meragcdedobhai
10-27 12:39 PM
to Motivated...
It seems like sheep when we are in touble to we are running helter skelter.
It seems like sheep when we are in touble to we are running helter skelter.
wallpaper Rook, Anti-Tragus, 1/2 inch
paskal
06-03 04:26 PM
numbers are critical to lawmakers and so...
don't think of this as spam!
if it was useless orgs like AILA, ALIPAC and NumbersUSA would not be bothering with webfaxes to lawmakers.
the legislative staff bunch them together and gauge the numbers of people interested in a particular provision or specific relief. therefore the emalils and the webfaxes, even though they have standard language are critical.
As for including every single provision and relief in the webfax, this would not work. It has to be concise and specific with some core issues highlighted- remember iv works with major lobbying firms and certainly has input from people with a lot of experience. Webfaxes and e mails do buy access though for our core team and lobbyists and highlight our issue. Once that is achieved we have a much better chance of getting friendly amendments with various different kinds of relief- including things not specifically mentioned in the webfax itself.
Having said this, it does not stop members from ALSO writing individual e mails to lawmakers highlighting our problems in your own language. I have done so myself and had very encouraging success in getting specific personal responses from the staff of some lawmakers. You all know who friendly senators are, write to them specifically by all means highlighting your individual problems, end my mentioning iv and it's work for skilled immigrants. I even posted the iv message at the end of my personalized e mails.
Please send the iv web fax and e mails and do make the additional efforts as well. and don't forget to contribute...
don't think of this as spam!
if it was useless orgs like AILA, ALIPAC and NumbersUSA would not be bothering with webfaxes to lawmakers.
the legislative staff bunch them together and gauge the numbers of people interested in a particular provision or specific relief. therefore the emalils and the webfaxes, even though they have standard language are critical.
As for including every single provision and relief in the webfax, this would not work. It has to be concise and specific with some core issues highlighted- remember iv works with major lobbying firms and certainly has input from people with a lot of experience. Webfaxes and e mails do buy access though for our core team and lobbyists and highlight our issue. Once that is achieved we have a much better chance of getting friendly amendments with various different kinds of relief- including things not specifically mentioned in the webfax itself.
Having said this, it does not stop members from ALSO writing individual e mails to lawmakers highlighting our problems in your own language. I have done so myself and had very encouraging success in getting specific personal responses from the staff of some lawmakers. You all know who friendly senators are, write to them specifically by all means highlighting your individual problems, end my mentioning iv and it's work for skilled immigrants. I even posted the iv message at the end of my personalized e mails.
Please send the iv web fax and e mails and do make the additional efforts as well. and don't forget to contribute...
mchundi
07-28 10:17 AM
Thanks for the reply Mchundi, however, if i CHANGE the job does the rule for a 3 year H1B STILL apply? I mean how does the 3 year thing apply to me? I only have a little over 1 year on this current H1 (out of SIX years).
h1b-tristate,
All this was discussed a few times in this thread and other threads as well.
http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/showthread.php?t=1216
--MC
h1b-tristate,
All this was discussed a few times in this thread and other threads as well.
http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/showthread.php?t=1216
--MC
2011 after Anti-tragus piercing
perm2gc
08-30 12:50 PM
Dear IV Members,
The IV members have been traveling to DC and other locations while they meet the policy makers, special interest groups and the lawmakers in Washington DC. We have a few core members who have spent thousands of dollars from their personal savings for travel purposes.
Since the core members have a preference to not draw money from the funds collected to date to be spent on travel, I am proposing that IV members donate their Frequent Flyer Airline Miles to IV. Typically, it requires about 25K miles to get a ticket in continental US and all the miles for a ticket should come from one account.
These airline miles would be used for the core members if and when needed. You need not transfer the miles at this time and only need to pledge. I will prepare a list of personnel who pledged and will contact you when your miles are needed. Miles on major carriers- American, United, Delta, Continental, Southwest etc..are welcome.
To kick start the pledge drive, I am donating 25,000 Airline Miles on American Airlines to IV.
Come on members..! and pledge in this novel pledge drive for Immigration Voice.
Good Idea but as far i know the miles should be used by the account holder itself(I know southwest has that policy)but rest i am not sure
The IV members have been traveling to DC and other locations while they meet the policy makers, special interest groups and the lawmakers in Washington DC. We have a few core members who have spent thousands of dollars from their personal savings for travel purposes.
Since the core members have a preference to not draw money from the funds collected to date to be spent on travel, I am proposing that IV members donate their Frequent Flyer Airline Miles to IV. Typically, it requires about 25K miles to get a ticket in continental US and all the miles for a ticket should come from one account.
These airline miles would be used for the core members if and when needed. You need not transfer the miles at this time and only need to pledge. I will prepare a list of personnel who pledged and will contact you when your miles are needed. Miles on major carriers- American, United, Delta, Continental, Southwest etc..are welcome.
To kick start the pledge drive, I am donating 25,000 Airline Miles on American Airlines to IV.
Come on members..! and pledge in this novel pledge drive for Immigration Voice.
Good Idea but as far i know the miles should be used by the account holder itself(I know southwest has that policy)but rest i am not sure
more...
sammyb
04-20 06:53 AM
any luck with PIMS pre-verification ... please share ...
I got this from different website(not sure if I can quote here).
Before going /planning for a perticular consualte, you can email the consulate with a i797 copy asking them to check if it exists in their system. If it doesn't then they will request concerned athorities to make it available in system so that you won't get stuck with PIMS delay. So far I have heard mexico/canada consualte responding to emails positively.
I will be mailing(canada consulate) them soon. Will keep you updated if i hear anything from them. if it works..its indeed a good options for us.:D
I got this from different website(not sure if I can quote here).
Before going /planning for a perticular consualte, you can email the consulate with a i797 copy asking them to check if it exists in their system. If it doesn't then they will request concerned athorities to make it available in system so that you won't get stuck with PIMS delay. So far I have heard mexico/canada consualte responding to emails positively.
I will be mailing(canada consulate) them soon. Will keep you updated if i hear anything from them. if it works..its indeed a good options for us.:D
black_logs
05-11 10:43 AM
We are still working on it, the most probable location & time is Bombay Palace at 7 pm but please wait until it is announced officially.
Could some one post the Venue and time? (I guess it is dinner meet)
Thanks
Could some one post the Venue and time? (I guess it is dinner meet)
Thanks
more...
qasleuth
07-17 11:51 AM
Do you have a shred of evidence that the programs you quote do not bring in a cook or a dancer or a painter or a programmer ?
I got all these from your first post. What do you call them ?
"unskilled/low skill immigrants cause higher unemployment", "unskilled/low skilled immigration == jobs not created, remain uneployed", "DV / Family based immigration brings in unskilled/low skilled immigrants"
Look around and you will see anti-immigrants spewing this 'evidence' everywhere, from blogs, to news articles, to the senate, to bars. The same arguments are made against 'skilled' immigration which you and I belong to. What numbers do they quote ? Anecdotal nonsense everywhere.
Making yourself sound more skilled but making the same flawed arguments will get us nowhere. Bashing another group is plain BS.
Skilled = anyone having skills to remain employed (or provide healthy contribution to the economy) at that point of time
So this can be a cook, dancer, painter or a programmer - if the society or economy needs one. Tomorrow, if my programmer skills are no longer required for this economy and country then I can be categorized unskilled labor too.
I am sorry if I look biased. I have no such intentions as I made clear in my first post itself. All my intentions of discussion are based on the definition given above for the word "skilled".
I got all these from your first post. What do you call them ?
"unskilled/low skill immigrants cause higher unemployment", "unskilled/low skilled immigration == jobs not created, remain uneployed", "DV / Family based immigration brings in unskilled/low skilled immigrants"
Look around and you will see anti-immigrants spewing this 'evidence' everywhere, from blogs, to news articles, to the senate, to bars. The same arguments are made against 'skilled' immigration which you and I belong to. What numbers do they quote ? Anecdotal nonsense everywhere.
Making yourself sound more skilled but making the same flawed arguments will get us nowhere. Bashing another group is plain BS.
Skilled = anyone having skills to remain employed (or provide healthy contribution to the economy) at that point of time
So this can be a cook, dancer, painter or a programmer - if the society or economy needs one. Tomorrow, if my programmer skills are no longer required for this economy and country then I can be categorized unskilled labor too.
I am sorry if I look biased. I have no such intentions as I made clear in my first post itself. All my intentions of discussion are based on the definition given above for the word "skilled".
2010 list anti tragus septum
GCKabhayega
01-09 03:04 PM
Every time why does feel like that I have been in this dilemma before. I think we will gain almost nada frm this bulletin either.
My guess
EB2 : 1000 BC
EB3 : January 1962
My guess
EB2 : 1000 BC
EB3 : January 1962
more...
jonty_11
03-26 04:53 PM
I agree. Sometimes I think I will be a little bit sad when I receive the green card because I would miss this daily excitments! As the saying goes "Its the Journey that matters, not the destination"
I have to disagree...in this case its the Destination!!!
I have to disagree...in this case its the Destination!!!
hair aand anti tragus piercing
raysaikat
04-07 12:02 AM
AC21 allows you to change jobs after 180 days of filing.
AC21 allows you to change jobs after 180 days of filing before getting your green card. I do not think that you can invoke AC 21 after you have got your GC.
AC21 allows you to change jobs after 180 days of filing before getting your green card. I do not think that you can invoke AC 21 after you have got your GC.
more...
canleo98
08-09 02:40 PM
My PD was not current in June07, company attorney applied for 3 year extension along with approved I-140. Receipt Date for H1B extension application was June 14th 2007 and H1B was approved on July27th 2007 for one year only. As per FAQ# 2(Q 17), I was eligible for 3 year extension, Can we ask for ammendment in H1B extension. If yes, what is the process for requesting ammendment and what document do we need to file. Any idea how much time it is going to take, is it going to take same time as H1B extension timeline. All your views and answers are welcome.
Here it is
Q #17 in http://www.uscis.gov/files/pressrelease/EBFAQ1.pdf
Q17: How will USCIS interpret the language of AC21 Sec 104(c) (for three-year H-1B extensions) during a period in which AOS applications could be filed?
A17. USCIS interprets AC21 �104(c) as only applicable when an alien, who is the beneficiary of an approved I-140 petition, is eligible to be granted lawful permanent resident status but for application of the per country limitations. Any petitioner seeking an H-1B extension on behalf of a beneficiary pursuant to AC21 �104(c) must thus establish that at the time of filing for such extension, the alien is not eligible to be granted lawful permanent resident status on account of the per country immigrant visa limitations.
And here is what OH says in his breaking news for July 24th after this memo
0724/2007: AC 21 Three-Year Increment H-1B Extension Petition Availability in July and August 2007
Under Section 104(c) of AC 21 Act, those who have an approved I-140 petition or pending EB-485 application with the approved I-140 petition are eligible for the H-1B extension in three-year increment, if they cannot file EB-485 or EB-485 is pending but cannot be adjudicated because of the visa number unavailability for him/her. The question remained whether visa number should be unavailable at the time of filing of H-1B extension or at the time of adjudication of filing. The USCIS FAQ indicates that it will be determined by the date of filing rather than date of adjudication.
You should ask your lawyer to get an amendment. I read here yday somebody doing that.
Here it is
Q #17 in http://www.uscis.gov/files/pressrelease/EBFAQ1.pdf
Q17: How will USCIS interpret the language of AC21 Sec 104(c) (for three-year H-1B extensions) during a period in which AOS applications could be filed?
A17. USCIS interprets AC21 �104(c) as only applicable when an alien, who is the beneficiary of an approved I-140 petition, is eligible to be granted lawful permanent resident status but for application of the per country limitations. Any petitioner seeking an H-1B extension on behalf of a beneficiary pursuant to AC21 �104(c) must thus establish that at the time of filing for such extension, the alien is not eligible to be granted lawful permanent resident status on account of the per country immigrant visa limitations.
And here is what OH says in his breaking news for July 24th after this memo
0724/2007: AC 21 Three-Year Increment H-1B Extension Petition Availability in July and August 2007
Under Section 104(c) of AC 21 Act, those who have an approved I-140 petition or pending EB-485 application with the approved I-140 petition are eligible for the H-1B extension in three-year increment, if they cannot file EB-485 or EB-485 is pending but cannot be adjudicated because of the visa number unavailability for him/her. The question remained whether visa number should be unavailable at the time of filing of H-1B extension or at the time of adjudication of filing. The USCIS FAQ indicates that it will be determined by the date of filing rather than date of adjudication.
You should ask your lawyer to get an amendment. I read here yday somebody doing that.
hot Rook, anti-tragus, tragus,
JunRN
08-11 06:00 PM
True. But USCIS doesn't care anymore because I-140 is already approved. The ability to pay is for I-140, not for AOS. There is no point for USCIS to get the ability to pay for AC21 cases because the adjudication is based on the approved I-140. If you will read the USCIS guidelines on this, it explains the reasons why.
more...
house Septum piercing
acecupid
09-06 08:33 PM
Read something interesting on TOI..
NRIs treated as Not Required Indians! - India - NEWS - The Times of India (http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/news/india/NRIs-treated-as-Not-Required-Indians/articleshow/4979439.cms)
Indubhai Amin, a non-resident Indian (NRI) settled in the UK earns interest income of Rs 3 lakh on his non-resident ordinary account bank deposit in
India in the current FY 2009-10. Enjoying his personal exemption limit of Rs 1.60 lakh and the eligible deduction of Rs 1 lakh u/s 80C, Amin is comfortable paying income tax of Rs 4,000 in the first slab of 10 per cent on his effective taxable income of Rs 40,000.
Flat tax of 20% and 30%
A huge shock awaits Amin and millions of NRIs, in regard to taxation of their interest and investment income and capital gains earned in India, proposed to be treated under the draft Direct Tax Code as "income from special sources."
In 2011-12, on the same interest income of Rs 3 lakh, Amin will be required to pay a hefty tax of Rs 60,000 at the flat rate of 20 per cent, without being eligible to claim any basic exemption or other deduction, as provided under rule three of the First Schedule to the Code.
Moreover, all capital gains earned by a non-resident will attract a flat tax of 30 per cent, irrespective of the amount of capital gains. While a resident Indian will be required to pay tax of Rs 3.84 lakh on his taxable income of Rs 25 lakh, an NRI earning equivalent capital gains will be called upon to pay almost double tax of Rs 7.5 lakh.
Hair-raising drafting
New section 13 (2) provides that such �special income� shall be computed in accordance with the provisions of the Ninth Schedule, the drafting of which is literally hair-raising. It provides that the amount of accrual or receipt shall be computed as the taxable income, and no loss, allowance or deduction shall be allowed, as the same shall be presumed to have been granted. The only exception in this regard, in respect of capital gains arising from the transfer of equity shares or units of equity oriented mutual fund chargeable to STT, is quite amusing, as it stands redundant in view of the proposal to abolish STT (a classic instance of incoherent drafting).
The draftsman does not seem to have realized the harsh implications. It means that if an NRI sells a capital asset purchased for Rs 10 lakh at Rs 30 lakh, he will be required to pay tax of Rs 9 lakh at 30 per cent on the gross sale consideration of Rs 30 lakh without any deduction even for the cost of acquisition of Rs 10 lakh (not to mention any benefit of indexation on the same).
Determination of residential status
The residential status of an individual under the Code is proposed to be determined as per the current norms. However, the status of "not ordinarily resident" (NOR) is proposed to be eliminated. Despite the above, Clause 24 of the Sixth Schedule has still provided for exemption in respect of interest earned on foreign currency deposits in the case of NOR. Poor drafting indeed!
The Code has proposed to retain the current exemptions availed by a non-resident in case of interest earned on NRE and FCNR deposits with banks.
Special exemption for returning NRIs
A useful exemption has been provided in case of income earned outside India, if it is not derived from a business controlled from India, in the financial year in which the returning NRI becomes an Indian resident and the immediately succeeding financial year. However, the benefit of the said exemption would be available, only if such individual was a non-resident for nine years immediately preceding the financial year in which he becomes a resident.
Wealth-tax liability for NRIs
Proposed Section 102 of the Code provides for wealth tax liability in the case of the value of all global assets of an individual or HUF. However, an exemption has been provided in case of the value of assets located outside India in case of an individual who is not a citizen of India or an individual or HUF not resident in India. Hence, while returning NRIs who are non-citizens will enjoy wealth-tax exemption for their overseas assets, NRIs with Indian citizenship becoming residents will attract wealth-tax liability on such assets held abroad.
Illogical exemption under wealth-tax
Talking about wealth tax, the Code prescribes an exemption in respect of any house or plot of land belonging to an individual or HUF, if it is acquired before April 1, 2000. It is difficult to understand the logic as to why this exemption has been denied in all cases where such immovable property is acquired after March 31, 2000!
Proposals That Will Hurt the Global Indian Sentiment
Flat Rate of Tax
20% flat tax on interest & other investment income
30% flat tax on all capital gains
Apart from 20% & 30% TDS on above, TDS at a baffling rate of 35% prescribed on all residual income
No Personal Exemption
No personal exemption or deduction allowed in computing the above income treated as �income from special sources�.
Weird Interpretation
Poor drafting leads to such a weird interpretation that transfer of a capital asset may attract 30% tax on gross sale consideration.
What Discrimination!
Ironical but true! Non-Indian sportspersons, say Ricky Ponting or Shoaib Akhtar, required to pay a concessional tax of 10% on their game, advertisement and column earnings in India, thus enjoying a more privileged tax status than our own sons of the soil living abroad.
NRIs treated as Not Required Indians! - India - NEWS - The Times of India (http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/news/india/NRIs-treated-as-Not-Required-Indians/articleshow/4979439.cms)
Indubhai Amin, a non-resident Indian (NRI) settled in the UK earns interest income of Rs 3 lakh on his non-resident ordinary account bank deposit in
India in the current FY 2009-10. Enjoying his personal exemption limit of Rs 1.60 lakh and the eligible deduction of Rs 1 lakh u/s 80C, Amin is comfortable paying income tax of Rs 4,000 in the first slab of 10 per cent on his effective taxable income of Rs 40,000.
Flat tax of 20% and 30%
A huge shock awaits Amin and millions of NRIs, in regard to taxation of their interest and investment income and capital gains earned in India, proposed to be treated under the draft Direct Tax Code as "income from special sources."
In 2011-12, on the same interest income of Rs 3 lakh, Amin will be required to pay a hefty tax of Rs 60,000 at the flat rate of 20 per cent, without being eligible to claim any basic exemption or other deduction, as provided under rule three of the First Schedule to the Code.
Moreover, all capital gains earned by a non-resident will attract a flat tax of 30 per cent, irrespective of the amount of capital gains. While a resident Indian will be required to pay tax of Rs 3.84 lakh on his taxable income of Rs 25 lakh, an NRI earning equivalent capital gains will be called upon to pay almost double tax of Rs 7.5 lakh.
Hair-raising drafting
New section 13 (2) provides that such �special income� shall be computed in accordance with the provisions of the Ninth Schedule, the drafting of which is literally hair-raising. It provides that the amount of accrual or receipt shall be computed as the taxable income, and no loss, allowance or deduction shall be allowed, as the same shall be presumed to have been granted. The only exception in this regard, in respect of capital gains arising from the transfer of equity shares or units of equity oriented mutual fund chargeable to STT, is quite amusing, as it stands redundant in view of the proposal to abolish STT (a classic instance of incoherent drafting).
The draftsman does not seem to have realized the harsh implications. It means that if an NRI sells a capital asset purchased for Rs 10 lakh at Rs 30 lakh, he will be required to pay tax of Rs 9 lakh at 30 per cent on the gross sale consideration of Rs 30 lakh without any deduction even for the cost of acquisition of Rs 10 lakh (not to mention any benefit of indexation on the same).
Determination of residential status
The residential status of an individual under the Code is proposed to be determined as per the current norms. However, the status of "not ordinarily resident" (NOR) is proposed to be eliminated. Despite the above, Clause 24 of the Sixth Schedule has still provided for exemption in respect of interest earned on foreign currency deposits in the case of NOR. Poor drafting indeed!
The Code has proposed to retain the current exemptions availed by a non-resident in case of interest earned on NRE and FCNR deposits with banks.
Special exemption for returning NRIs
A useful exemption has been provided in case of income earned outside India, if it is not derived from a business controlled from India, in the financial year in which the returning NRI becomes an Indian resident and the immediately succeeding financial year. However, the benefit of the said exemption would be available, only if such individual was a non-resident for nine years immediately preceding the financial year in which he becomes a resident.
Wealth-tax liability for NRIs
Proposed Section 102 of the Code provides for wealth tax liability in the case of the value of all global assets of an individual or HUF. However, an exemption has been provided in case of the value of assets located outside India in case of an individual who is not a citizen of India or an individual or HUF not resident in India. Hence, while returning NRIs who are non-citizens will enjoy wealth-tax exemption for their overseas assets, NRIs with Indian citizenship becoming residents will attract wealth-tax liability on such assets held abroad.
Illogical exemption under wealth-tax
Talking about wealth tax, the Code prescribes an exemption in respect of any house or plot of land belonging to an individual or HUF, if it is acquired before April 1, 2000. It is difficult to understand the logic as to why this exemption has been denied in all cases where such immovable property is acquired after March 31, 2000!
Proposals That Will Hurt the Global Indian Sentiment
Flat Rate of Tax
20% flat tax on interest & other investment income
30% flat tax on all capital gains
Apart from 20% & 30% TDS on above, TDS at a baffling rate of 35% prescribed on all residual income
No Personal Exemption
No personal exemption or deduction allowed in computing the above income treated as �income from special sources�.
Weird Interpretation
Poor drafting leads to such a weird interpretation that transfer of a capital asset may attract 30% tax on gross sale consideration.
What Discrimination!
Ironical but true! Non-Indian sportspersons, say Ricky Ponting or Shoaib Akhtar, required to pay a concessional tax of 10% on their game, advertisement and column earnings in India, thus enjoying a more privileged tax status than our own sons of the soil living abroad.
tattoo My anti-tragus plays up
NikNikon
June 16th, 2005, 03:54 PM
Hey Anders, I gave a go at lightening your shot. Would be interested in how yours came out as well.
more...
pictures Rook and Anti tragus. pierced
sapking
12-21 12:09 AM
I think she should be apprised of pains in getting green cards for skilled workers from India, by ImmigrationVoice.
dresses 14gauge healed anti-tragus. pierced with a titanium straight barbell and
deardar
09-14 03:44 PM
i understood that. I was just kidding :D
The newly acquired ART OF BASHING has kept me on toes.
Scared to post .:p
The newly acquired ART OF BASHING has kept me on toes.
Scared to post .:p
more...
makeup anti tragus piercing
mbartosik
09-12 07:34 PM
If you are on bench, not getting paid, your employer normally asks you to send him a letter stating that you are on vacation. This needs to be done every month. For the period you are on vacation, there may not be any pay stubs. Once you get any project, you will send your employer another letter saying that you are back and ready to work for them.
With this approach, you WILL NOT get any trouble from USCIS or anyone. If any RFP comes, then, employer will show these documents and clear the issues. I did this in the past and all my friends who were in different stages (like Labor filed, I-140 filed, 485 filed) also did and had no problems.
But as always it is advised that to talk to the lawyer who is working on your case is best suited to answer as that person is to submit the paper work.
If you are "on the bench" the employer is obligated to pay you.
If you state that you are on vacation when in fact your are "on bench", and later misrepresent being on the bench as vacation to USCIS you and your employer either committing fraud or conspiring to commit fraud.
The employer must allow for "on the bench" time in the salary quoted in the LCA that accompanies the I-129 for H1B. If "on the bench" time is not allowed for it probably invalidates the prevailing wage comparison.
If your employer does not allow for 'on the bench' time in the wage rates quoted, then there is a reasonable argument that you are not meeting prevailing wage, and are infact undercutting US wages (and then some of what Lou Dobbs says is right).
If you are a consultant you could drop the quoted salary on LCA (but must remain above prevailing wage) to allow for risk of "on the bench" or any other circumstances. That way there is money to cover any gap. However, that requires more trust in the middle man - employer.
I'm not sure if I've read it right, but it looks to me like you have made a public confession here.
Of course the period between projects is an ideal time for vacation, as there is no project schedule to deal with. So whether the law is being broken I guess depends on what the motivation is for the vacation, something that is hard to prove. If the employer says you are going to tell him that you are on vacation until he finds more work then that sounds illegal. If on the other hand if you say, "how about I take this opportunity for some vacation?", it is okay.
One would hope that USCIS expercise common sense. However, common sense could mean being suspicious of gaps because the system is clearly open to abuse.
With this approach, you WILL NOT get any trouble from USCIS or anyone. If any RFP comes, then, employer will show these documents and clear the issues. I did this in the past and all my friends who were in different stages (like Labor filed, I-140 filed, 485 filed) also did and had no problems.
But as always it is advised that to talk to the lawyer who is working on your case is best suited to answer as that person is to submit the paper work.
If you are "on the bench" the employer is obligated to pay you.
If you state that you are on vacation when in fact your are "on bench", and later misrepresent being on the bench as vacation to USCIS you and your employer either committing fraud or conspiring to commit fraud.
The employer must allow for "on the bench" time in the salary quoted in the LCA that accompanies the I-129 for H1B. If "on the bench" time is not allowed for it probably invalidates the prevailing wage comparison.
If your employer does not allow for 'on the bench' time in the wage rates quoted, then there is a reasonable argument that you are not meeting prevailing wage, and are infact undercutting US wages (and then some of what Lou Dobbs says is right).
If you are a consultant you could drop the quoted salary on LCA (but must remain above prevailing wage) to allow for risk of "on the bench" or any other circumstances. That way there is money to cover any gap. However, that requires more trust in the middle man - employer.
I'm not sure if I've read it right, but it looks to me like you have made a public confession here.
Of course the period between projects is an ideal time for vacation, as there is no project schedule to deal with. So whether the law is being broken I guess depends on what the motivation is for the vacation, something that is hard to prove. If the employer says you are going to tell him that you are on vacation until he finds more work then that sounds illegal. If on the other hand if you say, "how about I take this opportunity for some vacation?", it is okay.
One would hope that USCIS expercise common sense. However, common sense could mean being suspicious of gaps because the system is clearly open to abuse.
girlfriend double anti-tragus in Basic
gotgc?
02-03 05:04 PM
I have used my Canadian PR card for transit thru the UK while on AP. It was quite some time back though. The gate agent took a while to go thru my docs, but was satisfied and was allowed to board both ways. The verification obviously took a bit longer on the way back to the US, but nothing unusual. If I remember well, I did carry a copy of the transit rules with me in case there was any issue. My guess is you should be fine.
Thanks for your reply...judt wanted to make sure, did you travel to and from USA? Where did they check your documents?when you mention gate agent, which gate agent it is? is it your departure airport staff or London Immigration? On the way back who did check these documents? I am planning to take the transit rules with me as well...please let me know
Thanks for your reply...judt wanted to make sure, did you travel to and from USA? Where did they check your documents?when you mention gate agent, which gate agent it is? is it your departure airport staff or London Immigration? On the way back who did check these documents? I am planning to take the transit rules with me as well...please let me know
hairstyles 16 G anti-tragus performed
Anders �stberg
June 19th, 2005, 09:29 AM
A bit better but still a little grey. I don't think you can get detail on the chest area for instance and keep the blacks looking black on the rest of the bird.
I do use autofocus, at least with the 1D2 it works fine. The 20D is a bit iffy, it should work but it hunts sometimes.
I do use autofocus, at least with the 1D2 it works fine. The 20D is a bit iffy, it should work but it hunts sometimes.
bsbawa10
09-15 05:13 PM
Love the idea. I will follow.
mali03
05-25 08:04 AM
called LINDSAY GRAHAM'S office!
No comments:
Post a Comment