NKR
09-05 04:07 PM
chandu,its not same all the time as i believe in the candidate potential then the experience..i have seen so many case in my past 5 yrs of experience that a Guy who has 8yrs of experience failed to impress the hiring manager and technical lead in an personal interview where as a fresh graduate from well know university cracked the same interview a got the project� IT is the place where we all have to learn new thing every day...experience only matters how the a person approaching to get the things done...it all depends on how each individual is capable of job get done..this is what i belive in...no offence to any one.
I think it is more than that. A guy with lots of experience unless he is looking for a job that suits his experience will not get a job for which he will be over qualified.
An experience guy might find it difficult to answer questions like �what is operator precedence?� at first, cause he has moved from there to advanced levels, but a guy straight out of college can perform better in the interview and get the job.
Also remember for just a techie job, a middle aged (or older) guy will be a liability on the company as that can change the dynamics of medical insurances and other benefits for himself and his family. The company would rather take in a less experienced person and spend less, the company will not tell that for legal reasons but that is an unwritten rule that they will follow.
I think it is more than that. A guy with lots of experience unless he is looking for a job that suits his experience will not get a job for which he will be over qualified.
An experience guy might find it difficult to answer questions like �what is operator precedence?� at first, cause he has moved from there to advanced levels, but a guy straight out of college can perform better in the interview and get the job.
Also remember for just a techie job, a middle aged (or older) guy will be a liability on the company as that can change the dynamics of medical insurances and other benefits for himself and his family. The company would rather take in a less experienced person and spend less, the company will not tell that for legal reasons but that is an unwritten rule that they will follow.
wallpaper New York Yankee Logo Plain
webm
05-08 10:00 PM
I had checked the status earlier this morning (as every other day) and as every other day there was no LUD. When I got home this evening saw the following email (got one for my wife's application too)
I still remember very vividly the day I handed my papers to our HR in Sept 2002. It took our HR nine months to complete recruiting and send it to DoL. I am sure I will remember today and the day we get the physical cards better :)
Receipt Number: SRC07192xxxxx
Application Type: I485 , APPLICATION TO REGISTER PERMANENT RESIDENCE OR TO ADJUST STATUS
Current Status: Notice mailed welcoming the new permanent resident.
On May 8, 2008, we mailed you a notice that we had registered this customer's new permanent resident status. Please follow any instructions on the notice. Your new permanent resident card should be mailed within 60 days following this registration or after you complete any ADIT processing referred to in the welcome notice, whichever is later.
Congrats!! pal..
I still remember very vividly the day I handed my papers to our HR in Sept 2002. It took our HR nine months to complete recruiting and send it to DoL. I am sure I will remember today and the day we get the physical cards better :)
Receipt Number: SRC07192xxxxx
Application Type: I485 , APPLICATION TO REGISTER PERMANENT RESIDENCE OR TO ADJUST STATUS
Current Status: Notice mailed welcoming the new permanent resident.
On May 8, 2008, we mailed you a notice that we had registered this customer's new permanent resident status. Please follow any instructions on the notice. Your new permanent resident card should be mailed within 60 days following this registration or after you complete any ADIT processing referred to in the welcome notice, whichever is later.
Congrats!! pal..
Mr. Brown
03-10 04:29 PM
Hello,
I strongly suggest that we focus our time and efforts on a single and achievable target in this calendar year 2009.
Recapturing unused visa numbers from the last two decades would help us eliminate the retrogression issue. Other changes like Comprehensive Immigration Reform, Eliminating per country limits etc would require a leap of faith in the political process and it is unlikely to be achieved in this calendar year. The economy, unemployment rates, health care etc are bound to dominate the legislative agenda this year.
I suggest writing a petition or letter to the White House and the administrative offices strongly urging them to recapture the unused visa numbers.
I think we should follow the KISS ("Keep it Simple, Stupid") Principle to achieve this target.
If we add any other immigration provisions, it would increase the complexity of the legislation and it is bound to fail.
Could the administrators of this forum please consider my suggestion of focusing on recapturing the visa numbers and assign this task the highest priority.
By re-capturing the visa numbers, we are not asking for any change in the immigration laws. We are simply asking to use the visa numbers that had been lost due to inefficient processing by the USCIS.
Let us start preparing a petition and create a dedicated fund to achieve this goal of visa number recapturing.
Thank you.
Great thought about being focussed on one topic that doesn't even need a "reform"!Simplest solution to the retrogression problem I have heard so far.
I strongly suggest that we focus our time and efforts on a single and achievable target in this calendar year 2009.
Recapturing unused visa numbers from the last two decades would help us eliminate the retrogression issue. Other changes like Comprehensive Immigration Reform, Eliminating per country limits etc would require a leap of faith in the political process and it is unlikely to be achieved in this calendar year. The economy, unemployment rates, health care etc are bound to dominate the legislative agenda this year.
I suggest writing a petition or letter to the White House and the administrative offices strongly urging them to recapture the unused visa numbers.
I think we should follow the KISS ("Keep it Simple, Stupid") Principle to achieve this target.
If we add any other immigration provisions, it would increase the complexity of the legislation and it is bound to fail.
Could the administrators of this forum please consider my suggestion of focusing on recapturing the visa numbers and assign this task the highest priority.
By re-capturing the visa numbers, we are not asking for any change in the immigration laws. We are simply asking to use the visa numbers that had been lost due to inefficient processing by the USCIS.
Let us start preparing a petition and create a dedicated fund to achieve this goal of visa number recapturing.
Thank you.
Great thought about being focussed on one topic that doesn't even need a "reform"!Simplest solution to the retrogression problem I have heard so far.
2011 Yankees Photos, Wallpapers
pcs
07-02 07:42 PM
I put in $100 today to fight for our cause
more...
texanguy
06-08 06:26 PM
I thought the spillover starts at July, but it doesnt look that way. When would they do the spillovers? in next two months??? i thought we are done for 2009 quota...
That "small change" of EB2 China PD is very important. It suggests that there is going to be "Spill over" so EB2 India and China will have to move together to use the unused numbers. A good sign; at least EB1 retrogression does not seem to be likely and there will be some spill over numbers to EB2 India (EB2 china may not benefit much as it had a PD later than that for the rest of the year.
Scorpion: how can you say "no spill over". EB2ROW is current and so spill over is likely (more likely from EB1 and even to some extent from EB2 ROW)
Moreover, EB2 ROW remained current meaning that they have not used all their quota; they will not use any spillover numbers and they may even provide spill over numbers to EB2 India and China.
That "small change" of EB2 China PD is very important. It suggests that there is going to be "Spill over" so EB2 India and China will have to move together to use the unused numbers. A good sign; at least EB1 retrogression does not seem to be likely and there will be some spill over numbers to EB2 India (EB2 china may not benefit much as it had a PD later than that for the rest of the year.
Scorpion: how can you say "no spill over". EB2ROW is current and so spill over is likely (more likely from EB1 and even to some extent from EB2 ROW)
Moreover, EB2 ROW remained current meaning that they have not used all their quota; they will not use any spillover numbers and they may even provide spill over numbers to EB2 India and China.
paskal
01-28 11:34 AM
i hear a lot of complaints from you and i do understand your frustration.
i also seem to realize that you want a lot and are holding on to anything you might give in return.
work like lobbying is done in the background- and you seem to know that. it is not the time to send web faxes. last time an update came there was a war here, and there has been an iv newsletter in the new year. unnecessary information provided publicly can backfire on us in the worst way possible. incidentally you are further wrong- lawmaker contacts are taking place and updates are being given- in the state chapters. repeatedly, members have been begged top join a state chapter, or if one does not exist, to help start it. have you joined one? i humbly suggest you do. you may see a lot more action there- and maybe actually do something, rather than constantly whining here that no one is updating you. in our state chapter teleconference an iv core member updated us. subsequently another core member has posted mails on the group with advice and suggestions and resources.
i hate writing posts like this or even responding to posts like this. please understand that people like me who are trying to get things moving are as frustrated as you are, because we can't get enough support.
we are not iv core. and they have full time jobs and families. still, they are traveling, contacting lawmakers, helping and updating state chapters and coordinating with lobbyists and friendly organizations, getting prepared for upcoming legislative action.
if your $20 is dependent on their making more time for you, WITHOUT you making any time for iv except to complain, then maybe it's best in your pocket. you seem to forget, and i have said this before, it's not iv as an organization that will derive any benefit from the money- it is YOU and ME and EVERY OTHER PERSON STUCK IN RETROGRESSION.
so please help yourself. this is not a free lunch. if your money is so valuable, make time. but do something- add members - and then, your complaints will begin to have some legitimacy in other's eyes. if you are doing all these things already, i apologize- but i doubt it- you would be complaining less once you understood how hard it really is to move people off their butts.
enough said and thanks for reading.
i also seem to realize that you want a lot and are holding on to anything you might give in return.
work like lobbying is done in the background- and you seem to know that. it is not the time to send web faxes. last time an update came there was a war here, and there has been an iv newsletter in the new year. unnecessary information provided publicly can backfire on us in the worst way possible. incidentally you are further wrong- lawmaker contacts are taking place and updates are being given- in the state chapters. repeatedly, members have been begged top join a state chapter, or if one does not exist, to help start it. have you joined one? i humbly suggest you do. you may see a lot more action there- and maybe actually do something, rather than constantly whining here that no one is updating you. in our state chapter teleconference an iv core member updated us. subsequently another core member has posted mails on the group with advice and suggestions and resources.
i hate writing posts like this or even responding to posts like this. please understand that people like me who are trying to get things moving are as frustrated as you are, because we can't get enough support.
we are not iv core. and they have full time jobs and families. still, they are traveling, contacting lawmakers, helping and updating state chapters and coordinating with lobbyists and friendly organizations, getting prepared for upcoming legislative action.
if your $20 is dependent on their making more time for you, WITHOUT you making any time for iv except to complain, then maybe it's best in your pocket. you seem to forget, and i have said this before, it's not iv as an organization that will derive any benefit from the money- it is YOU and ME and EVERY OTHER PERSON STUCK IN RETROGRESSION.
so please help yourself. this is not a free lunch. if your money is so valuable, make time. but do something- add members - and then, your complaints will begin to have some legitimacy in other's eyes. if you are doing all these things already, i apologize- but i doubt it- you would be complaining less once you understood how hard it really is to move people off their butts.
enough said and thanks for reading.
more...
msgrewal81
02-18 04:16 PM
1 - It will grant GC to people with > 5 years in US
2 - For EB skilled immigration for people with <5 years in US, it makes LC process more difficult.
Please add your views about this bill, how it might be improved and its chances of becoming a law.
P.S. I previously misread the text somewhere. This bill just eliminate H1B classification for fashion models.
2 - For EB skilled immigration for people with <5 years in US, it makes LC process more difficult.
Please add your views about this bill, how it might be improved and its chances of becoming a law.
P.S. I previously misread the text somewhere. This bill just eliminate H1B classification for fashion models.
2010 new york yankee wallpaper
mchundi
07-24 10:32 AM
To the core group/Senior Members,
If I understand it right, the ability to concurrently file I40/I485 was introduced by the legacy INS through a memo in July of 2002 and it went effective almost immediately on July 31st 2002. I've tried to search for news archives on different law websites and to best of my knowledge it was purely an executive decision taken by INS governing body and no congressional or judicial intervention was needed to allow concurrent filing. In a very similar fashion, the new USCIS has indicated that it wants to discontinue concurrent filing in near future...an executive decision again.
Is it a possibility to get an audience with the USCIS director/start a letter campaign with the goal of getting them issue a memo allowing filing of I485/EAD even if the visa number is not available? The adjucation of the case would obviously happen only after visa number becomes available but as we all know this will be a big relief for all those who want to use AC21 provisions.
Passage of CIR/SKIL is very important in the longer run to reduce the overall greencard processing time and alleviate heavy backlogs but if we get this small relief right now it would help a lot of individuals from retrogressed countries waiting to file I485...and the good thing is, it looks like USCIS might have the ability to effect this change without a lengthy legislative process.
Any thoughts ??
In the recently released ombudsman's report there was a concern that USCIS is giving EAD's for all AOS applications without checking the case and later rejects 20% of the cases.
It might be tough to push them to take a decesion like this.
On the other hand the hospital and doctor's lobby is going to push for some more relief for the nurses VISA numbers if the CIR doesnot materialize this year, If that happens we can try and lobby to attach some of our issues to that.
--MC
If I understand it right, the ability to concurrently file I40/I485 was introduced by the legacy INS through a memo in July of 2002 and it went effective almost immediately on July 31st 2002. I've tried to search for news archives on different law websites and to best of my knowledge it was purely an executive decision taken by INS governing body and no congressional or judicial intervention was needed to allow concurrent filing. In a very similar fashion, the new USCIS has indicated that it wants to discontinue concurrent filing in near future...an executive decision again.
Is it a possibility to get an audience with the USCIS director/start a letter campaign with the goal of getting them issue a memo allowing filing of I485/EAD even if the visa number is not available? The adjucation of the case would obviously happen only after visa number becomes available but as we all know this will be a big relief for all those who want to use AC21 provisions.
Passage of CIR/SKIL is very important in the longer run to reduce the overall greencard processing time and alleviate heavy backlogs but if we get this small relief right now it would help a lot of individuals from retrogressed countries waiting to file I485...and the good thing is, it looks like USCIS might have the ability to effect this change without a lengthy legislative process.
Any thoughts ??
In the recently released ombudsman's report there was a concern that USCIS is giving EAD's for all AOS applications without checking the case and later rejects 20% of the cases.
It might be tough to push them to take a decesion like this.
On the other hand the hospital and doctor's lobby is going to push for some more relief for the nurses VISA numbers if the CIR doesnot materialize this year, If that happens we can try and lobby to attach some of our issues to that.
--MC
more...
Canadian_Dream
04-04 02:18 PM
The Durbin-Grassley bill would prohibit employers from hiring H-1B employees who are then outsourced to other companies. This is a method that some companies use to evade restrictions on hiring H-1Bs.
http://durbin.senate.gov/record.cfm?id=271783
http://durbin.senate.gov/record.cfm?id=271783
hair Yankees Wallpaper 3 by
squishy
02-23 03:54 PM
ohhhhhhhh my goddddddddddddd
tht is cool
man!
i want to do those stuff
i will learn
tell me a good program
If you want a free program blender not free and cheaper than $500 animtion master $300
tht is cool
man!
i want to do those stuff
i will learn
tell me a good program
If you want a free program blender not free and cheaper than $500 animtion master $300
more...
mirage
07-02 08:03 AM
I think you guys keep forgetting IV's success of getting it's amendments as brownback amendment in the CIR last fall. The beauty was the amendment was not even discussed or debated or voted by the senate as it was added by Sen. specter as manager's amendment. So don't make loose statements about IV.
hot This NY Yankees Wallpapers app
waitin_toolong
08-15 04:38 PM
Please link it.
http://travel.state.gov/visa/frvi/bulletin/bulletin_3761.html
http://travel.state.gov/visa/frvi/bulletin/bulletin_3761.html
more...
house wallpaper-daddy-yankee-4-
dilber
07-20 05:37 AM
Here you go - conversion should not impact this as the number of LC approvals remains the same:
Here are all the LC approvals for India in the last seven years.
Year, Total LC Approved, Total India
2007 85112 24573
2006 79782 22298
2005 6133 1350
2004 43582 No Info
2003 62912 No Info
2002 79784 No Info
2001 77921 No Info
2000 70204 No Info
Lets assume about 25% of pre-PERM LCs are India based on post-PERM data. Thus for fiscal 2004 (Oct 2003 thru Sep 2004) the total LC number is 43,852. Assume 25% of that to be India based on PERM data. That gives about 11,000 India LCs in 2004 alone (All EB categories combined). If you assume an average of 2.5 dependents then the number of visas required for all India EB categories for 2004 is 27,500 (11,000*2.5). The regular quota for EB2 and EB3 combined is only about 9,800. That means 17,700 visas have to come from somewhere. I dont think those many visas are remaining for this year. Be prepared to see FIFO thrown under the bus and approvals with PDs that are all over the place. Please critique this analysis without piling on. Thoughts?
EB2 has been on or Apr 2004 for a long time so all the ones before should have got the GC or at least most would have when we are calculation numbers for calculating retrogation We have to consider the numbers in in a particular category 11000 number as you say includes all the EB categories you have to discount out the EB1's because they have got their GCs long back. EB3 will also have to cut out form the calculation because they are not being counted. even if you consider 40% of these to be EB2 (a conservative estimate) then total GC needed including the dependents will be closer to 11000 (Total not just primary) and as Vdlrao and others have shown there should be more than this number available in this fiscal year alone. So I will have to agree with them that the numbers will go back but not all the way to Apr 2004 It should easily come in 2005 range may even come to 2006 since there were very few cases applied during 2005. Also can some one let me know if during 2005 when perm was instigated was regular labor processing also going on or was it completed stopped during that time.
Also conversations will affect this because people converting from EB3 to EB2 will make sure that they port their priority dates and hence if say all the EB3 people from 2003 convert to EB2 and successfully port their dates it will definitely push the dates south of 2003. Did I make sense???
Here are all the LC approvals for India in the last seven years.
Year, Total LC Approved, Total India
2007 85112 24573
2006 79782 22298
2005 6133 1350
2004 43582 No Info
2003 62912 No Info
2002 79784 No Info
2001 77921 No Info
2000 70204 No Info
Lets assume about 25% of pre-PERM LCs are India based on post-PERM data. Thus for fiscal 2004 (Oct 2003 thru Sep 2004) the total LC number is 43,852. Assume 25% of that to be India based on PERM data. That gives about 11,000 India LCs in 2004 alone (All EB categories combined). If you assume an average of 2.5 dependents then the number of visas required for all India EB categories for 2004 is 27,500 (11,000*2.5). The regular quota for EB2 and EB3 combined is only about 9,800. That means 17,700 visas have to come from somewhere. I dont think those many visas are remaining for this year. Be prepared to see FIFO thrown under the bus and approvals with PDs that are all over the place. Please critique this analysis without piling on. Thoughts?
EB2 has been on or Apr 2004 for a long time so all the ones before should have got the GC or at least most would have when we are calculation numbers for calculating retrogation We have to consider the numbers in in a particular category 11000 number as you say includes all the EB categories you have to discount out the EB1's because they have got their GCs long back. EB3 will also have to cut out form the calculation because they are not being counted. even if you consider 40% of these to be EB2 (a conservative estimate) then total GC needed including the dependents will be closer to 11000 (Total not just primary) and as Vdlrao and others have shown there should be more than this number available in this fiscal year alone. So I will have to agree with them that the numbers will go back but not all the way to Apr 2004 It should easily come in 2005 range may even come to 2006 since there were very few cases applied during 2005. Also can some one let me know if during 2005 when perm was instigated was regular labor processing also going on or was it completed stopped during that time.
Also conversations will affect this because people converting from EB3 to EB2 will make sure that they port their priority dates and hence if say all the EB3 people from 2003 convert to EB2 and successfully port their dates it will definitely push the dates south of 2003. Did I make sense???
tattoo NY YANKEES - flag, New York,
greyhair
06-10 02:06 PM
There is no point in arguing with each other just to see this bill in a manner to exclude each one of us. EAD is work authorization even when it is not a visa. The intent of the bill will matter. The clear intent is to not allow hiring of non-citizens by companies engaged in mass layoff, which could include EADs. What's the point of arguing if someone gets an RFE for employment letter? It's not relevant.
What should/can we all do to prevent this from passing? What does IV core want us to do?
What should/can we all do to prevent this from passing? What does IV core want us to do?
more...
pictures new york yankees wallpapers.
arihant
04-27 09:59 AM
Good find, Sat0207.
Where did you get the information?
Where did you get the information?
dresses New York Yankees Wallpaper
pcs
11-10 09:06 PM
Guys..
I have been watching and participating in this drama for a long time....
We must go to court for the correct interpretation and enforcement of UNUSED VISA from ROW / undersubscribed catagories. THERE IS NO CASE FOR EVEN WAITING FOR ONE QUARTER. 20,000 VISA are available unused at a given time, they should ALL be immediately allocated to the guys in the Q.
This will benefit all EB 2 / EB 3
We really should not have any debate about loosing the case etc... Let us try and loose the case... At least , we will have the satisfaction of trying...
If your are with me please respond to this thread
We MUST take the advantage of low VISA usage in this recession and cut the line by tens of thousand
I have been watching and participating in this drama for a long time....
We must go to court for the correct interpretation and enforcement of UNUSED VISA from ROW / undersubscribed catagories. THERE IS NO CASE FOR EVEN WAITING FOR ONE QUARTER. 20,000 VISA are available unused at a given time, they should ALL be immediately allocated to the guys in the Q.
This will benefit all EB 2 / EB 3
We really should not have any debate about loosing the case etc... Let us try and loose the case... At least , we will have the satisfaction of trying...
If your are with me please respond to this thread
We MUST take the advantage of low VISA usage in this recession and cut the line by tens of thousand
more...
makeup new york yankees wallpaper
krishmunn
08-31 02:25 PM
I just found that Aspen University is offering online MBA at $3600 (end to end) + books.
The univ is accredited by DTE but not sure about its market value.
I am thinking about low cost MBA and the options (apart from newly discovered super low cost Aspen) are --
University of South Dakota (USD) (18 K)
&
University of Massachusetts (UMass) (30 K)
Does any one know if USD has a decent market value ?
The univ is accredited by DTE but not sure about its market value.
I am thinking about low cost MBA and the options (apart from newly discovered super low cost Aspen) are --
University of South Dakota (USD) (18 K)
&
University of Massachusetts (UMass) (30 K)
Does any one know if USD has a decent market value ?
girlfriend Daddy-yankee-mobile-wallpaper
catchupvijay
06-11 02:01 PM
Thanks!
hairstyles Yankee Stadium (Sports Complex
Jaime
09-10 12:41 PM
You are reminded often that you are a second class citizen - There is so much of this...where to start? How about renewing a driver's license? Cannot do it unless you bring your immigration papers with you, and then you are given a driver license only for the duration of your current visa extension, and that is if you're lucky, as it often just gets denied.
Indirant
03-07 08:45 PM
Varsha,
I have not heard any reply. waiting for repsonse to Ajay's request.
Thanks
Sekar
I have not heard any reply. waiting for repsonse to Ajay's request.
Thanks
Sekar
abhijitp
07-25 05:14 PM
This is not new but only Lawyers and the employers who filed your GC knows what position and job duties on which they applied your GC.
Position and job duties on which they applied your GC = whatever they said in your PERM/ labor cert application. If they make a change to that during the I-140 or I-485 stage, that itself will lead to RFE, if not to rejection! Some of us may not have the copy of the labor cert/PERM approval, but if so, one should try to look for the form that you (hopefully) reviewed during the first stage. For PERM this is ETA form 9089.
Position and job duties on which they applied your GC = whatever they said in your PERM/ labor cert application. If they make a change to that during the I-140 or I-485 stage, that itself will lead to RFE, if not to rejection! Some of us may not have the copy of the labor cert/PERM approval, but if so, one should try to look for the form that you (hopefully) reviewed during the first stage. For PERM this is ETA form 9089.
No comments:
Post a Comment