nixstor
07-03 12:26 PM
I admit, it seems discriminatory to say you can't get your GC now because you're from this country or that country but these "high volume" countries have created the current back log through their sheer numbers and sometimes multiple applications, not the system. The system is fair to ALL and for some group to say that it isn't fair because all of that group isn't getting what they want is unjust to the rest of us. I knew I would be pounced upon when I submitted my original post and it only proves my point of personal agendas; sometimes I wonder what the "I" in "IV" really stands for? Don't be so arrogant as to believe that your higher education should give you more rights than others - that doesn't fly with me! I am frustrated with this forum because of this arrogance and I may not visit too much longer!
I do have one question for all of you who are in favor of eliminating the per country limit; do you support an eventual road to citizenship for the large group of people who dominate the "other side" of immigration? If you don't, some may think you hipocritical to want the rules changed for yourselves!
Sheer number of applications from the high volume countries has created the backlog?? Are you saying/wishing that these people should not have come in the first place to avoid the backlog?? My friend, backlogs did not happen completely because of the sheer number of applications and gaming. Backlogs happened primarily because of wasted visa numbers and issues surrounding it. If there was no visa number wastage the priority dates would have been around 2-3 years behind as opposed to 7 or 8 years. There are gamers in every system. If a system does not work for people as it is supposed to, gamers do so to get out of the system. Not that IV condones such things but it happens in any system, when the system is broken.
The I in IV definitely does not stand for me only or for any one only. I along with V only makes sense. I by itself does not get IV any where.
So removing the per country limit would remove the "bias" off these countries and move it to the ones with lower populations; so, in essence the discrimination would be reversed?
On one hand you are saying that there is a bias towards lower population countries now and you are ok with it, just because you happen to benefit from it. Is that what you mean?
If retrogressed countries are asking for 75% of the numbers reserved to them rather than having one line for all, You have a good point in saying that the bias is shifting towards retrogressed countries. There is no such provision like that. The provision creates one line depending on when you entered the line. You enter the line ahead, you get it first.
So keeping the limits intact is NOT a bias to you? You can't have it both ways. What do you think is a solution? The point system you referred to came with the same 10% limit on the retrogressed countries. What difference does it make to a retrogressed person with 96 out of 100 points, but still needs to wait for 4 years, while some one from Krakozhia walks away in 6 months with 60 points. B T W , you also said that higher education deserves more does not fly with you. I am not sure how you want points to be assigned, other than education and experience. Don't let the fear and protectionist thought take over the logical and rational thought.
The "other side" of immigration is an entirely different topic. Their issues and our issues, their path to the end line and ours are entirely different. We can't simply compare apples and oranges and call people hypocrites. That said, I personally support it and feel that it will happen at some point depending on the majority in both houses and one party will suffer for the decisions it made. As a by stander, I sympathize with the situation the "other side" has been in. I have a full plate to work on.
I do have one question for all of you who are in favor of eliminating the per country limit; do you support an eventual road to citizenship for the large group of people who dominate the "other side" of immigration? If you don't, some may think you hipocritical to want the rules changed for yourselves!
Sheer number of applications from the high volume countries has created the backlog?? Are you saying/wishing that these people should not have come in the first place to avoid the backlog?? My friend, backlogs did not happen completely because of the sheer number of applications and gaming. Backlogs happened primarily because of wasted visa numbers and issues surrounding it. If there was no visa number wastage the priority dates would have been around 2-3 years behind as opposed to 7 or 8 years. There are gamers in every system. If a system does not work for people as it is supposed to, gamers do so to get out of the system. Not that IV condones such things but it happens in any system, when the system is broken.
The I in IV definitely does not stand for me only or for any one only. I along with V only makes sense. I by itself does not get IV any where.
So removing the per country limit would remove the "bias" off these countries and move it to the ones with lower populations; so, in essence the discrimination would be reversed?
On one hand you are saying that there is a bias towards lower population countries now and you are ok with it, just because you happen to benefit from it. Is that what you mean?
If retrogressed countries are asking for 75% of the numbers reserved to them rather than having one line for all, You have a good point in saying that the bias is shifting towards retrogressed countries. There is no such provision like that. The provision creates one line depending on when you entered the line. You enter the line ahead, you get it first.
So keeping the limits intact is NOT a bias to you? You can't have it both ways. What do you think is a solution? The point system you referred to came with the same 10% limit on the retrogressed countries. What difference does it make to a retrogressed person with 96 out of 100 points, but still needs to wait for 4 years, while some one from Krakozhia walks away in 6 months with 60 points. B T W , you also said that higher education deserves more does not fly with you. I am not sure how you want points to be assigned, other than education and experience. Don't let the fear and protectionist thought take over the logical and rational thought.
The "other side" of immigration is an entirely different topic. Their issues and our issues, their path to the end line and ours are entirely different. We can't simply compare apples and oranges and call people hypocrites. That said, I personally support it and feel that it will happen at some point depending on the majority in both houses and one party will suffer for the decisions it made. As a by stander, I sympathize with the situation the "other side" has been in. I have a full plate to work on.
wallpaper hair cut, purple towel,
Sunx_2004
07-15 01:53 PM
I agree, Don't waste single minute and consult attorney if you haven'nt done so..
Good luck
ajthakur,
U r covered under AC-21 if I-140 is not revoked by your previous employer.
Be truthful to USCIS and using a very good attorney firm drat AC-21 and Employment verification letter to USCIS. Since your PD is current chances are after reviewing the new employment letter USCIS might approve your case.
Please dont waste time in on this forum, instead spend some money to consult Rajeev Khanna or Sheela Murthy, it is worth spending every penny on the advice and their services for invoking AC-21.
Per your RFE notice it looks like, USCIS is only interested in verifying your current employment in the similar profession. good employment verification letter and AC-21 draft is good to save your GC.
RFE might have triggered due to previous H1B transfer, it has nothing to do with your employer revoking I-140. Trust me lot of desi consulting companies dont want to take any "Panga" with USCIS and 99% of the time they just ignore employees leaving them. So dont worry, dial in Murthy or Khanna consulting services and see what's their take on your case. If you are getting any help from new Employer's attorney that will be free of cost to you.
Bottomline you need a competent attorney for answering this RFE and invoking AC-21.
Good luck
ajthakur,
U r covered under AC-21 if I-140 is not revoked by your previous employer.
Be truthful to USCIS and using a very good attorney firm drat AC-21 and Employment verification letter to USCIS. Since your PD is current chances are after reviewing the new employment letter USCIS might approve your case.
Please dont waste time in on this forum, instead spend some money to consult Rajeev Khanna or Sheela Murthy, it is worth spending every penny on the advice and their services for invoking AC-21.
Per your RFE notice it looks like, USCIS is only interested in verifying your current employment in the similar profession. good employment verification letter and AC-21 draft is good to save your GC.
RFE might have triggered due to previous H1B transfer, it has nothing to do with your employer revoking I-140. Trust me lot of desi consulting companies dont want to take any "Panga" with USCIS and 99% of the time they just ignore employees leaving them. So dont worry, dial in Murthy or Khanna consulting services and see what's their take on your case. If you are getting any help from new Employer's attorney that will be free of cost to you.
Bottomline you need a competent attorney for answering this RFE and invoking AC-21.
gcformeornot
03-16 12:52 PM
think IV membership should be vetted. Only way to stop fools like these.
2011 hair straightener purple
MDix
03-11 11:43 AM
Don't put words in my mouth.
Now you want me to give you reply which you will understand. The SledgeHammer or Mirage way.
About the link, read from the top don't just read one post.
Hey Joker -
I joined IV 5 years after getting my GC. Please look at my 900+ posts and pull out one (just one) that justify your stupid thoughts.
If that's make you happy - PD will be current next month. Now start dreaming again.
-- desi3933
Now you want me to give you reply which you will understand. The SledgeHammer or Mirage way.
About the link, read from the top don't just read one post.
Hey Joker -
I joined IV 5 years after getting my GC. Please look at my 900+ posts and pull out one (just one) that justify your stupid thoughts.
If that's make you happy - PD will be current next month. Now start dreaming again.
-- desi3933
more...
johnamit
07-18 09:14 AM
some applications have already been rejected, mostly on July 2nd but a very few.
USCIS did not say that they will return the application and they should be refilled.
With their announcement on July 17th, they have about 16 more days in this month left. It is a heavy workload for them to reject all the petitions (minimum 200K packages) which is unnecessary work and cost enourmous amount of money.
Also they will not invite another problem if the do not give sufficient time to the clients to file, what if someone receives the package Auguest 15. That will be another mess up.
It looks like SCs have rejected some applications on the same day (July 2nd), those applicants should have already received them(on July 3rd or 4th). They have to refile. Rejections after July 17th may not be true.
My lawer says:
Your application has reached INS on July 2nd and upon the statement from USIC on July 17th, it will be accepted.
USCIS did not say that they will return the application and they should be refilled.
With their announcement on July 17th, they have about 16 more days in this month left. It is a heavy workload for them to reject all the petitions (minimum 200K packages) which is unnecessary work and cost enourmous amount of money.
Also they will not invite another problem if the do not give sufficient time to the clients to file, what if someone receives the package Auguest 15. That will be another mess up.
It looks like SCs have rejected some applications on the same day (July 2nd), those applicants should have already received them(on July 3rd or 4th). They have to refile. Rejections after July 17th may not be true.
My lawer says:
Your application has reached INS on July 2nd and upon the statement from USIC on July 17th, it will be accepted.
akilhere
10-11 12:44 PM
Received email about change in status to 'Your Case Status: Request for Evidence Response Review'. USCIS should have received it yesterday and today it changed to response review.
RFE email: Sept 10, 2010
RFE received by attorney: Sept 21, 2010 [Civil Surgeon was not in current list of authorised civil surgeon + x-ray report was missing]
Reponse to RFE sent on : Oct 05, 2010 via USPS
Soft LUD/email: Oct 07, 2010 @10.30PM PST [Your Case Status: Request for Evidence Response Review]
feedfront
I got an RFE on my 485 on Oct 6th. But I haven't received the letter yet. But, since my TB test turned positive and I had to take an X-ray, I'm wondering if I would get the same RFE on my 485 too. I haven't changed employers nor had any H1B breaks in my 12 year stint here. So, I'm wondering if it would be the same RFE as yours.
In case of an X-Ray missing, couldn't we contact the doctor's office where we did our tests and ask them to mail it again? Or should we do it once again now? I did my tests in 2004, so I'm not even sure if they have copies of my X-rays with them.
Please let me know.
Thanks,
RFE email: Sept 10, 2010
RFE received by attorney: Sept 21, 2010 [Civil Surgeon was not in current list of authorised civil surgeon + x-ray report was missing]
Reponse to RFE sent on : Oct 05, 2010 via USPS
Soft LUD/email: Oct 07, 2010 @10.30PM PST [Your Case Status: Request for Evidence Response Review]
feedfront
I got an RFE on my 485 on Oct 6th. But I haven't received the letter yet. But, since my TB test turned positive and I had to take an X-ray, I'm wondering if I would get the same RFE on my 485 too. I haven't changed employers nor had any H1B breaks in my 12 year stint here. So, I'm wondering if it would be the same RFE as yours.
In case of an X-Ray missing, couldn't we contact the doctor's office where we did our tests and ask them to mail it again? Or should we do it once again now? I did my tests in 2004, so I'm not even sure if they have copies of my X-rays with them.
Please let me know.
Thanks,
more...
bindas74
02-21 12:29 PM
if u can keep thd same PD whenu change from eB3 to eB2..you should do it immediately!
Hi,
Can someone please tell if we can port to EB2 from EB3 even after using AC21 and statred working on EAD??
-THanks
Hi,
Can someone please tell if we can port to EB2 from EB3 even after using AC21 and statred working on EAD??
-THanks
2010 GHD HAIR STRAIGHTENER: PURPLE
gc_wow
03-09 12:37 PM
why did row eb3 gone back 2 years?
more...
piyu7444
01-30 04:15 PM
Good. That means you were in-status at the I-485 filing. Submit documents mentioned in RFE and you should be good.
>> My question is - Is the time I haven't been working considered as Out of Status?
No you are not. Like I said out of status UNTIL date of I-485 application is most important.
____________________
Not a legal advice.
US Citizen of Indian Origin
I read the thread and have a question for Desi3933 as he seems to have knowledge about how this works..........
I am on h1b with employer B.
Employer A had my h1b and had processed my GC. I applied for 485 in Jul 07 and then in Jun 08 I transfered my h1b to Employer B. I did not notify USCIS about this job change so I did not invoke AC21. (Lawyer suggested to leave it in case we get a RFE)
Now my wife's 485 application is tied with mine. She is on h1b with employer C. Employer C is a consulting agency and her contract will end today Jan 30 2009. Also we are expecting hence she will take a 3 month time off / vacation for the baby (permissible under law) starting End of April 2009. Further she will travel to India on Aug 1 2009 and will return around Nov 15 09.
She has worked only 1 month in 2009 this will be reflected on 2009 w-2. I have couple of questions:
Will she be considered as "out of status" from Feb 1 to April end?
She has h1b valid till 2010 so when she returns back to US in Nov 09 shall she use h1b or enter US on AP given the fact that 485 is pending?
Will you recommend getting paid from Feb thru May to cover the gap? (this could be done with as the employer is willing to help)
Thanks
>> My question is - Is the time I haven't been working considered as Out of Status?
No you are not. Like I said out of status UNTIL date of I-485 application is most important.
____________________
Not a legal advice.
US Citizen of Indian Origin
I read the thread and have a question for Desi3933 as he seems to have knowledge about how this works..........
I am on h1b with employer B.
Employer A had my h1b and had processed my GC. I applied for 485 in Jul 07 and then in Jun 08 I transfered my h1b to Employer B. I did not notify USCIS about this job change so I did not invoke AC21. (Lawyer suggested to leave it in case we get a RFE)
Now my wife's 485 application is tied with mine. She is on h1b with employer C. Employer C is a consulting agency and her contract will end today Jan 30 2009. Also we are expecting hence she will take a 3 month time off / vacation for the baby (permissible under law) starting End of April 2009. Further she will travel to India on Aug 1 2009 and will return around Nov 15 09.
She has worked only 1 month in 2009 this will be reflected on 2009 w-2. I have couple of questions:
Will she be considered as "out of status" from Feb 1 to April end?
She has h1b valid till 2010 so when she returns back to US in Nov 09 shall she use h1b or enter US on AP given the fact that 485 is pending?
Will you recommend getting paid from Feb thru May to cover the gap? (this could be done with as the employer is willing to help)
Thanks
hair blonde hair purple highlights.
lazycis
01-19 07:35 AM
Very interesting. When we applied for 485/EAD/AP, our lawyer specifically asked for color passport copies of the first few pages. I went ahead and made copies of all pages. Am I in trouble?
That was exactly my thought! I think people who say it's illegal to make a copy and provide it for other than personal use should give us a reference to the applicable law, I am not aware of the specific law regarding this. If anybody could point out the source of information, that would be great.
BTW, here is the quote from the Department of State website
http://travel.state.gov/travel/tips/emergencies/emergencies_1197.html
"If you can provide the U.S. embassy or consulate with a photocopy of your passport identification page, that will make getting a new passport easier since your citizenship and identity information would be more readily available."
That was exactly my thought! I think people who say it's illegal to make a copy and provide it for other than personal use should give us a reference to the applicable law, I am not aware of the specific law regarding this. If anybody could point out the source of information, that would be great.
BTW, here is the quote from the Department of State website
http://travel.state.gov/travel/tips/emergencies/emergencies_1197.html
"If you can provide the U.S. embassy or consulate with a photocopy of your passport identification page, that will make getting a new passport easier since your citizenship and identity information would be more readily available."
more...
waitin_toolong
10-03 01:52 PM
that is the only ption to continue L status..but remember u can not use h1b ..and u have to apply again for h1b in next year quota....
wrong there, once counted against cap she is exempt for 6 years. she can use this approval if working for same employe get it stamped and enter on H1 any time. Or apply for COS with any other employer sponsoring H1.
To answer the original questions only two options.
1) depart and reeneter using L1
2) apply for COS (but a long process)
wrong there, once counted against cap she is exempt for 6 years. she can use this approval if working for same employe get it stamped and enter on H1 any time. Or apply for COS with any other employer sponsoring H1.
To answer the original questions only two options.
1) depart and reeneter using L1
2) apply for COS (but a long process)
hot Sideswept Hair and Purple
bigboy007
07-18 11:08 AM
OK just called USCIS with great difficulty they escalated it to Supervisor , He took my details and informed and nothing is in system yet. Then i asked him about procedural changes , as per him everything "SHOULD" be on HOLD earlier. Hence he expressed concern that none MIGHT have returned . BUT he adviced me to call back during last week of July just to be safe on side so that we can make sure they are through atleast by deadline of Aug 17. For me what he told makes sense.
more...
house My hair is purple.
abhijitp
07-28 02:02 AM
Copying from the reply I posted here:
http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/showthread.php?p=133404#post133404
I consulted a high profile ($200 per 15 minutes) lawyer to discuss this issue. 1) He told me that he would re-submit the AOS. The comparison to the medical clearance requirement, according to him, was pointless, as they are two different things. If USCIS issues a statement they will not reject solely based on the EVL, then we can assume that is the truth. Their statement on Medical clearance cannot be interpreted to say they won't reject on the basis of another missing requirement, say the EVL.
2) Filing two AOS packets can indeed also cause confusion, but it is a smaller risk according to him, and should be mitigated by a covering letter that says you are re-submitting to provide the XYZ document that was missed from the first packet.
Based on this info, I have asked my lawyer to get a confirmation from the USCIS on the document that he missed in my case-- the EVL. If USCIS okays that, we do not resubmit. If they don't do that within a week, I will try to re-submit... not going to be easy considering my lawyer may not be in agreement... but that is what would be the correct way out of this, according to the second opinion I got today.
Thanks
http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/showthread.php?p=133404#post133404
I consulted a high profile ($200 per 15 minutes) lawyer to discuss this issue. 1) He told me that he would re-submit the AOS. The comparison to the medical clearance requirement, according to him, was pointless, as they are two different things. If USCIS issues a statement they will not reject solely based on the EVL, then we can assume that is the truth. Their statement on Medical clearance cannot be interpreted to say they won't reject on the basis of another missing requirement, say the EVL.
2) Filing two AOS packets can indeed also cause confusion, but it is a smaller risk according to him, and should be mitigated by a covering letter that says you are re-submitting to provide the XYZ document that was missed from the first packet.
Based on this info, I have asked my lawyer to get a confirmation from the USCIS on the document that he missed in my case-- the EVL. If USCIS okays that, we do not resubmit. If they don't do that within a week, I will try to re-submit... not going to be easy considering my lawyer may not be in agreement... but that is what would be the correct way out of this, according to the second opinion I got today.
Thanks
tattoo Fox Hair Grape Purple
praveenat11
09-24 01:31 PM
Hi,
Appreciate ur quick response.
so i need to get the affidavit from notary signed that it is a true translation from telugu to english so this is a replacement of English DOB Certificate.
Appreciate ur quick response.
so i need to get the affidavit from notary signed that it is a true translation from telugu to english so this is a replacement of English DOB Certificate.
more...
pictures Dip+dye+hair+purple
cableching
07-11 03:02 PM
I think movement in EB-3 for India nad Chine will be difficult, as most of the folks from ROW apply under EB3 and most of the applicants in EB2 are from India and Chine?
As a result EB-3 quota is used up easily and the per country limits apply for Indians and Chinese. Where as for EB-2, the per country limits do not apply as the ROW applicants are not that many.
As a result EB-3 quota is used up easily and the per country limits apply for Indians and Chinese. Where as for EB-2, the per country limits do not apply as the ROW applicants are not that many.
dresses purple and red hair
willgetgc2005
04-20 02:37 PM
Logiclife,
If you have contacts in Cisco, Intel etc in bay area , can you please spread the word so morepeople turn out. I am about 8 hours drive form San Jose. will try to make it. This is awesome. We need to get as many people as possible on war footing.
Maybe no banners or signs because this is a town-hall style meeting and not a rally. I'll let you know if its ok to do that.
But surely, it would be good if you bring a sign/banner saying "www.immigrationvoice.org" which would help us get more coverage is its caught by the media.
If you have contacts in Cisco, Intel etc in bay area , can you please spread the word so morepeople turn out. I am about 8 hours drive form San Jose. will try to make it. This is awesome. We need to get as many people as possible on war footing.
Maybe no banners or signs because this is a town-hall style meeting and not a rally. I'll let you know if its ok to do that.
But surely, it would be good if you bring a sign/banner saying "www.immigrationvoice.org" which would help us get more coverage is its caught by the media.
more...
makeup Ghd-mk4-hair-straightener-
Desertfox
12-10 07:01 PM
I am on L1 & my I-94 is expiring in a month from now on 11 Dec 2007 . I have applied for my L-Extenstion and is pending for approval.
Given this case - can my wife apply for a EAD with the current L1 approved document (expiring on 11 Dec 2007( and add my L-Extension approval papers later on?
There seems to be a three month delay in getting the EAD - hence wanted to initiate the process earlier and not till my L-Extension papers come-in
Please help me ASAP.
Sriram
My spouse got EAD from similar situation. Your wife should file I-765 for L-2 based EAD along with the receipt notice (I-797) of your I-129 (L-1 extension application). She should mail a I-765 hardcopy application to USCIS. USCIS will get back to you with RFE after 45-60 days for your I-129 approval notice (i.e. principal applicant's L-1 extension approval). BTW... hasn't she already filed for I-539 this way?
Given this case - can my wife apply for a EAD with the current L1 approved document (expiring on 11 Dec 2007( and add my L-Extension approval papers later on?
There seems to be a three month delay in getting the EAD - hence wanted to initiate the process earlier and not till my L-Extension papers come-in
Please help me ASAP.
Sriram
My spouse got EAD from similar situation. Your wife should file I-765 for L-2 based EAD along with the receipt notice (I-797) of your I-129 (L-1 extension application). She should mail a I-765 hardcopy application to USCIS. USCIS will get back to you with RFE after 45-60 days for your I-129 approval notice (i.e. principal applicant's L-1 extension approval). BTW... hasn't she already filed for I-539 this way?
girlfriend dyed hair, piercings, purple
sodh
07-24 10:49 PM
They are talking about Allien#.
If you were on OPT you will have Allien# but the EB Catogery gets an allien# after they apply for AOS.
If you were on OPT you will have Allien# but the EB Catogery gets an allien# after they apply for AOS.
hairstyles hair with purple tips.
nirenjoshi
10-29 12:02 PM
Posted last week..
GCaspirations
10-12 09:21 PM
EB3 - Feb 2004
485,EAD,AP : RD July3107 at NSC
485,EAD,AP : ND Oct0307 at CSC
EAD,AP approved : Oct10 at CSC
I would like to know if your case has been transferred back to NSC. Also have you received FP notice yet.
485,EAD,AP : RD July3107 at NSC
485,EAD,AP : ND Oct0307 at CSC
EAD,AP approved : Oct10 at CSC
I would like to know if your case has been transferred back to NSC. Also have you received FP notice yet.
rimzhim
01-28 11:04 AM
I don’t want to start another war here but all I am asking for is a fair treatment of people and not discriminate against people based on country of birth. One of the reasons I left my country, India, is because of the discriminating that exists there in terms of "reservations" where everything is reserved based on your caste for 50%. Now please dont tell me reservations and country cap are different, they are not different they are the same. they accomplish the same purpose in case of skilled immigration.I never thought such a thing would happen in US but it seems worst here because Indians and Chinese make up almost 70 to 80% of H1 (which is dual intent) but when it comes to employment based green cards (which are based on H1) Indians and Chinese combined get only 14% of the visas, don’t you see the tragedy here? Why don’t they enforce the country cap on H1 also, that way people from India and china will not have to suffer worse than others? But US is a competitive country, they want the best available talent for H1 and that’s the reason they don’t put country caps on H1.
Take my case for example, I have come to this country in 1999 on F1 and have been working and paying takes since 2001. I am not even able to apply for 485. If I get laid off now I will have to leave US next year. Contrast this with somebody from Taiwan, UK or some non retrogressed country. In some cases they can get green card within the first year of coming to US. This is not a hypothetical case but a scenario which is happening quite often, especially in EB2. In my own company I have seen people (6 so far) who are 5 years junior to me (i.e joined the company 5 years after I did) get a green card where as I am dazed and confused and haven’t even applied for 485.
I totally agreed with country caps in non skilled immigration, because the only criteria is that you don’t have any diseases and don’t have a criminal background. But in skilled immigration it does not make sense to apply country caps unless you apply country caps in H1. but US is a competitive country, they want the best available talent for H1and that’s the reason they don’t put country caps on H1.
I understand your plight, but then the solution is to put a country cap to H1. Also, I respectfully disagree with comparing your situation in regards to caste etc in your country to country-cap based quotas in the US. This has only happened because the number of H1s for many years exceeded the number of GCs allowed every yr. The US does believe in some diversity which is why they have affirmative action, and the country cap has been imposed in the same spirit. Affirmative action will not go away from the US even if it is, as you say, same thing as caste-based reservations in your home country. I agree: there should be a country cap on H1 also and the total number of H1 per yr should never exceed the number of GCs per yr.
Take my case for example, I have come to this country in 1999 on F1 and have been working and paying takes since 2001. I am not even able to apply for 485. If I get laid off now I will have to leave US next year. Contrast this with somebody from Taiwan, UK or some non retrogressed country. In some cases they can get green card within the first year of coming to US. This is not a hypothetical case but a scenario which is happening quite often, especially in EB2. In my own company I have seen people (6 so far) who are 5 years junior to me (i.e joined the company 5 years after I did) get a green card where as I am dazed and confused and haven’t even applied for 485.
I totally agreed with country caps in non skilled immigration, because the only criteria is that you don’t have any diseases and don’t have a criminal background. But in skilled immigration it does not make sense to apply country caps unless you apply country caps in H1. but US is a competitive country, they want the best available talent for H1and that’s the reason they don’t put country caps on H1.
I understand your plight, but then the solution is to put a country cap to H1. Also, I respectfully disagree with comparing your situation in regards to caste etc in your country to country-cap based quotas in the US. This has only happened because the number of H1s for many years exceeded the number of GCs allowed every yr. The US does believe in some diversity which is why they have affirmative action, and the country cap has been imposed in the same spirit. Affirmative action will not go away from the US even if it is, as you say, same thing as caste-based reservations in your home country. I agree: there should be a country cap on H1 also and the total number of H1 per yr should never exceed the number of GCs per yr.
0 comments:
Post a Comment