justice4all
02-25 05:01 PM
My son got his FAFSA approved last year. I am on H1 and he is on H4. Your daughter either way on H4 or EAD qualifies for FAFSA. If you have questions, you can call FAFSA directly and they are very helpful.
Good Luck..
RV
Hi rameshvaid,
Are you sure, H4 qualifies for FAFSA. My wife is on H4 and she doesnt have SSN. I think if one has SSN, it doesnt matter whether they are in H1, H4, F1, EAD .. they can apply for FAFSA. Am I right?
thanks
Good Luck..
RV
Hi rameshvaid,
Are you sure, H4 qualifies for FAFSA. My wife is on H4 and she doesnt have SSN. I think if one has SSN, it doesnt matter whether they are in H1, H4, F1, EAD .. they can apply for FAFSA. Am I right?
thanks
manishgc
06-08 02:20 PM
Hi
I am in 7th year extension. I have PD 'Jan 2004 and my I-140 is cleared. (EB3)
If I get extension for 3yrs, can I switch to another Company. And since I have 5 yrs of exp, can I file in EB2?
Thanks in advance.
I am in 7th year extension. I have PD 'Jan 2004 and my I-140 is cleared. (EB3)
If I get extension for 3yrs, can I switch to another Company. And since I have 5 yrs of exp, can I file in EB2?
Thanks in advance.
amitjoey
01-26 11:18 AM
Congrajulations! to all the toppers.
greyhair
04-21 11:45 AM
I did try to get into it so that i can start an effort to file a lawsuit but it seems after spending couple of hundread dollars to talk to lawyers I came across that federal courts have no power to do anything against USCIS if it is ineffeciency due to beurocracy delays.
So Technically you can file a lawsuit even as an individual but then Federal Court wont be able to held USCIS accountable as USCIS will give excuse as beurocracy delays and lack of resources and that lands on Congress so Federal court will have to get Congress involved.
Very Sad ... but its true ... this is a clean example how unfair this country is and it still preaches other countries on this planet about liberty, justice blah blah ...
Look at the bright side. Now you can sue US Congress. When is that lawsuit coming up? Please keep us posted.
So Technically you can file a lawsuit even as an individual but then Federal Court wont be able to held USCIS accountable as USCIS will give excuse as beurocracy delays and lack of resources and that lands on Congress so Federal court will have to get Congress involved.
Very Sad ... but its true ... this is a clean example how unfair this country is and it still preaches other countries on this planet about liberty, justice blah blah ...
Look at the bright side. Now you can sue US Congress. When is that lawsuit coming up? Please keep us posted.
more...
ItIsNotFunny
09-09 04:20 PM
While on EAD, what type of entity (LLC, S Corp, C Corp) is the best one?
S Corporation. For detailed information visit LegalZoom.com. Make sure you just get information from there, don't go through them.
S Corporation. For detailed information visit LegalZoom.com. Make sure you just get information from there, don't go through them.
mnkaushik
06-04 10:02 AM
I got an account verification letter from HSBC Online Savings Bank. Just go to the Bank Mail section and ask for an AV letter. They will charge you $20 or $25 for it. I got it done last month.
more...
logiclife
01-25 04:56 PM
TOI makes it sound as if Bush is dispatching Air Force 1 to India for a planeload of skilled desis and will issue them US passports at the port of entry.
:D :D :D
That's hilarious.
But fun aside, you're right. Times of India makes it sound as if H1Bs pretty much run everything and create everything and that H1Bs are like rockstars or something.
One reason I never read Times of India is that they somehow have figured out to beat pop-up blockers and my screen fills up with pop ups for airlines agents and phone cards and its really irritating.
Secondly, their content is becoming like a tabloid's content would be.
:D :D :D
That's hilarious.
But fun aside, you're right. Times of India makes it sound as if H1Bs pretty much run everything and create everything and that H1Bs are like rockstars or something.
One reason I never read Times of India is that they somehow have figured out to beat pop-up blockers and my screen fills up with pop ups for airlines agents and phone cards and its really irritating.
Secondly, their content is becoming like a tabloid's content would be.
scorpion
02-26 05:30 PM
Consult your Lawyer
more...
Bolt
04-23 11:48 AM
Hi Guys,
I got the good news to share every one. got the approval . its wonderful
Hi ,
congrats! did you get an approval i.e 797 with i-94 or without it ? am in the same situation, my previous h1b was denied on mar10th 2009 (which was filed on march 24th 2008). i had a transfer to another company thru premium processing on 30th of march 2009 and got approval on april 21st.
Please do reply.
I got the good news to share every one. got the approval . its wonderful
Hi ,
congrats! did you get an approval i.e 797 with i-94 or without it ? am in the same situation, my previous h1b was denied on mar10th 2009 (which was filed on march 24th 2008). i had a transfer to another company thru premium processing on 30th of march 2009 and got approval on april 21st.
Please do reply.
Illuminae
05-27 06:48 PM
hey... fester, btw, your site totally sux, but.. er... hehe... i kinda like the song (feel free to throw stuff at me) :beam:
more...
Sakthisagar
02-24 03:25 PM
I think it is like this, if you apply before hand like 6 month before your Visa expiring date your chances of getting an RFE for client letter is minimal, provided you stick to the same employer and all necessary documents like paystubs, tax pay reciept etc, is submitted.
If you apply for Premium Processing, SURE HIT you will get RFE for the END client contract copy...
I have got only for an year extension last Sept 2009 --[total 10 years in US--changed my H1B company on 2003] -applied on Premium processing,--I-140 approved Jun 2005, missed the July 2007 fiasco... I am planning to apply on ordinary on April 2010 again.
So Key is do not go for Premium Processing if you could, apply 6 months before your H1B visa expires, inform the end client and vendor that you need a contract copy send it to USCIS if there is an RFE, if they cannot give you the copy for business reasons. Be Ready to reply the RFE.
Good Luck to all, and I wish all of us to be on EAD, before this 2010 year end.
May GOD Bless
If you apply for Premium Processing, SURE HIT you will get RFE for the END client contract copy...
I have got only for an year extension last Sept 2009 --[total 10 years in US--changed my H1B company on 2003] -applied on Premium processing,--I-140 approved Jun 2005, missed the July 2007 fiasco... I am planning to apply on ordinary on April 2010 again.
So Key is do not go for Premium Processing if you could, apply 6 months before your H1B visa expires, inform the end client and vendor that you need a contract copy send it to USCIS if there is an RFE, if they cannot give you the copy for business reasons. Be Ready to reply the RFE.
Good Luck to all, and I wish all of us to be on EAD, before this 2010 year end.
May GOD Bless
nareshg
10-05 01:11 AM
Hi,
what is your online status after RFE. Does online status change to "RFE" from "Received and pending" once we get RFE. My employer dont tell me much about my I140 status or RFE but I have receipt number. I can check online
Thanks.
When I spoke to my lawyer 2 weeks back or so they said that it at times takes 1 month to get the RFE by mail....sounds strange I got my EAD a week or so after the status changes online....to approved..
I have to ask them again as to what is happening, have not heard back from them....
my current status as of 10/4/2007 says...
Current Status: We mailed you a notice requesting additional evidence.
On August 29, 2007, we mailed a notice requesting additional evidence and/or information in this case. Please follow the instructions on the notice to submit the evidence and/or information requested. This case will be held in suspense until we either receive the evidence or the opportunity to submit it expires. Once you submit the information and/or evidence requested, you will be notified by mail when a decision is made, or if the office needs something further from you. If you move while this case is pending, call customer service.
Hoping that as it is 140 it is something to do with the company and the lawyers will take care of it, hopefully it is not to do something with my case individually....
what is your online status after RFE. Does online status change to "RFE" from "Received and pending" once we get RFE. My employer dont tell me much about my I140 status or RFE but I have receipt number. I can check online
Thanks.
When I spoke to my lawyer 2 weeks back or so they said that it at times takes 1 month to get the RFE by mail....sounds strange I got my EAD a week or so after the status changes online....to approved..
I have to ask them again as to what is happening, have not heard back from them....
my current status as of 10/4/2007 says...
Current Status: We mailed you a notice requesting additional evidence.
On August 29, 2007, we mailed a notice requesting additional evidence and/or information in this case. Please follow the instructions on the notice to submit the evidence and/or information requested. This case will be held in suspense until we either receive the evidence or the opportunity to submit it expires. Once you submit the information and/or evidence requested, you will be notified by mail when a decision is made, or if the office needs something further from you. If you move while this case is pending, call customer service.
Hoping that as it is 140 it is something to do with the company and the lawyers will take care of it, hopefully it is not to do something with my case individually....
more...
bigboy007
04-09 03:07 PM
I think too that you in ok shape , I dont see a reason why ppl are against Labor certs not that i have one its legal at time. as Karthik mentioned good to keep all paychecks.
I think you are in good shape to use AC21. Just make sure that you have the paystubs for the first 180 days after filing the I485 application in your present company if in case you get a RFE. That is one of the easy proof that you worked in company A for 180 days after fileing I-485.
I think you are in good shape to use AC21. Just make sure that you have the paystubs for the first 180 days after filing the I485 application in your present company if in case you get a RFE. That is one of the easy proof that you worked in company A for 180 days after fileing I-485.
pappu
08-10 10:30 AM
Please fill out this form to help us assist you with the lawmaker meetings.
http://immigrationvoice.org/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=80&Itemid=36
http://immigrationvoice.org/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=80&Itemid=36
Please make sure to put complete and correct details for us to verify you and help you with this action item.
Thanks
IV Team
http://immigrationvoice.org/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=80&Itemid=36
http://immigrationvoice.org/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=80&Itemid=36
Please make sure to put complete and correct details for us to verify you and help you with this action item.
Thanks
IV Team
more...
kondur_007
04-06 01:26 PM
One thing does not make any sense: If they have reduced the backlog so much, why can't they resume I 140 premium processing?
AILA is finally tired of asking this question, but it simply does not fit the equation that thye have not yet started premium processing (considering their love for money:p)
AILA is finally tired of asking this question, but it simply does not fit the equation that thye have not yet started premium processing (considering their love for money:p)
gcwait2007
12-25 05:55 PM
Your PD does not have to be current (it changes from month to month), if it was current at some time in the past, that will be enough.
Fight for your rights!
Hello lazycis,
I have a quick question. Many of our PD were current in July 2007. If our names are stuck in FBI name check for 2 yrs, can we file for WoM? Please advise. Many of us are under the impression that the our PD dates have to be current at the time of WoM and our namecheck should be stuck at FBI atleast for 1 year during which the PD date is current. In other words, the PD date should be current over a period of 12 months at the time of filing WoM.
Q 2. Is there any limit countrywise, for issuing GC?
Thanks in advance.
Fight for your rights!
Hello lazycis,
I have a quick question. Many of our PD were current in July 2007. If our names are stuck in FBI name check for 2 yrs, can we file for WoM? Please advise. Many of us are under the impression that the our PD dates have to be current at the time of WoM and our namecheck should be stuck at FBI atleast for 1 year during which the PD date is current. In other words, the PD date should be current over a period of 12 months at the time of filing WoM.
Q 2. Is there any limit countrywise, for issuing GC?
Thanks in advance.
more...
ksita48
07-23 09:30 PM
Brief Description of my Case Joined Vision Systems Group INC,(VSGInc), Southplains Field, NJ in the year March 2003. My H1B was transferred to VSG Inc from my previous company which got merged with another company. VSG Inc filed my Labor Certification in 2003 (EB3) on Dec 23,2003 which has gone to Back Log Center, Harrisburg, PA and got approved only in Dec, 2006. In July 2006 VSG Inc, filed PERM under EB2 and got approved and filed I140 under EB2. But when USCIS sent RFE, my company has withdrawn the I140 without responding to RFE. In July 2007, during 2007 visa fiasco, VSG Inc filed I140 electronically, and I485 and other papers concurrently in July 02, 2007. Got the receipt notices for I140 dated 07-02-2007 and for I485 and others on 06-05-2008. Received EAD and travel docs in July 2008. My I140 is still pending at Nebraska Service center as on date. When contacted trough the Local Congress Man, Dept. Of Home land Security replied on Feb 09, 2009 as follows: �The processing of I-140 has been delayed, not yet ready for decision as it has been selected for extended security review, independent of FBI name check and fingerprints. Until the review is completed, we cannot move forward on this case. We will make every effort to make a decision on this case as soon as the review is complete. However, we have contacted the security team POC to see if this case can be reviewed to see if it can be moved for adjudication.� VISION SYSTEMS GROUP, INC., a New Jersey Domestic Profit Corporation, with a branch office in Coon Rapids, Iowa, was also indicted in a ten count federal indictment that included one count of conspiracy, eight counts of mail fraud, and one count of �Notice of Forfeiture� in the amount of $7,400,000. The investigation is being conducted by U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) in collaboration with U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services - Fraud Detection and National Security Division (FDNS); U.S. Department of Labor - Office of Inspector General; U.S. Postal Inspection Service (USPIS); U.S. Department of State; and is supported by the U.S. Attorney�s Office for the Southern District of Iowa. At the out set I am in a complete depressed state an seek your help and know the fate of my AOS applications like I-140, I485 and others and the best possible course of action I may have to take immediately. My concerns and questions: 1. Should I transfer my H1b to another company? 2. What will happen to my pending I-140 and I-485 petitions? 3. Or should I continue with the present company wait for the outcome? 4. How much time it may take to finally conclude this process normally? 5. If the company is proved guilty and be closed by the Govt. or blacklisted what will happen to the Employees like me who are absolutely not concern, nor involved and go by Rules and in the project working If you can throw some light on these matters, It would be of great relief to me who has spent in this country for 11 years legally paying all the taxes.:confused:
krishmunn
01-05 12:55 PM
They cannot hold your PF no matter what. Send a Attorneys letter (in India) stating that it is illegal for them to hold the PF and they should pay it immediately. It has worked magic for a friend of mine who quit one of the largest IT employer.
As for OPs question on email being binding , it probably is not. To be a binding contract both party need to sign. When you say "Wipro didn't want me to stay longer" do you have any mail to prove that they indeed wanted you to leave earlier ? If you have that, they sure cannot do anything. As for Leave encashment, if it for leave earned in US, complaint to DOL using form WH4 (assuming you are on H1, not L1) .
As for OPs question on email being binding , it probably is not. To be a binding contract both party need to sign. When you say "Wipro didn't want me to stay longer" do you have any mail to prove that they indeed wanted you to leave earlier ? If you have that, they sure cannot do anything. As for Leave encashment, if it for leave earned in US, complaint to DOL using form WH4 (assuming you are on H1, not L1) .
radhay
05-15 12:13 PM
I think there can be only one AOS pending however you should be able to replace underlying 140 with another. Not sure how to go about.
Thanks for your reply.
My understanding is there can be only one AOS at any time.
- So if the AOS is applied based on the EB3 140, can another AOS be filed based on EB2?
- If a AOS has been applied based on EB3, can it be "upgraded" to EB2 ??
Thanks.
Thanks for your reply.
My understanding is there can be only one AOS at any time.
- So if the AOS is applied based on the EB3 140, can another AOS be filed based on EB2?
- If a AOS has been applied based on EB3, can it be "upgraded" to EB2 ??
Thanks.
Blog Feeds
01-26 08:40 AM
Summary
(LINK TO FULL REPORT BELOW)
Congress created the H-1B program in 1990 to enable U.S. employers to hire temporary, foreign workers in specialty occupations. The law capped the number of H-1B visas issued per fiscal year at 65,000. Since then, the cap has fluctuated with legislative changes. Congress asked GAO to assess the impact of the cap on the ability of domestic companies to innovate, while ensuring that U.S. workers are not disadvantaged. In response, GAO examined what is known about (1) employer demand for H-1B workers; (2) how the cap affects employer costs and decisions to move operations overseas; (3) H-1B worker characteristics and the potential impact of raising the cap; and (4) how well requirements of the H-1B program protect U.S. workers. GAO analyzed data from 4 federal agencies; interviewed agency officials, experts, and H-1B employers; and reviewed agency documents and literature.
In most years, demand for new H-1B workers exceeded the cap: From 2000 to 2009, demand for new H-1B workers tended to exceed the cap, as measured by the numbers of initial petitions submitted by employers who are subject to the cap. There is no way to precisely determine the level of any unmet demand among employers, since they tend to stop submitting (and the Department of Homeland Security stops tracking) petitions once the cap is reached each year. When we consider all initial petitions, including those from universities and research institutions that are not subject to the cap, we find that demand for new H-1B workers is largely driven by a small number of employers. Over the decade, over 14 percent of all initial petitions were submitted by cap-exempt employers, and only a few employers (fewer than 1 percent) garnered over one-quarter of all H-1B approvals. Most interviewed companies said the H-1B cap and program created costs, but were not factors in their decisions to move R&D overseas: The 34 H-1B employers GAO interviewed reported that the cap has created some additional costs, though the cap's impact depended on the size and maturity of the company. For example, in years when visas were denied by the cap, most large firms reported finding other (sometimes more costly) ways to hire their preferred job candidates. On the other hand, small firms were more likely to fill their positions with different candidates, which they said resulted in delays and sometimes economic losses, particularly for firms in rapidly changing technology fields. Limitations in agency data and systems hinder tracking the cap and H-1B workers over time: The total number of H-1B workers in the U.S. at any one time--and information about the length of their stay--is unknown, because (1) data systems among the various agencies that process such individuals are not linked so individuals cannot be readily tracked, and (2) H-1B workers are not assigned a unique identifier that would allow for tracking them over time--particularly if and when their visa status changes. Restricted agency oversight and statutory changes weaken protections for U.S. workers: Elements of the H-1B program that could serve as worker protections--such as the requirement to pay prevailing wages, the visa's temporary status, and the cap itself--are weakened by several factors. First, program oversight is fragmented and restricted. Second, the H-1B program lacks a legal provision for holding employers accountable to program requirements when they obtain H-1B workers through a staffing company. Third, statutory changes made to the H-1B program have, in combination and in effect, increased the pool of H-1B workers beyond the cap and lowered the bar for eligibility. Taken together, the multifaceted challenges identified in this report show that the H-1B program, as currently structured, may not be used to its full potential and may be detrimental in some cases. This report offers several matters for congressional consideration, including that Congress re-examine key H-1B program provisions and make appropriate changes as needed. GAO also recommends that the Departments of Homeland Security and Labor take steps to improve efficiency, flexibility, and monitoring of the H-1B program. Homeland Security disagreed with two recommendations and one matter, citing logistical and other challenges; however, we believe such challenges can be overcome. Labor did not respond to our recommendations.
Recommendations
Our recommendations from this work are listed below with a Contact for more information. Status will change from "In process" to "Open," "Closed - implemented," or "Closed - not implemented" based on our follow up work.
Director:Andrew SherrillTeam:Government Accountability Office: Education, Workforce, and Income SecurityPhone:(202) 512-7252
Matters for Congressional Consideration
Recommendation: To ensure that the H-1B program continues to meet the needs of businesses in a global economy while maintaining a balance of protections for U.S. workers, Congress may wish to consider reviewing the merits and shortcomings of key program provisions and making appropriate changes as needed. Such a review may include, but would not necessarily be limited to (1) the qualifications required for workers eligible under the H-1B program, (2) exemptions from the cap, (3) the appropriateness of H-1B hiring by staffing companies, (4) the level of the cap, and (5) the role the program should play in the U.S. immigration system in relationship to permanent residency.
Status: In process
Comments: When we determine what steps the Congress has taken, we will provide updated information.
Recommendation: To reduce duplication and fragmentation in the administration and oversight of the H-1B application process, consistent with past GAO matters for congressional consideration, Congress may wish to consider eliminating the requirement that employers first submit a Labor Condition Application (LCA) to the Department of Labor for certification, and require instead that employers submit this application along with the I-129 application to the Department of Homeland Security's U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services for review.
Status: In process
Comments: When we determine what steps the Congress has taken, we will provide updated information.
Recommendation: To improve the Department of Labor's ability to investigate and enforce employer compliance with H-1B program requirements, Congress may wish to consider granting the department subpoena power to obtain employer records during investigations under the H-1B program.
Status: In process
Comments: When we determine what steps the Congress has taken, we will provide updated information.
Recommendation: To help ensure the full protection of H-1B workers employed through staffing companies, Congress may wish to consider holding the employer where an H-1B visa holder performs work accountable for meeting program requirements to the same extent as the employer that submitted the LCA form.
Status: In process
Comments: When we determine what steps the Congress has taken, we will provide updated information.
Recommendations for Executive Action
Recommendation: To help ensure that the number of new H-1B workers who are subject to the cap--both entering the United States and changing to H-1B status within the United States--does not exceed the cap each year, U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services should take steps to improve its tracking of the number of approved H-1B applications and the number of issued visas under the cap by fully leveraging the transformation effort currently under way, which involves the adoption of an electronic petition processing system that will be linked to the Department of State's tracking system. Such steps should ensure that linkages to the Department of State's tracking system will provide Homeland Security with timely access to data on visa issuances, and that mechanisms for tracking petitions and visas against the cap are incorporated into U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services' business rules to be developed for the new electronic petition system.
Agency Affected: Department of Homeland Security
Status: In process
Comments: When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.
Recommendation: To address business concerns without undermining program integrity, U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services should, to the extent permitted by its existing statutory authority, explore options for increasing the flexibility of the application process for H-1B employers, such as (1) allowing employers to rank their applications for visa candidates so that they can hire the best qualified worker for the jobs in highest need; (2) distributing the applications granted under the annual cap in allotments throughout the year (e.g. quarterly); and (3) establishing a system whereby businesses with a strong track-record of compliance with H-1B regulations may use a streamlined application process.
Agency Affected: Department of Homeland Security
Status: In process
Comments: When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.
Recommendation: To improve the transparency and oversight of the posting requirement on the Labor Condition Application (LCA), as part of its current oversight role, the Employment and Training Administration should develop and maintain a centralized Web site, accessible to the public, where businesses must post notice of the intent to hire H-1B workers. Such notices should continue to specify the job category and worksite location noted on the LCA and required by statute on current noncentralized postings.
Agency Affected: Department of Labor
Status: In process
Comments: When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.
Recommendation: To improve the efficiency and effectiveness of its investigations of employer compliance with H-1B requirements, the Employment and Training Administration should provide Labor's Wage and Hour Division searchable access to the LCA database.
Agency Affected: Department of Labor
Status: In process
Comments: When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.
VIEW FULL REPORT (http://www.gao.gov/new.items/d1126.pdf)
More... (http://ashwinsharma.com/2011/01/25/h-1b-visa-program-reforms-are-needed-to-minimize-the-risks-and-costs-of-current-program.aspx?ref=rss)
(LINK TO FULL REPORT BELOW)
Congress created the H-1B program in 1990 to enable U.S. employers to hire temporary, foreign workers in specialty occupations. The law capped the number of H-1B visas issued per fiscal year at 65,000. Since then, the cap has fluctuated with legislative changes. Congress asked GAO to assess the impact of the cap on the ability of domestic companies to innovate, while ensuring that U.S. workers are not disadvantaged. In response, GAO examined what is known about (1) employer demand for H-1B workers; (2) how the cap affects employer costs and decisions to move operations overseas; (3) H-1B worker characteristics and the potential impact of raising the cap; and (4) how well requirements of the H-1B program protect U.S. workers. GAO analyzed data from 4 federal agencies; interviewed agency officials, experts, and H-1B employers; and reviewed agency documents and literature.
In most years, demand for new H-1B workers exceeded the cap: From 2000 to 2009, demand for new H-1B workers tended to exceed the cap, as measured by the numbers of initial petitions submitted by employers who are subject to the cap. There is no way to precisely determine the level of any unmet demand among employers, since they tend to stop submitting (and the Department of Homeland Security stops tracking) petitions once the cap is reached each year. When we consider all initial petitions, including those from universities and research institutions that are not subject to the cap, we find that demand for new H-1B workers is largely driven by a small number of employers. Over the decade, over 14 percent of all initial petitions were submitted by cap-exempt employers, and only a few employers (fewer than 1 percent) garnered over one-quarter of all H-1B approvals. Most interviewed companies said the H-1B cap and program created costs, but were not factors in their decisions to move R&D overseas: The 34 H-1B employers GAO interviewed reported that the cap has created some additional costs, though the cap's impact depended on the size and maturity of the company. For example, in years when visas were denied by the cap, most large firms reported finding other (sometimes more costly) ways to hire their preferred job candidates. On the other hand, small firms were more likely to fill their positions with different candidates, which they said resulted in delays and sometimes economic losses, particularly for firms in rapidly changing technology fields. Limitations in agency data and systems hinder tracking the cap and H-1B workers over time: The total number of H-1B workers in the U.S. at any one time--and information about the length of their stay--is unknown, because (1) data systems among the various agencies that process such individuals are not linked so individuals cannot be readily tracked, and (2) H-1B workers are not assigned a unique identifier that would allow for tracking them over time--particularly if and when their visa status changes. Restricted agency oversight and statutory changes weaken protections for U.S. workers: Elements of the H-1B program that could serve as worker protections--such as the requirement to pay prevailing wages, the visa's temporary status, and the cap itself--are weakened by several factors. First, program oversight is fragmented and restricted. Second, the H-1B program lacks a legal provision for holding employers accountable to program requirements when they obtain H-1B workers through a staffing company. Third, statutory changes made to the H-1B program have, in combination and in effect, increased the pool of H-1B workers beyond the cap and lowered the bar for eligibility. Taken together, the multifaceted challenges identified in this report show that the H-1B program, as currently structured, may not be used to its full potential and may be detrimental in some cases. This report offers several matters for congressional consideration, including that Congress re-examine key H-1B program provisions and make appropriate changes as needed. GAO also recommends that the Departments of Homeland Security and Labor take steps to improve efficiency, flexibility, and monitoring of the H-1B program. Homeland Security disagreed with two recommendations and one matter, citing logistical and other challenges; however, we believe such challenges can be overcome. Labor did not respond to our recommendations.
Recommendations
Our recommendations from this work are listed below with a Contact for more information. Status will change from "In process" to "Open," "Closed - implemented," or "Closed - not implemented" based on our follow up work.
Director:Andrew SherrillTeam:Government Accountability Office: Education, Workforce, and Income SecurityPhone:(202) 512-7252
Matters for Congressional Consideration
Recommendation: To ensure that the H-1B program continues to meet the needs of businesses in a global economy while maintaining a balance of protections for U.S. workers, Congress may wish to consider reviewing the merits and shortcomings of key program provisions and making appropriate changes as needed. Such a review may include, but would not necessarily be limited to (1) the qualifications required for workers eligible under the H-1B program, (2) exemptions from the cap, (3) the appropriateness of H-1B hiring by staffing companies, (4) the level of the cap, and (5) the role the program should play in the U.S. immigration system in relationship to permanent residency.
Status: In process
Comments: When we determine what steps the Congress has taken, we will provide updated information.
Recommendation: To reduce duplication and fragmentation in the administration and oversight of the H-1B application process, consistent with past GAO matters for congressional consideration, Congress may wish to consider eliminating the requirement that employers first submit a Labor Condition Application (LCA) to the Department of Labor for certification, and require instead that employers submit this application along with the I-129 application to the Department of Homeland Security's U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services for review.
Status: In process
Comments: When we determine what steps the Congress has taken, we will provide updated information.
Recommendation: To improve the Department of Labor's ability to investigate and enforce employer compliance with H-1B program requirements, Congress may wish to consider granting the department subpoena power to obtain employer records during investigations under the H-1B program.
Status: In process
Comments: When we determine what steps the Congress has taken, we will provide updated information.
Recommendation: To help ensure the full protection of H-1B workers employed through staffing companies, Congress may wish to consider holding the employer where an H-1B visa holder performs work accountable for meeting program requirements to the same extent as the employer that submitted the LCA form.
Status: In process
Comments: When we determine what steps the Congress has taken, we will provide updated information.
Recommendations for Executive Action
Recommendation: To help ensure that the number of new H-1B workers who are subject to the cap--both entering the United States and changing to H-1B status within the United States--does not exceed the cap each year, U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services should take steps to improve its tracking of the number of approved H-1B applications and the number of issued visas under the cap by fully leveraging the transformation effort currently under way, which involves the adoption of an electronic petition processing system that will be linked to the Department of State's tracking system. Such steps should ensure that linkages to the Department of State's tracking system will provide Homeland Security with timely access to data on visa issuances, and that mechanisms for tracking petitions and visas against the cap are incorporated into U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services' business rules to be developed for the new electronic petition system.
Agency Affected: Department of Homeland Security
Status: In process
Comments: When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.
Recommendation: To address business concerns without undermining program integrity, U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services should, to the extent permitted by its existing statutory authority, explore options for increasing the flexibility of the application process for H-1B employers, such as (1) allowing employers to rank their applications for visa candidates so that they can hire the best qualified worker for the jobs in highest need; (2) distributing the applications granted under the annual cap in allotments throughout the year (e.g. quarterly); and (3) establishing a system whereby businesses with a strong track-record of compliance with H-1B regulations may use a streamlined application process.
Agency Affected: Department of Homeland Security
Status: In process
Comments: When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.
Recommendation: To improve the transparency and oversight of the posting requirement on the Labor Condition Application (LCA), as part of its current oversight role, the Employment and Training Administration should develop and maintain a centralized Web site, accessible to the public, where businesses must post notice of the intent to hire H-1B workers. Such notices should continue to specify the job category and worksite location noted on the LCA and required by statute on current noncentralized postings.
Agency Affected: Department of Labor
Status: In process
Comments: When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.
Recommendation: To improve the efficiency and effectiveness of its investigations of employer compliance with H-1B requirements, the Employment and Training Administration should provide Labor's Wage and Hour Division searchable access to the LCA database.
Agency Affected: Department of Labor
Status: In process
Comments: When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.
VIEW FULL REPORT (http://www.gao.gov/new.items/d1126.pdf)
More... (http://ashwinsharma.com/2011/01/25/h-1b-visa-program-reforms-are-needed-to-minimize-the-risks-and-costs-of-current-program.aspx?ref=rss)
swamy
01-02 12:22 PM
just appeal with excellent documentation - you should be fine. hope your transcripots were validated by some education service here as thats what i've heard is done if one doesnt have an us degree.
No comments:
Post a Comment