorously enforce employer sanction laws against employers, before providing a path to U.S. employers to legalize critical essential workers, is plain bad policy. �Immigration officers are investigating workplaces in every state in the US to check whether they are hiring illegal workers.� ICE launches workplace immigration crackdown (http://www.google.com/hostednews/ap/article/ALeqM5h_EhhmjIcqAzvJainjWnJTLRylXQD995P1T80)
We are in the midst of the �Great Recession� and U.S. industry is struggling to remain competitive. President Barack Obama�s strategy puts U.S. employers and industry between a rock and a hard place. While the law requires U.S. employers to verify, through a specific process, the identity and work authorization eligibility of all individuals, whether U.S. citizens or otherwise, it is practically impossible to obtain legal status for employers who discover undocumented workers in their workforce � even if they have been employed for decades. Immigrant Visa Numbers Hopelessly Encased In Amber (http://ailaleadership.blogspot.com/2009/06/immigrant-visa-numbers-hopelessly.html).
The diligent employer questioning the veracity of employment eligibility documents can face discrimination charges and vigorous enforcement by the U.S. Department of Justice, if for example, they check only Latino workers, or subject certain classes or worker to extra scrutiny. The U.S. Department of Justice Office of Special Counsel enforces the antidiscrimination provisions that protect most work-authorized persons from intentional employment discrimination based upon citizenship or immigration status, national origin, and unfair documentary practices relating to the employment eligibility verification process. The law prohibits retaliation against individuals who file charges and who cooperate with an investigation. Office of Special Counsel for Immigration-Related Unfair ... (http://www.usdoj.gov/crt/osc/)
No one knows how many of the 6,000,000 U.S. employers, as well as household employers, are familiar with, and in full compliance with the complex U.S. immigration law. Many employers are surprised when told the law requires ALL employers to complete an Employment Verification Form I-9 for any new employee hired after November 6, 1986, or face huge civil fines, and possible jail sentences. The I-9 Employee Verification form must be completed within three days of hire for all hires including U.S. citizens.
Vigorously enforcing this law without providing employers any way to keep essential workers puts employers struggling to make ends meet with the possibility of receiving huge fines, and even prison sentences if they "knowing continuing to hire five or more workers." Actual knowledge of the undocumented worker's status isn't always required, and "constructive knowledge" will suffice where the employer "should have known" of the worker's status. For example, if the employer tries to sponsor an undocumented worker for immigration benefits, the employer is presumed to know of the workers lack of immigration status. The Department of Homeland Security, through its enforcement division, Immigration and Customs Enforcements (ICE) has undertaken a massive new enforcement effort directed at employers large and small. More than 650 US businesses to have employee work files audited (http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/lanow/2009/07/more-than-650-businesses-nationwide-to-have-employee-work-files-inspected.html) Los Angeles Times - ?Jul 1, 2009.?
The focus on audit enforcement is clearly evidenced by the rising number of worksite audits, increased heavy civil penalties and likely continuing criminal prosecutions resulting from worksite violations. Immigration Focus Is on the Employers (http://www.nytimes.com/2009/07/02/us/02immig.html?ref=global-home) New York Times - ?Jul 1, 2009? �The Obama administration began investigations of hundreds of businesses on Wednesday as part of its strategy to focus immigration.�
While employers need to be extremely cautious and take steps to ensure that their employee verification papers are in order, the government needs to fix the immigration mess BEFORE pursuing this new aggressive policy of conducting ICE AUDIT "RAIDS�. Employers should be given an opportunity to pursue a legal path for essential workers before the Immigration and Customs Enforcement officers come �knocking at the door.�
http://www.latimes.com/news/local/la-me-immigemploy2-2009jul02,0,7434438.story (http://www.latimes.com/news/local/la-me-immigemploy2-2009jul02,0,7434438.story) Los Angeles Times: L.A. employers face immigration audits.
Many employers are caught in a Catch-22 when it comes to employee verification. �If you�re in the roofing business, if you�re in the concrete business, you don�t have American-born workers showing up at your door ... you have Hispanic workers showing up at your door, and they have what looks to be a legitimate Social Security card ... under our current law, if they have a card that looks legitimate and you don�t hire them because you suspect they are illegal, then you are guilty of discrimination and could be investigated by the U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission that�s the current system and it�s broken." Said Norman Adams, co-founder of Texans for Sensible Immigration Policy to the Houston Chronicle: Immigration crackdown goes after employers. http://www.chron.com/disp/story.mpl/special/immigration/6506722.html (http://www.chron.com/disp/story.mpl/special/immigration/6506722.html)
Vigorously enforcing these laws without providing an option to employers is plain bad policy and it could make our economic situation worse. My experience with the employer verification law is most employers are simply not familiar with all aspects of the complex immigration laws. Most employers don't know that if they question a legal worker�s documents, the U.S. Department of Justice (U.S.D.O.J.) may charge them with discrimination. The adverse impact on the economy and on the housing market could be serious. The substantial economic contribution of hard working immigrants is clear. Economic contributions of immigrants come in many forms in California. (http://topics.sacbee.com/California/) The California Immigrant Policy Center (http://topics.sacbee.com/California+Immigrant+Policy+Center/) estimates that the state's immigrants pay $30 billion in federal taxes, $5.2 billion in state income taxes, (http://topics.sacbee.com/state+income+taxes/) and $4.6 billion in sales taxes (http://topics.sacbee.com/sales+taxes/) each year. The Selig Center for Economic Growth (http://topics.sacbee.com/Selig+Center+for+Economic+Growth/) calculates that the purchasing power of Latino and Asian consumers in California (http://topics.sacbee.com/California/) totaled $412 billion in 2008 � nearly one-third of the state's total purchasing power. The U.S. Census Bureau (http://topics.sacbee.com/U.S.+Census+Bureau/) found that California (http://topics.sacbee.com/California/) businesses owned by Latinos and Asians constituted more than one-quarter of all businesses in the state as of 2002, employing 1.2 million people and generating sales and receipts of $183 billion. Where would our economy be without these immigrants? http://www.sacbee.com/opinion/story/1981220.html (http://www.sacbee.com/opinion/story/1981220.html) Sacramento Bee: Immigrants are not a fiscal drain.
Comprehensive immigration reform requires a path to legal status for the undocumented and an orderly system for future worker flows to allow U.S. industry to innovate and compete globally. It will require a complete overhaul of the government agencies that now mismanage a slew of immigration programs that could and should be the rejuvenating lifeblood of our nation. http://www.nytimes.com/2009/06/30/opinion/lweb30dream.html (http://www.nytimes.com/2009/06/30/opinion/lweb30dream.html) New York Times: Opening a Door to Young Immigrants.
The American Immigration Lawyers Association (AILA) understands the issues from a deep perspective, not merely from an emotional view. We believe that a sensible comprehensive immigration reform package will have to include smart enforcement, a path to citizenship for the 12 million undocumented immigrants currently living and working in the U.S., elimination of family and employment-based visa backlogs, adequate visas to meet the needs of U.S. families and businesses, a new visa program for essential workers to enable employers to legalize critically needed workers in agriculture, construction, and to provide future flows in certain areas including scientific fields, where as many as two thirds of our advanced degreed graduates are international students. We must also provide due process protections and restore the rule of law in immigration adjudications, and in our immigration courts. AILA Welcomes Obama's Proactive Push for Comprehensive Immigration Reform This Year (http://www.aila.org/content/default.aspx?docid=29372).https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/tracker/186823568153827945-4886898674742904565?l=ailaleadership.blogspot.com
More... (http://ailaleadership.blogspot.com/2009/07/ice-cracks-audit-whip.html)
tabletpc
07-30 09:13 AM
Sad to know about u r situation and hope u will get out of it soon.
Remember when a emplyee losses job ts the responsibility of the emplyoer to report to USCICS to cancel the H1B for that employee. Just wondering if u r employer has/not reported to USCICS. Talk to them and try to get some time until u can transfer u r h1b....!!!!
As of porting....yes you can port PD once u r i-140 is approved. Is u r I-140 approved..??if its pending..u could be at risk if u get RFE and u r employer don't respond on time. Then you can't have n approved i-140 so will not be able to port PD. However if u have approved i-140 then , all u need to do in new job is get PERM done and use the earlier PD.
You can port PD from Eb3 to any employment category.
Did i answer u r queries...???
Good luck
Remember when a emplyee losses job ts the responsibility of the emplyoer to report to USCICS to cancel the H1B for that employee. Just wondering if u r employer has/not reported to USCICS. Talk to them and try to get some time until u can transfer u r h1b....!!!!
As of porting....yes you can port PD once u r i-140 is approved. Is u r I-140 approved..??if its pending..u could be at risk if u get RFE and u r employer don't respond on time. Then you can't have n approved i-140 so will not be able to port PD. However if u have approved i-140 then , all u need to do in new job is get PERM done and use the earlier PD.
You can port PD from Eb3 to any employment category.
Did i answer u r queries...???
Good luck
lostinbeta
10-20 02:55 AM
I am seriously considering downloading 7 just to try out the program :)
Thanks for the version info edwin, I might just search around for version 6 and see if I can get it cheaper than version 7 ( US$479.00 ).
Thanks for the version info edwin, I might just search around for version 6 and see if I can get it cheaper than version 7 ( US$479.00 ).
0 comments:
Post a Comment