Administrator2
06-11 01:35 PM
If you really believe that this bogus bill will become a Law, then also see the real picture, that is why I posted the other Ifs.
This Bill is titled as "Employ America Act". By having the GC, you are not an American. If you do not know the rule here it is, GC is a "Privilege", and it is not a "Right". So if this Bill passes all these people with alerady having GC will also need to pack their Bags and Go. That is the reality, dude.
So again and again do not fall over it. If you respond to this Bill, and Vote "No" against it, you are trying to send wrong messages to the originators of the bill, that we are scared. Why you guys are making everyone scared, when there is nothing to be scared about.
Look I don't want to say this to you but I am left with no other choice. When CEOs such as Steve Ballmer and John Chambers are personally calling the Senators because they think this amendment is a real threat, it will be least of our worries what opponents would think about us getting scared. We are not scared, we are simply making our voices heard. If we were scared we won't be doing this.
Now, you have no freaking clue of what is going on behind the scenes, this is your third post in this forum and all these posts in opposition to our action item which we are coordinating with other coalition partners. Why do you think you know more than the folks who are right now speaking with the Senators?
This Bill is titled as "Employ America Act". By having the GC, you are not an American. If you do not know the rule here it is, GC is a "Privilege", and it is not a "Right". So if this Bill passes all these people with alerady having GC will also need to pack their Bags and Go. That is the reality, dude.
So again and again do not fall over it. If you respond to this Bill, and Vote "No" against it, you are trying to send wrong messages to the originators of the bill, that we are scared. Why you guys are making everyone scared, when there is nothing to be scared about.
Look I don't want to say this to you but I am left with no other choice. When CEOs such as Steve Ballmer and John Chambers are personally calling the Senators because they think this amendment is a real threat, it will be least of our worries what opponents would think about us getting scared. We are not scared, we are simply making our voices heard. If we were scared we won't be doing this.
Now, you have no freaking clue of what is going on behind the scenes, this is your third post in this forum and all these posts in opposition to our action item which we are coordinating with other coalition partners. Why do you think you know more than the folks who are right now speaking with the Senators?
wallpaper Cruella de Vil; Evil Queen
sukhwinderd
02-22 09:22 AM
with StarSun. there are so many people in neighboring states (to DC) who can come during advocacy days, or atleast offer accomodation, hotel pickup drop offs. hardly anything to loose. its pathetic that people will line up for free lunch, but will not do anything to get it, even when there is nothing to loose.
delax
07-19 08:55 PM
We need a realistic estimate of how many applications are pending with PD in 2004, which really seems like the bottleneck. Another thing to bear in mind is the conversion from EB3->EB2. That is also going to hinder the movement of EB2. There are a lot of people trying to use that route.
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?
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?
2011 Creative Makeup Photoshoot
prioritydate
12-20 08:42 PM
Correct me if I am wrong, but you've had unexpired H1B while you were out of work. This is not considered unlawful presence. On top of that, violation of status determination can be done only by the USCIS (IO). If they did not inform you that you violated status, you are good to go.
Well, I moved a lot since 2001 and I don't know if the IO sent any documents to my previous address. Yes, I have unexpired H1B visa till Oct 2002(I-94 valid until Oct, 2002). In Apr, 2005, I went to Canada for stamping of my new H1B. I again made an appointment in Jan, 2008.
Well, I moved a lot since 2001 and I don't know if the IO sent any documents to my previous address. Yes, I have unexpired H1B visa till Oct 2002(I-94 valid until Oct, 2002). In Apr, 2005, I went to Canada for stamping of my new H1B. I again made an appointment in Jan, 2008.
more...
dealsnet
03-19 08:17 AM
See Ron Gotcher's Immigration news letter.
http://imminfo.com/resources/newsletter/2008-03Newsletter.pdf
http://imminfo.com/resources/newsletter/2008-03Newsletter.pdf
srkamath
07-13 07:33 PM
Hi srkamath
My actual RD is 2nd July, my notices show it as 30th of July. Do you think we should try you get that corrected? Is that posssible at all?
Thanks
Lucky you, you might start seeing LUDs on you case by the end of this month. If you do please send me a message.
Reg correcting the dates, USCIS usually takes months to respond to such things. I'm not gonna do anything about it for my case, unless the processing dates show virtually no movement.
My understanding of process.date is that it is the oldest date of completed cases - which means they might be caught up with processing on most cases received till that date (July-20th 2007 ?) I could be wrong, we'll see..
My actual RD is 2nd July, my notices show it as 30th of July. Do you think we should try you get that corrected? Is that posssible at all?
Thanks
Lucky you, you might start seeing LUDs on you case by the end of this month. If you do please send me a message.
Reg correcting the dates, USCIS usually takes months to respond to such things. I'm not gonna do anything about it for my case, unless the processing dates show virtually no movement.
My understanding of process.date is that it is the oldest date of completed cases - which means they might be caught up with processing on most cases received till that date (July-20th 2007 ?) I could be wrong, we'll see..
more...
vdlrao
07-14 01:26 PM
link does not work
http://www.dhs.gov/ximgtn/statistics/publications/LPR07.shtm
see table 6 in that link
http://www.dhs.gov/ximgtn/statistics/publications/LPR07.shtm
see table 6 in that link
2010 Stage Makeup: The Evil Queen
svr_76
02-19 10:59 PM
I'm one of those who say with pride that I can create jobs and buy houses. Then why will not congress or policy makers not touch this. As some here said it depends upon what we think about ourselves. I know many people who like to work under someone even after 10-15 years, my brother is like that, and I know many more like me who want to start companies, employ many people, and do bigger things. Both may be right in their own ways, but if you project yourself like me, then the doors will open.. Show enterprise..
Definitely enterprising candidates do have the perfect carved out visa category for this purpose EB5. Show them a plan to create jobs and get bank to approve of your plan as being profitable and feasible, to extend you a line of credit and you'll get ur GC in 1 year.
Its pure politics here..the current bill is an attempt to garner more ethnic votes...e.g.
UPA never initiates action to press hard for deportation of bangla immigrats (undocumented aliens) in India because those aliens are from a particular community and UPA wants to capitalize on the valid votes that Indian citizen from the same community provide them.
Definitely enterprising candidates do have the perfect carved out visa category for this purpose EB5. Show them a plan to create jobs and get bank to approve of your plan as being profitable and feasible, to extend you a line of credit and you'll get ur GC in 1 year.
Its pure politics here..the current bill is an attempt to garner more ethnic votes...e.g.
UPA never initiates action to press hard for deportation of bangla immigrats (undocumented aliens) in India because those aliens are from a particular community and UPA wants to capitalize on the valid votes that Indian citizen from the same community provide them.
more...
GeetaRam
07-29 12:53 PM
Add CareFirst - Blue Cross Blue Shield
Legg Meson
All these companies take people on H1 and after an year of year an half they say they have changed policy and they can't file H1. They have big lawyers like M**** and R**** and those lawyers tell employers even if your employee is on 5th year and if you don't file GC (PERM) b4 365 days its alright.... we can send them out and re catpture time and all BS and ultimately employees suffer.... as they r in their 5th or some are in 6th year and are completely screwed up.
We should think of taking some legal actions...
Legg Meson
All these companies take people on H1 and after an year of year an half they say they have changed policy and they can't file H1. They have big lawyers like M**** and R**** and those lawyers tell employers even if your employee is on 5th year and if you don't file GC (PERM) b4 365 days its alright.... we can send them out and re catpture time and all BS and ultimately employees suffer.... as they r in their 5th or some are in 6th year and are completely screwed up.
We should think of taking some legal actions...
hair Queen Grimhilde (Evil Queen
GreenLantern
02-15 06:51 AM
Look at my post count. Does it look like I have a life? :lol:
more...
WAIT_FOR_EVER_GC
06-10 12:50 PM
WAKE UP CALL FOR THOSE STILL SITTING ON THE SIDELINES
On Tuesday, when we were on the Hill doing meetings during Advocacy days, we were informed by the senior Senate office that an amendment to prevent H1 and work authorizations is in the works in the Tax bill. We immediately requested this office to oppose this amendment. Senator office expressed full support for us and shared with us that the Senator's office has already expressed opposition to such an amendment.
We would like everyone to know that just because someone has EAD, it does not mean we are in safe haven. There is no safe haven till we have approved green cards. And for those who think that they don't need to participate actively, this is a wake up call.
We have also learned that this is degree 1 amendment. This means it will be voted on on the Senate floor even when it is non-germane to the bill. We have also learned that if such an amendment comes up for vote during this difficult political climate, it appears that such an amendment will have 70 votes in the senate which makes each one of us extremely vulnerable to be forced out. Everyone on H1, L1, J1 or EAD will risk the renewal of their current application status.
IV is working on defeating this amendment. Please stay tuned for further updates.
On Tuesday, Mr. Sanders sponsored an amendment S.AMDT.4319 in bill H.R.4213
AMENDMENT PURPOSE: Purpose will be available when the amendment is proposed for consideration. See Congressional Record for text.
TEXT OF AMENDMENT AS SUBMITTED: CR S4754
COSPONSORS(2):
Sen Grassley, Chuck [IA] - 6/9/2010
Sen Harkin, Tom [IA] - 6/9/2010
Source: Congressional Record - 111th Congress (2009-2010) - THOMAS (Library of Congress) (http://www.thomas.gov/cgi-bin/query/F?r111:1:./temp/~r1119eE0Na:e98:)
SA 4319. Mr. SANDERS (for himself, Mr. Grassley, and Mr. Harkin) submitted an amendment intended to be proposed by him to the bill H.R. 4213, to amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to extend certain expiring provisions, and for other purposes; which was ordered to lie on the table; as follows:
At the appropriate place, insert the following:
SEC. __. CERTIFICATION REQUIREMENT.
(a) Short Title.--This section may be cited as the ``Employ America Act''.
(b) In General.--The Secretary of Homeland Security may not approve a petition by an employer for any visa authorizing employment in the United States unless the employer has provided written certification, under penalty of perjury, to the Secretary of Labor that--
(1) the employer has not provided a notice of a mass layoff pursuant to the Worker Adjustment and Retraining Notification Act (29 U.S.C. 2101 et seq.) during the 12-month period immediately preceding the date on which the alien is scheduled to be hired; and
(2) the employer does not intend to provide a notice of a mass layoff pursuant to such Act.
(c) Effect of Mass Layoff.--If an employer provides a notice of a mass layoff pursuant to the Worker Adjustment and Retraining Notification Act after the approval of a visa described in subsection (b), any visas approved during the most recent 12-month period for such employer shall expire on the date that is 60 days after the date on which such notice is provided. The expiration of a visa under this subsection shall not be subject to judicial review.
(d) Notice Requirement.--Upon receiving notification of a mass layoff from an employer, the Secretary of Homeland Security shall inform each employee whose visa is scheduled to expire under subsection (c)--
(1) the date on which such individual will no longer be authorized to work in the United States; and
(2) the date on which such individual will be required to leave the United States unless the individual is otherwise authorized to remain in the United States.
(e) Exemption.--An employer shall be exempt from the requirements under this section if the employer provides written certification, under penalty of perjury, to the Secretary of Labor that the total number of the employer's workers who are United States citizens and are working in the United States have not been, and will not be, reduced as a result of a mass layoff described in subsection (c).
(f) Rulemaking.--Not later than 90 days after the date of the enactment of this Act, the Secretary of Homeland Security and the Secretary of Labor shall promulgate regulations to carry out this section, including a requirement that employers provide notice to the Secretary of Homeland Security of a mass layoff (as defined in section 2 of the Worker Adjustment and Retraining Notification Act (29 U.S.C. 2101)).
What should we do. I am in tell me what I need to do?
On Tuesday, when we were on the Hill doing meetings during Advocacy days, we were informed by the senior Senate office that an amendment to prevent H1 and work authorizations is in the works in the Tax bill. We immediately requested this office to oppose this amendment. Senator office expressed full support for us and shared with us that the Senator's office has already expressed opposition to such an amendment.
We would like everyone to know that just because someone has EAD, it does not mean we are in safe haven. There is no safe haven till we have approved green cards. And for those who think that they don't need to participate actively, this is a wake up call.
We have also learned that this is degree 1 amendment. This means it will be voted on on the Senate floor even when it is non-germane to the bill. We have also learned that if such an amendment comes up for vote during this difficult political climate, it appears that such an amendment will have 70 votes in the senate which makes each one of us extremely vulnerable to be forced out. Everyone on H1, L1, J1 or EAD will risk the renewal of their current application status.
IV is working on defeating this amendment. Please stay tuned for further updates.
On Tuesday, Mr. Sanders sponsored an amendment S.AMDT.4319 in bill H.R.4213
AMENDMENT PURPOSE: Purpose will be available when the amendment is proposed for consideration. See Congressional Record for text.
TEXT OF AMENDMENT AS SUBMITTED: CR S4754
COSPONSORS(2):
Sen Grassley, Chuck [IA] - 6/9/2010
Sen Harkin, Tom [IA] - 6/9/2010
Source: Congressional Record - 111th Congress (2009-2010) - THOMAS (Library of Congress) (http://www.thomas.gov/cgi-bin/query/F?r111:1:./temp/~r1119eE0Na:e98:)
SA 4319. Mr. SANDERS (for himself, Mr. Grassley, and Mr. Harkin) submitted an amendment intended to be proposed by him to the bill H.R. 4213, to amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to extend certain expiring provisions, and for other purposes; which was ordered to lie on the table; as follows:
At the appropriate place, insert the following:
SEC. __. CERTIFICATION REQUIREMENT.
(a) Short Title.--This section may be cited as the ``Employ America Act''.
(b) In General.--The Secretary of Homeland Security may not approve a petition by an employer for any visa authorizing employment in the United States unless the employer has provided written certification, under penalty of perjury, to the Secretary of Labor that--
(1) the employer has not provided a notice of a mass layoff pursuant to the Worker Adjustment and Retraining Notification Act (29 U.S.C. 2101 et seq.) during the 12-month period immediately preceding the date on which the alien is scheduled to be hired; and
(2) the employer does not intend to provide a notice of a mass layoff pursuant to such Act.
(c) Effect of Mass Layoff.--If an employer provides a notice of a mass layoff pursuant to the Worker Adjustment and Retraining Notification Act after the approval of a visa described in subsection (b), any visas approved during the most recent 12-month period for such employer shall expire on the date that is 60 days after the date on which such notice is provided. The expiration of a visa under this subsection shall not be subject to judicial review.
(d) Notice Requirement.--Upon receiving notification of a mass layoff from an employer, the Secretary of Homeland Security shall inform each employee whose visa is scheduled to expire under subsection (c)--
(1) the date on which such individual will no longer be authorized to work in the United States; and
(2) the date on which such individual will be required to leave the United States unless the individual is otherwise authorized to remain in the United States.
(e) Exemption.--An employer shall be exempt from the requirements under this section if the employer provides written certification, under penalty of perjury, to the Secretary of Labor that the total number of the employer's workers who are United States citizens and are working in the United States have not been, and will not be, reduced as a result of a mass layoff described in subsection (c).
(f) Rulemaking.--Not later than 90 days after the date of the enactment of this Act, the Secretary of Homeland Security and the Secretary of Labor shall promulgate regulations to carry out this section, including a requirement that employers provide notice to the Secretary of Homeland Security of a mass layoff (as defined in section 2 of the Worker Adjustment and Retraining Notification Act (29 U.S.C. 2101)).
What should we do. I am in tell me what I need to do?
hot WICKED QUEEN
mirage
02-06 03:32 PM
There can be several ways to deal with this and still get least opposition, I sent you a PM...That's absolutely true. Immigration quotas were originally designed to keep people out, which meant if you were a white, Western European come on in. If you were not, you need not apply. The per country limit was instituted to redress this issue and assure diversity in the immigration process. Eliminating the per country limit would require a massive paradigm shift, that in the end would only be more harmful to those groups who perceive a short term benefits.
more...
house makeup for the Evil Queen
rockstart
07-16 08:46 AM
I hope some lawyer on this forum or on their respective websites can answer this question I think most folks have given their FP's only once some where from Oct - Dec 2007 time frame and USCIS said they do not need more FP's for most cases since they now have the ability to reuse the FP's. My guess is unless you have a criminal record of some kind or perhaps your name appears in the POI list they do not call you for FP again perhaps some random cases as part of Quality checks might be included but thats it.
Does any one remember any statements made by the Ombudsman about preadjudication?
Does any one remember any statements made by the Ombudsman about preadjudication?
tattoo a SECOND Evil Queen makeup
rockstart
03-12 11:55 AM
In theory you are right. But practically Very big corporations/companies have recently started a practice not to hire a person on EAD if I-140 is not clearly approved. Why? Lawyers advise them to do so. I have been hired by very prestigious company recently of course on EAD and first thing they wanted to make a check was on whether I have I-140 approved or not. Secondly they ask if I could submit 3 years audit report for "previous employer". That could make sense to me as it was a clear hint that they wanted to check whether I am coming from good financial based company or not... Why? The reason is that if that would not have been the case then there could be the chance of denying I-140 although it was approved. At least in my network of friends I am the third person who experienced this level of scrutiny before hiring on EAD. The reason is simple. They do not want to hire a guy who can not work at some time of the initial period due to I-140 related problems. So bottom line, I-140 approval is must nowadays for working in big corporations with EAD.
I am worried about this financial reports. I am not sure many consulting companies will give those to employee who is leaving
I am worried about this financial reports. I am not sure many consulting companies will give those to employee who is leaving
more...
pictures Evil Queen
crazyghoda
02-13 02:50 PM
All,
Thank you for supporting me during this stage. The RFE was for employer verification. Luckily I just managed to get a new job and started this week. I have an offer letter as well as got the HR department to provide an Employment Verification Letter stating my name, title and salary. Now I need to work with my lawyer to respond to the RFE.
Thanks again to all who responded. I'll keep you folks updated once I submit my RFE response.
Thank you for supporting me during this stage. The RFE was for employer verification. Luckily I just managed to get a new job and started this week. I have an offer letter as well as got the HR department to provide an Employment Verification Letter stating my name, title and salary. Now I need to work with my lawyer to respond to the RFE.
Thanks again to all who responded. I'll keep you folks updated once I submit my RFE response.
dresses Villians-Evil Queen-beauty
morchu
07-24 11:18 AM
There is one guy I know of mentioned that his 485 package was returned after the July 2nd update.
more...
makeup Evil Queen - Angels Fancy
qesehmk
02-11 03:03 PM
http://www.travel.state.gov/pdf/FY09AnnualReport_TableV.pdf
Family based visa used for FY2009 = 215,343
Family based immigrant visa numbers = 226,000
Unused visa = 10,567
available for employment based visa numbers for FY2010.
*********
http://www.travel.state.gov/pdf/FY08-AR-TableV.pdf
Family based visa used for FY2008 = 226,105
Family based immigrant visa numbers = 226,000
Unused visa = ZERO
available for employment based visa numbers for FY2009.
Always go by the facts.
___________________
Not a legal advice.
I agree. I tried to see if there is a way FB category in 2009 might have received a spillover from EB. But thats almost impossible given EB is severely backlogged.
Another way to verify unused 13K in 2009 EB would be to check 2010 FB limit. If there were unused visas from EB in 2009 then they go back to FB in 2010.
Finally, per Ron unused is not same as wasted. Unused is unassigned. Wasted is .... assigned but action is not taken to close the case. If that is the case then wasted visas won't be available .... neither inside or outside category. It is frightening to think that with so many preadjudicated cases USCIS might be wasting visas! I don't believe this .... but if true ... it is outrageous.
Family based visa used for FY2009 = 215,343
Family based immigrant visa numbers = 226,000
Unused visa = 10,567
available for employment based visa numbers for FY2010.
*********
http://www.travel.state.gov/pdf/FY08-AR-TableV.pdf
Family based visa used for FY2008 = 226,105
Family based immigrant visa numbers = 226,000
Unused visa = ZERO
available for employment based visa numbers for FY2009.
Always go by the facts.
___________________
Not a legal advice.
I agree. I tried to see if there is a way FB category in 2009 might have received a spillover from EB. But thats almost impossible given EB is severely backlogged.
Another way to verify unused 13K in 2009 EB would be to check 2010 FB limit. If there were unused visas from EB in 2009 then they go back to FB in 2010.
Finally, per Ron unused is not same as wasted. Unused is unassigned. Wasted is .... assigned but action is not taken to close the case. If that is the case then wasted visas won't be available .... neither inside or outside category. It is frightening to think that with so many preadjudicated cases USCIS might be wasting visas! I don't believe this .... but if true ... it is outrageous.
girlfriend Lively-Fitzgerald » Makeup
ArkBird
03-11 11:11 PM
More like KLPD :)
hairstyles Good Queen. Model: Zeyi
desi3933
01-31 05:56 PM
first of thanks a lot for taking time and explaining this in detail.
so if i understand it correctly, I have applied in jul2007 and entered on h1 on dec2007. if i get my gc in 2012. I can not be out of status for more than 6 months between dec 2007 to whenever 2012. So if i start using EAD i need to make sure i have a job almost all the time.
RFE which was posted is clearly looking for past employment history. If W2 shows that in year 2009 i made 40k and my labor cert was for 80K it will be a problem. assuming u r getting RFE in future. this realy is crazy.
Out of status is usually checked until date of I-485 filing. One exception being working without valid and active EAD when I-485 is pending.
H1 status, one should be paid what is mention in H1 LCA and it is not related to LC Salary for green card. LC Salary comes into picture for ability-to-pay issues.
____________________
Not a legal advice.
US Citizen of Indian Origin
so if i understand it correctly, I have applied in jul2007 and entered on h1 on dec2007. if i get my gc in 2012. I can not be out of status for more than 6 months between dec 2007 to whenever 2012. So if i start using EAD i need to make sure i have a job almost all the time.
RFE which was posted is clearly looking for past employment history. If W2 shows that in year 2009 i made 40k and my labor cert was for 80K it will be a problem. assuming u r getting RFE in future. this realy is crazy.
Out of status is usually checked until date of I-485 filing. One exception being working without valid and active EAD when I-485 is pending.
H1 status, one should be paid what is mention in H1 LCA and it is not related to LC Salary for green card. LC Salary comes into picture for ability-to-pay issues.
____________________
Not a legal advice.
US Citizen of Indian Origin
crazyghoda
01-16 04:27 PM
My layoff was much less traumatizing at the instant.
I was in India on vacation and one fine day I check my work email to see an email that I was let go a day earlier with 2 weeks of severance.
Luckily I had my AP with me which is what I used to return back instead of the H1. Needless to add my entire remainder of the vacation was ruined in between obsessing about how to come back (try using the H1 even though laid off or use the AP and face secondary inspections) and applying to new jobs.
Well I am back now and looking everywhere. Hopefully something should click soon.
All the best guys!
I was in India on vacation and one fine day I check my work email to see an email that I was let go a day earlier with 2 weeks of severance.
Luckily I had my AP with me which is what I used to return back instead of the H1. Needless to add my entire remainder of the vacation was ruined in between obsessing about how to come back (try using the H1 even though laid off or use the AP and face secondary inspections) and applying to new jobs.
Well I am back now and looking everywhere. Hopefully something should click soon.
All the best guys!
bondgoli007
07-29 02:42 PM
@wizkid...Nice job!! Go on and pile it on the poor sod!
You had already made your point in your initial post to this thread so why rub it in? Is it because you never have faced such a dire situation... if you cannot offer anything constructive atleast shut your trap, don't be such a jerk and let the guy vent!
@uma...I can understand your frustration at this point. Is staying and working in the US very important to you? If so, you can try to workout a solution with your employer where you can work for them in a different country for 1 year and then maybe come back with a new 6 year H1 time. If the economy gets better (and hoping it would), you can perhaps negotiate with them to restart your GC process or at that stage move to another employer. I ask you to think ahead with calm and logic. You will find a solution which you will be happy with in future.
I wish you all the best and Take care!
You had already made your point in your initial post to this thread so why rub it in? Is it because you never have faced such a dire situation... if you cannot offer anything constructive atleast shut your trap, don't be such a jerk and let the guy vent!
@uma...I can understand your frustration at this point. Is staying and working in the US very important to you? If so, you can try to workout a solution with your employer where you can work for them in a different country for 1 year and then maybe come back with a new 6 year H1 time. If the economy gets better (and hoping it would), you can perhaps negotiate with them to restart your GC process or at that stage move to another employer. I ask you to think ahead with calm and logic. You will find a solution which you will be happy with in future.
I wish you all the best and Take care!
No comments:
Post a Comment