anantc
01-29 09:27 AM
Hi,
my wife has received EAD and she also has H4 status. If she travels on H4 and get it stamped in India , can she work on EAD when she comes back?
Kindly request your help,
Anant
my wife has received EAD and she also has H4 status. If she travels on H4 and get it stamped in India , can she work on EAD when she comes back?
Kindly request your help,
Anant
wallpaper cool cars wallpaper hd.
lahiribaba
07-06 01:37 AM
What makes you think so?
More Bulls**t
More Bulls**t
DSLStart
07-29 11:16 AM
No contact with old attorney since I changed job. Do you see any chance of our PD becoming current for next month, hence this activity?
I too got the same two mails. First mail on 20 th and last mail on 22 nd.Mine is approved from Texas on JAN 2006.My PD is Nov 2005,but I used only PD to apply I-485.My current AOS is from another company.Did you or your lawyer get any postal mail?
I too got the same two mails. First mail on 20 th and last mail on 22 nd.Mine is approved from Texas on JAN 2006.My PD is Nov 2005,but I used only PD to apply I-485.My current AOS is from another company.Did you or your lawyer get any postal mail?
2011 HD Fiat Vintage Car Wallpapers
bingl
04-15 11:47 PM
My Driving license is expiring soon (the day my I94 expires ) ....I have been on H4 till now ....but my husband is on EAD now . When I went to renew my license they asked me to get EAD since my I94 will expire soon . Is that the only way to renew ? Can I file for AP and use that, since I will have to travel to India anyways ?
more...
sanan
05-22 11:39 AM
huh?
EAD is Employment Authorization Document. It can filed with your I 485, it has nothing to do with 485 pending for 6 months! Where are you getting such info from?
People will be filing their I-485, not their EAD. EAD is something one gets after the 1-485 application has been pending for 6 months :)
EAD is Employment Authorization Document. It can filed with your I 485, it has nothing to do with 485 pending for 6 months! Where are you getting such info from?
People will be filing their I-485, not their EAD. EAD is something one gets after the 1-485 application has been pending for 6 months :)
p_kumar
11-30 02:24 PM
Can you put the exact working of the status ?
Is it one of the following ?
Current Status: Notice mailed welcoming the new permanent resident.
or
Current Status: Document mailed to applicant.
or
something else.
Canadian_Dream
Does the status 'Document mailed to applicant' mean a RFE?.:eek:
Is it one of the following ?
Current Status: Notice mailed welcoming the new permanent resident.
or
Current Status: Document mailed to applicant.
or
something else.
Canadian_Dream
Does the status 'Document mailed to applicant' mean a RFE?.:eek:
more...
tnite
07-26 09:27 AM
Hello everyone,
I got to know about this website recently and I wish I had known it earlier.
Anyway, I need advice/conformation
I got married recently outside the US. However, I did not come back with my wife b/c of a couple of reasons. And I cannot bring her here in the next 3 weeks. (My H1B is getting renewed...)
The company's lawyer is advising me not file for I-485 and wait till I become current again and apply with my wife then. (I am EB3 and my PD is March 2005)
After reading this web and others, if I go ahead and apply now the following are the choices that I have later. Please confirm if I am right or wrong
1. Get every document ready for my wife at all times and apply for I-485 immediately after I become current. As long as they receive her I-485 before they approve mine, she is going to be fine. She will be fine even if they receive her I-485 a day before they approve mine.
2. If my I-485 gets approved before my wife’s I-485 get there, under section 245(k), she has 180 days to send in her I-485 as long as PD is current. And there is no penalty and no other problem with this. She can stay in the country and wait for her I-485 to approve.
3. If I though that it was a grave mistake to apply for my I-485, I can withdraw it before it gets approved and reapply later with my wife’s when I become current again. No problem with this other than paying the fees again.
4. My wife and change her H4 to F1 any time she wants to as long as she goes to school full time. She could be on F1 and apply for I-485 when I become current (I feel uneasy on this one).
Please, let me know if what I listed above is right. These are the only choices that I have ready about. If there are more choices please, let me know that too. I have to make a decision by the end of tomorrow. Thank you all!
I think your lawyer is too optimistic about EB3 March 2005 being current in the immediate future.Maybe he's right .I dont know
But looking at the possible choice you have mentioned :
1.This is the best option . ie you apply for I485 right now and add you wife when she's in the US later when the date is current.The reason being that for USCIS to approve your GC the date should be current and if its current then you're eligible to apply for your wife's I485.Its a loop. For one thing(GC Approval) to happen the other thing(Date being current) has to happen.
2.The 2nd choice is same as the 1st one. Many here are prediciting that there will be severe retrogression in the Oct bulletin and no one with a right state of mind can even guess the dates at this point of time.
3.Why do you think it would be a grave mistake in life? If you think u'r taking a big risk then make your wife's status independent of your's by applying for H1b or F1 which is option 4. You should talk to a lawyer about the intent issues on F1 visa. I am not aware of that. I know that if one's one F1 or any other non-dual intent visa they shouldnt(risky and chances are higher for denial) apply for any immigrant visa within 90 days of their arrival or in your wife's case change of status.Search for more info on the web.
But my choice would be the first one. It's not risky for the reasons I had mentioned.
my 2 cents
I got to know about this website recently and I wish I had known it earlier.
Anyway, I need advice/conformation
I got married recently outside the US. However, I did not come back with my wife b/c of a couple of reasons. And I cannot bring her here in the next 3 weeks. (My H1B is getting renewed...)
The company's lawyer is advising me not file for I-485 and wait till I become current again and apply with my wife then. (I am EB3 and my PD is March 2005)
After reading this web and others, if I go ahead and apply now the following are the choices that I have later. Please confirm if I am right or wrong
1. Get every document ready for my wife at all times and apply for I-485 immediately after I become current. As long as they receive her I-485 before they approve mine, she is going to be fine. She will be fine even if they receive her I-485 a day before they approve mine.
2. If my I-485 gets approved before my wife’s I-485 get there, under section 245(k), she has 180 days to send in her I-485 as long as PD is current. And there is no penalty and no other problem with this. She can stay in the country and wait for her I-485 to approve.
3. If I though that it was a grave mistake to apply for my I-485, I can withdraw it before it gets approved and reapply later with my wife’s when I become current again. No problem with this other than paying the fees again.
4. My wife and change her H4 to F1 any time she wants to as long as she goes to school full time. She could be on F1 and apply for I-485 when I become current (I feel uneasy on this one).
Please, let me know if what I listed above is right. These are the only choices that I have ready about. If there are more choices please, let me know that too. I have to make a decision by the end of tomorrow. Thank you all!
I think your lawyer is too optimistic about EB3 March 2005 being current in the immediate future.Maybe he's right .I dont know
But looking at the possible choice you have mentioned :
1.This is the best option . ie you apply for I485 right now and add you wife when she's in the US later when the date is current.The reason being that for USCIS to approve your GC the date should be current and if its current then you're eligible to apply for your wife's I485.Its a loop. For one thing(GC Approval) to happen the other thing(Date being current) has to happen.
2.The 2nd choice is same as the 1st one. Many here are prediciting that there will be severe retrogression in the Oct bulletin and no one with a right state of mind can even guess the dates at this point of time.
3.Why do you think it would be a grave mistake in life? If you think u'r taking a big risk then make your wife's status independent of your's by applying for H1b or F1 which is option 4. You should talk to a lawyer about the intent issues on F1 visa. I am not aware of that. I know that if one's one F1 or any other non-dual intent visa they shouldnt(risky and chances are higher for denial) apply for any immigrant visa within 90 days of their arrival or in your wife's case change of status.Search for more info on the web.
But my choice would be the first one. It's not risky for the reasons I had mentioned.
my 2 cents
2010 Aston Martin DB9 Wallpaper
vin13
01-15 03:40 PM
I agree.
Visa Recapture or remove country limit for skilled labor (EB category). these would probably be the only ones that will fly.
Maybe they should also keep it low key so less people oppose it;)
Send it through when Mr.King is on vacation:D
Visa Recapture or remove country limit for skilled labor (EB category). these would probably be the only ones that will fly.
Maybe they should also keep it low key so less people oppose it;)
Send it through when Mr.King is on vacation:D
more...
kavita_abb
10-10 10:03 AM
Thank you!
I am not quiting my company but I am moving to India. In that case what will happen ?
Your valuable inputs are greatly appreciated.
Thank you very much!
I am not quiting my company but I am moving to India. In that case what will happen ?
Your valuable inputs are greatly appreciated.
Thank you very much!
hair HD 2011 - Car Wallpaper at
waitingGC
03-14 12:07 PM
.
more...
dbevis
May 17th, 2005, 06:33 AM
There are several spots in the Indy area where you can get such a perspective. One with easy access is high atop Crown Hill cemetary (i.e., the James Whitcomb Riley hilltop gravesite). Sunrise or sunset would be your best bet unless you hit on a really crystal-clear day with no midday haze. You might find something close to what you are after around 16th and Georgetown road, too ;)
hot exotic car wallpaper.
reno_john
06-16 02:02 AM
If you read the instructions for I-485, nowhere does it require you to be on a non immigrant visa, with dual intent, to apply for I-485.
I tried to read the instructions from the standpoint of a student, and I did not find anything that says I cannot apply to adjust status. All they want is proof of your status and admission.
Also, we have someone in our company who will go for Eb1, and is on OPT (which is not a status, F1 is). He was told that he can apply for I-140!
Any F1 visa spouse can apply for I-485 the only legal cause is that at the time of filing spouse status should be legal, found from my attorney.
As per my knowledge when I was a student, the internation center updates the Sevis database and also writes on the I-20 that the student is accepting OPT and so a EAD needs to be issued. And on the EAD it will mention that the EAD is for OPT, so EAD for I485 is differect from EAD for OPT.
I tried to read the instructions from the standpoint of a student, and I did not find anything that says I cannot apply to adjust status. All they want is proof of your status and admission.
Also, we have someone in our company who will go for Eb1, and is on OPT (which is not a status, F1 is). He was told that he can apply for I-140!
Any F1 visa spouse can apply for I-485 the only legal cause is that at the time of filing spouse status should be legal, found from my attorney.
As per my knowledge when I was a student, the internation center updates the Sevis database and also writes on the I-20 that the student is accepting OPT and so a EAD needs to be issued. And on the EAD it will mention that the EAD is for OPT, so EAD for I485 is differect from EAD for OPT.
more...
house 2011 hd wallpapers of mw cars. cars wallpaper hd. cars wallpaper 2011 hd.
asdfgh
10-15 12:04 PM
Received Transfer notice from CSC to NSC...originally filed at TSC.
No Receipt Notice, EAD, AP or FP.:mad:
friends,
Today i recieved transfer notice from CSC to TSC but no reciept notice yet. Am i going to recieve reciept notice also?
I485 filled on July 31, 2007
No Receipt Notice, EAD, AP or FP.:mad:
friends,
Today i recieved transfer notice from CSC to TSC but no reciept notice yet. Am i going to recieve reciept notice also?
I485 filled on July 31, 2007
tattoo wallpaper designs hd. Flower Vector Designs HD; Flower Vector Designs HD
miteshm
07-21 04:03 PM
I am curious - Did you get a receipt notice for your wife? I have E-filed for AP for my family. I have got the paper receipt for me but not for my family. I am wondering if there is a pattern here.
Thanks,
Mitesh
Hi,
I have absolutely the same story happened to my wife.
I'm July 2007 filer, she is a dependent. She never received AP which was approved and mailed on September 2007.
Called USCIS on October, November and December 2007. No results.
Took Infopass on January 2008. We were told that we have to apply for a new one.
On April 2008 we applied for NEW AP. I attached a cover letter, explaining everything and asking to put approval start date from the actual approval date and not the date of expiration of previous AP, which is September 2008 because it was lost. They ignored the letter!
On June 2008 we received new AP with Start Date September 2008.
My wife need to travel on August 2008.
I made infopass appointment on July 2008. I do not have any hope. At least I can try. Going to ask about FBI Name Check.
I read, somebody got AP issued by local CIS office during the infopass. But I think it's rare.
Any suggestions?
Misha
I485 EB3 filed on July 2, 2007
PD: December 2005
Thanks,
Mitesh
Hi,
I have absolutely the same story happened to my wife.
I'm July 2007 filer, she is a dependent. She never received AP which was approved and mailed on September 2007.
Called USCIS on October, November and December 2007. No results.
Took Infopass on January 2008. We were told that we have to apply for a new one.
On April 2008 we applied for NEW AP. I attached a cover letter, explaining everything and asking to put approval start date from the actual approval date and not the date of expiration of previous AP, which is September 2008 because it was lost. They ignored the letter!
On June 2008 we received new AP with Start Date September 2008.
My wife need to travel on August 2008.
I made infopass appointment on July 2008. I do not have any hope. At least I can try. Going to ask about FBI Name Check.
I read, somebody got AP issued by local CIS office during the infopass. But I think it's rare.
Any suggestions?
Misha
I485 EB3 filed on July 2, 2007
PD: December 2005
more...
pictures Bmw Cars Wallpapers Hd
don840
04-08 02:30 PM
wandmaker,
need another clarification.
on DS 156, Q 38- "Have you ever violated the terms of a U.S. visa,----?", Do I answer yes or no. There is another question, about 'has your visa ever been revoked?"
An attorney that i consulted, said the answer is 'No' to both these questions. His explaination was, I might have violated terms of h1 status and my h1 status has been revoked. But I have not violated terms of visa, and my visa (thats stamped in the passport) has not been revoked.
Is his explaination correct?
need another clarification.
on DS 156, Q 38- "Have you ever violated the terms of a U.S. visa,----?", Do I answer yes or no. There is another question, about 'has your visa ever been revoked?"
An attorney that i consulted, said the answer is 'No' to both these questions. His explaination was, I might have violated terms of h1 status and my h1 status has been revoked. But I have not violated terms of visa, and my visa (thats stamped in the passport) has not been revoked.
Is his explaination correct?
dresses exotic cars wallpaper
nonimmi
06-20 01:44 PM
If the visa is already expired, you better wait to get the travel documents (AP) so you don't need to go for stamping.
If you use AP to go and return without stamping new H1, can you continue working with H1 or you've to use EAD? And if you use EAD, can you be with current employer?? This is confusing!! :confused:
If you use AP to go and return without stamping new H1, can you continue working with H1 or you've to use EAD? And if you use EAD, can you be with current employer?? This is confusing!! :confused:
more...
makeup hd cars. wallpaper hd bmw.
glus
03-19 11:47 AM
My LCA was approved in July 2007.
My lawyer sent the I-14 application to USCIS in January 2008 before the 180 day period but my employer dated the USCIS fee check as 2005.
The USCIS returned the application asking us to re-send the application with a new check.
My lawyer sent the application again with a new check but by the time this application reached USCIS the 180 day period was over and USCIS returned the application again stating that my 180 period is over and they cannot accept the I-140 application now.
I am in the process of filing a fresh Labor Cert again. I guess now I will get a priority date of July 2008 and therefore I am losing 1 whole year in this process.
Is there a way out and will USCIS accept my application? The bad part here is the first application sent was before time but the check date was wrong.
All suggestions are highly appreciated.
Legally, USCIS can not accept an I140 with an expired Labor. If they do so, they will only do that under very unusual circumstances. For example, mail was lost etc. It is going to be hard to get I140 receipted if labor is expired by even one day :-(.
My lawyer sent the I-14 application to USCIS in January 2008 before the 180 day period but my employer dated the USCIS fee check as 2005.
The USCIS returned the application asking us to re-send the application with a new check.
My lawyer sent the application again with a new check but by the time this application reached USCIS the 180 day period was over and USCIS returned the application again stating that my 180 period is over and they cannot accept the I-140 application now.
I am in the process of filing a fresh Labor Cert again. I guess now I will get a priority date of July 2008 and therefore I am losing 1 whole year in this process.
Is there a way out and will USCIS accept my application? The bad part here is the first application sent was before time but the check date was wrong.
All suggestions are highly appreciated.
Legally, USCIS can not accept an I140 with an expired Labor. If they do so, they will only do that under very unusual circumstances. For example, mail was lost etc. It is going to be hard to get I140 receipted if labor is expired by even one day :-(.
girlfriend HD 2011 - Car Wallpapers
dealsnet
08-04 12:07 PM
We will forget many legal requirement after getting GC due to the excitment.
But we need to do these things to finish our GC journey.
Thank you for this information. Never realized that this should be done.
But we need to do these things to finish our GC journey.
Thank you for this information. Never realized that this should be done.
hairstyles pictures wallpapers hd cars.
bkshres
10-20 11:28 AM
Hi
I used AC21 to switch the company. First my new company said I have to use my existing old attorney for my I485 case. So, I asked my old attorney to prepare AC21 documents and mailed to USCIS, which is already done.
But now the attorney from new company is saying that they are again doing AC21 documents and will be sending to USCIS. On top, new attorney is asking me to fill G28 form. Is it necessary to file AC21 document twice or make it too confusing? And this G28 is only for me, not for my wife. I am confused with whole thing. How will this work? with my case transferred to new attorney and my wife's case still with old attorney? I also heard from this new attorney that most of the time G28 and AC21 documents will never reach to USCIS file and in that case, USCIS will communicate with old attorney. On one hand, I have to tell my old attorney that I am changing attorney but on other hand I am not even sure whether USCIS will accept or not. My old attorney has been always helpful and he has all my information and original documents.
Is it advisable to switch attorney when you have I-485 pending? and is this filing of AC21 documents twice necessary or will make more confusion in my case? What is advisable in this situation? What should I say to this new company attorney and what should I say to my old attorney? I am in big dilemma...
Please help. I need your suggestion.
Thanks,
BK
I used AC21 to switch the company. First my new company said I have to use my existing old attorney for my I485 case. So, I asked my old attorney to prepare AC21 documents and mailed to USCIS, which is already done.
But now the attorney from new company is saying that they are again doing AC21 documents and will be sending to USCIS. On top, new attorney is asking me to fill G28 form. Is it necessary to file AC21 document twice or make it too confusing? And this G28 is only for me, not for my wife. I am confused with whole thing. How will this work? with my case transferred to new attorney and my wife's case still with old attorney? I also heard from this new attorney that most of the time G28 and AC21 documents will never reach to USCIS file and in that case, USCIS will communicate with old attorney. On one hand, I have to tell my old attorney that I am changing attorney but on other hand I am not even sure whether USCIS will accept or not. My old attorney has been always helpful and he has all my information and original documents.
Is it advisable to switch attorney when you have I-485 pending? and is this filing of AC21 documents twice necessary or will make more confusion in my case? What is advisable in this situation? What should I say to this new company attorney and what should I say to my old attorney? I am in big dilemma...
Please help. I need your suggestion.
Thanks,
BK
485Mbe4001
05-17 06:31 PM
question along the same lines, any idea how much it costs to get LC via perm?
Blog Feeds
02-25 07:20 PM
AILA Leadership Has Just Posted the Following:
https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEit43Gc_-kXtMnFLAafXmeQny80e0m6hQD9qYSodF378sDoXKa_6z_l85T-Y3Gfb0-mOrscQMNOP-0W853IT1T-yvqDCTMabAhcOmmxwdr6S4pCpDH-aXMpssVLIy16dqPEx7XDoGlKcIc/s320/2010-02-23+Magnifying+Glass.jpg (https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEit43Gc_-kXtMnFLAafXmeQny80e0m6hQD9qYSodF378sDoXKa_6z_l85T-Y3Gfb0-mOrscQMNOP-0W853IT1T-yvqDCTMabAhcOmmxwdr6S4pCpDH-aXMpssVLIy16dqPEx7XDoGlKcIc/s1600-h/2010-02-23+Magnifying+Glass.jpg)
By Eleanor Pelta, AILA First Vice President
The latest salvo in the war against H-1B workers and their employers (and this time, they�ve thrown L-1�s in just for fun,) is the Economic Policy Institute�s briefing paper by Ron Hira, released last week, which concludes that the practice of using H-1B and L-1 workers and then sending them back to their home countries is bad for the economy. While Hira�s findings are certainly headline-grabbing, the road that Hira takes to get there is filled with twists, turns and manipulations and simply lacks real data.
Hira starts with the premise that some employers use H-1B�s and L visas as a bridge to permanent residence, and some employers use those categories for temporary worker mobility. (His particular political bent is belied by his constant usage of the term �guest-worker status��a term that brings with it the politically charged connotations of the European guest worker programs for unskilled workers�for the practice of bringing H-1B�s and L�s in to the U.S. on a temporary basis.) After examining his �data,� he divides the world of employers into two broad categories:
� Bad guys (generally foreign employers, no surprise, or U.S. employers with off-shore companies in India) that bring in H-1B and L workers for temporary periods, exploit them, underpay them and send them home after they get training from the American workers whose jobs they will outsource when they return home
� Good guys (U.S. corporations �Hira uses the more genteel label, �firms with traditional business models�) that bring H-1B and L workers to the U.S., pay them adequate wages, and sponsor them for permanent residence, thereby effecting a knowledge transfer to American colleagues that is good for the economy
Hira�s tool, a statistic he calls �immigration yield,� is simply a comparison of H-1B and L usage and the number of PERM applications filed by the highest users of those visas. He essentially concludes that because the highest users of H-1B�s and L�s are Indian consulting companies, and these companies have only a minimal number of PERM�s certified, they are using H�s and L�s as cheap temporary labor. He is unable to explain away the high number PERM filings of one of the IT consulting companies, and so he addresses this anomaly by saying �part of the explanation might be that it is headquartered in the United States.�
There are too many things wrong with this analysis to list in this blog, but here are a just a few ways in which Hira�s study is problematic:
Hira�s clear implication is that companies that don�t sponsor H-1B�s and L�s for PERM are using these workers instead of more expensive American labor. He ignores that fact the H-1B program has rules in place requiring payment of the prevailing wage to these workers. But even worse, he has not presented any data whatsoever on the average wages paid to these workers. He also doesn�t address the expense of obtaining such visas. He simply concludes that because they are here temporarily, they are underpaid.
Hira makes the argument that companies who use H-1B and L workers as temporary workers generally use their U.S. operations as a training ground for these workers and then send then back to their home countries to do the job that was once located here. Again, this assertion is not supported by any real statistical data about, or serious review of, the U.S. activities of such workers, but rather by anecdotal evidence and quotes from news stories taken out of context.
With respect to the fact that the L-1B visa requires specialized knowledge and so would normally preclude entry to the U.S. for the purpose of gaining training, Hira cites and outdated OIG report that alleges that adjudicators will approve any L-1B petition, because the standards are so broad. Those of use in the field struggling with the 10 page RFE�s typically issued automatically on any specialized knowledge petition would certainly beg to differ with that point.
Hira clearly implies that American jobs are lost because of H-1B and L �guest workers,� but has no direct statistical evidence of such job loss.
The fact is that usage of H-1B and L visas varies with the needs of the employer. Some employers use these programs to rotate experienced, professional workers into the United States and then send the workers abroad to continue their careers. Some employers bring H-1B�s and L�s into the U.S. to rely on their skills on a permanent basis. Judging from the fraud statistics as well as DOL enforcement actions, the majority of employers who use H-1B workers pay these workers adequate wages and comply with all of the DOL rules regarding use of these workers, whether the employers bring them in for temporary purposes or not. By the same token, the minority of employers who seek to abuse H and L workers may well do so, whether they intend to sponsor them for permanent residence or not. Indeed, arguably, the potential for long-term abuse is much worse in the situation in which a real �bad guy� employer is sponsoring an employee for a green card, because of the inordinate length of time it takes for many H-1B and L workers to obtain permanent residency due to backlogs.
Hira does make that last point, and it is just about the only one we agree on. Congress needs to create a streamlined way for employers to access and retain in the U.S. foreign expertise and talent, without at 10-15 year wait for permanent residence. But our economy still needs the ability for business to nimbly move talent to the U.S. on a temporary basis when needed, or to rotate key personnel internationally. In a world where global mobility means increased competitiveness, Hira�s �statistics� simply don�t support elimination of these crucial capability.https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/tracker/186823568153827945-6000198492670312275?l=ailaleadership.blogspot.com
More... (http://ailaleadership.blogspot.com/2010/02/epis-latest-study-of-h-1b-and-l-usage.html)
https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEit43Gc_-kXtMnFLAafXmeQny80e0m6hQD9qYSodF378sDoXKa_6z_l85T-Y3Gfb0-mOrscQMNOP-0W853IT1T-yvqDCTMabAhcOmmxwdr6S4pCpDH-aXMpssVLIy16dqPEx7XDoGlKcIc/s320/2010-02-23+Magnifying+Glass.jpg (https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEit43Gc_-kXtMnFLAafXmeQny80e0m6hQD9qYSodF378sDoXKa_6z_l85T-Y3Gfb0-mOrscQMNOP-0W853IT1T-yvqDCTMabAhcOmmxwdr6S4pCpDH-aXMpssVLIy16dqPEx7XDoGlKcIc/s1600-h/2010-02-23+Magnifying+Glass.jpg)
By Eleanor Pelta, AILA First Vice President
The latest salvo in the war against H-1B workers and their employers (and this time, they�ve thrown L-1�s in just for fun,) is the Economic Policy Institute�s briefing paper by Ron Hira, released last week, which concludes that the practice of using H-1B and L-1 workers and then sending them back to their home countries is bad for the economy. While Hira�s findings are certainly headline-grabbing, the road that Hira takes to get there is filled with twists, turns and manipulations and simply lacks real data.
Hira starts with the premise that some employers use H-1B�s and L visas as a bridge to permanent residence, and some employers use those categories for temporary worker mobility. (His particular political bent is belied by his constant usage of the term �guest-worker status��a term that brings with it the politically charged connotations of the European guest worker programs for unskilled workers�for the practice of bringing H-1B�s and L�s in to the U.S. on a temporary basis.) After examining his �data,� he divides the world of employers into two broad categories:
� Bad guys (generally foreign employers, no surprise, or U.S. employers with off-shore companies in India) that bring in H-1B and L workers for temporary periods, exploit them, underpay them and send them home after they get training from the American workers whose jobs they will outsource when they return home
� Good guys (U.S. corporations �Hira uses the more genteel label, �firms with traditional business models�) that bring H-1B and L workers to the U.S., pay them adequate wages, and sponsor them for permanent residence, thereby effecting a knowledge transfer to American colleagues that is good for the economy
Hira�s tool, a statistic he calls �immigration yield,� is simply a comparison of H-1B and L usage and the number of PERM applications filed by the highest users of those visas. He essentially concludes that because the highest users of H-1B�s and L�s are Indian consulting companies, and these companies have only a minimal number of PERM�s certified, they are using H�s and L�s as cheap temporary labor. He is unable to explain away the high number PERM filings of one of the IT consulting companies, and so he addresses this anomaly by saying �part of the explanation might be that it is headquartered in the United States.�
There are too many things wrong with this analysis to list in this blog, but here are a just a few ways in which Hira�s study is problematic:
Hira�s clear implication is that companies that don�t sponsor H-1B�s and L�s for PERM are using these workers instead of more expensive American labor. He ignores that fact the H-1B program has rules in place requiring payment of the prevailing wage to these workers. But even worse, he has not presented any data whatsoever on the average wages paid to these workers. He also doesn�t address the expense of obtaining such visas. He simply concludes that because they are here temporarily, they are underpaid.
Hira makes the argument that companies who use H-1B and L workers as temporary workers generally use their U.S. operations as a training ground for these workers and then send then back to their home countries to do the job that was once located here. Again, this assertion is not supported by any real statistical data about, or serious review of, the U.S. activities of such workers, but rather by anecdotal evidence and quotes from news stories taken out of context.
With respect to the fact that the L-1B visa requires specialized knowledge and so would normally preclude entry to the U.S. for the purpose of gaining training, Hira cites and outdated OIG report that alleges that adjudicators will approve any L-1B petition, because the standards are so broad. Those of use in the field struggling with the 10 page RFE�s typically issued automatically on any specialized knowledge petition would certainly beg to differ with that point.
Hira clearly implies that American jobs are lost because of H-1B and L �guest workers,� but has no direct statistical evidence of such job loss.
The fact is that usage of H-1B and L visas varies with the needs of the employer. Some employers use these programs to rotate experienced, professional workers into the United States and then send the workers abroad to continue their careers. Some employers bring H-1B�s and L�s into the U.S. to rely on their skills on a permanent basis. Judging from the fraud statistics as well as DOL enforcement actions, the majority of employers who use H-1B workers pay these workers adequate wages and comply with all of the DOL rules regarding use of these workers, whether the employers bring them in for temporary purposes or not. By the same token, the minority of employers who seek to abuse H and L workers may well do so, whether they intend to sponsor them for permanent residence or not. Indeed, arguably, the potential for long-term abuse is much worse in the situation in which a real �bad guy� employer is sponsoring an employee for a green card, because of the inordinate length of time it takes for many H-1B and L workers to obtain permanent residency due to backlogs.
Hira does make that last point, and it is just about the only one we agree on. Congress needs to create a streamlined way for employers to access and retain in the U.S. foreign expertise and talent, without at 10-15 year wait for permanent residence. But our economy still needs the ability for business to nimbly move talent to the U.S. on a temporary basis when needed, or to rotate key personnel internationally. In a world where global mobility means increased competitiveness, Hira�s �statistics� simply don�t support elimination of these crucial capability.https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/tracker/186823568153827945-6000198492670312275?l=ailaleadership.blogspot.com
More... (http://ailaleadership.blogspot.com/2010/02/epis-latest-study-of-h-1b-and-l-usage.html)