harishgowda
05-19 08:08 AM
Hello,
My H -1B visa is been approved from August 2008 to September 2011 which equals to 3 year.
I have worked in US from October 2008 to January 2009.
Later i got layoff and my Agent\Consultant said that my Visa was cancelled according to U.S. Immigration regulations and termination of employment procedures.
Thereafter i came to India and started work job here. My company had applied for Business Visa but Today my Business Visa got rejected and they gave me the reason that you dont justify that you will come back. What if you stay back there.?
I am thinking to reapply again in next 2 day.
Can anyone help me what should i do in this case?
Thanks,
Harish Gowda
My H -1B visa is been approved from August 2008 to September 2011 which equals to 3 year.
I have worked in US from October 2008 to January 2009.
Later i got layoff and my Agent\Consultant said that my Visa was cancelled according to U.S. Immigration regulations and termination of employment procedures.
Thereafter i came to India and started work job here. My company had applied for Business Visa but Today my Business Visa got rejected and they gave me the reason that you dont justify that you will come back. What if you stay back there.?
I am thinking to reapply again in next 2 day.
Can anyone help me what should i do in this case?
Thanks,
Harish Gowda
sangeethak31
07-14 08:53 PM
Thanks for the quick response...
Could someone please provide me the co-affidavit letter template.
Thanks,
Sangeetha K
Could someone please provide me the co-affidavit letter template.
Thanks,
Sangeetha K
wandmaker
09-30 09:58 AM
Thanks Chanduv23...this really helps to keep up the spirit.
Does anyone know how long does it take to get the mail?
You should have it by end of the week or before middle of next week.
Does anyone know how long does it take to get the mail?
You should have it by end of the week or before middle of next week.
zCool
03-24 04:25 PM
I heard whole segment and it was great advocacy Mark.
I think the guy who called afterwards nailed it right..
I don't know why folks don't emphasis injustice built-in per country quota..
If discrimination is prohibited anywhere else based on persons's national origin why is it allowed to continue in Green Card queue??
We should hammer this point everywhere..
I have spoken abt it and no one can really say any good counter-point..
IF the pain was shared across all the nations, you bet there would be more support across the board..
Also per-country quotas are really relic of pre-1965 European only immigration policy..
Before anything else I would like simple just queue formed.. This is new "Asian Exclusion Law" and that should be #1 target!
I think the guy who called afterwards nailed it right..
I don't know why folks don't emphasis injustice built-in per country quota..
If discrimination is prohibited anywhere else based on persons's national origin why is it allowed to continue in Green Card queue??
We should hammer this point everywhere..
I have spoken abt it and no one can really say any good counter-point..
IF the pain was shared across all the nations, you bet there would be more support across the board..
Also per-country quotas are really relic of pre-1965 European only immigration policy..
Before anything else I would like simple just queue formed.. This is new "Asian Exclusion Law" and that should be #1 target!
more...
GCBy3000
11-09 02:44 PM
I moved from location A to location B within the same state with same employer. My legal consulting with company attorney is as below.
1. Yes, you can move to different location. But you have to move back to the original location once you get GC. How long you have to work at the original location is a grey area. My attorney said anywhere between 6months to one year will do.
2. If your employer is not willing to relocate you to the original location, you HAVE TO start your LC process again in the new location. Even before my labor approved from location A, I moved to location B. Since my company is good, they agreed to file 140 for location A just for me to keep the PD. Now my location B 140 is filed.
3. With the new perm process, there is no provision to state that a employee will work in multiple location. This is what I have heard from my attorney.
4. When I asked him what will happen if I dont move back to location A and continue working in location B, he said I will get into trouble when I to for interview for my citizenship. Until then, it should be fine. Only case it will be a probelm when a query is put to the employer and he does not backs you up. Of couse, no one should lie and I dont want my employer to lie for me.
Thanks folks for all the replies. I got to know finally that the employer can setup the LC to provide for any relocation. It looks like my employer usually does that so that the employees does not loose out in a relocation scenario.
Thanks for all the inputs
1. Yes, you can move to different location. But you have to move back to the original location once you get GC. How long you have to work at the original location is a grey area. My attorney said anywhere between 6months to one year will do.
2. If your employer is not willing to relocate you to the original location, you HAVE TO start your LC process again in the new location. Even before my labor approved from location A, I moved to location B. Since my company is good, they agreed to file 140 for location A just for me to keep the PD. Now my location B 140 is filed.
3. With the new perm process, there is no provision to state that a employee will work in multiple location. This is what I have heard from my attorney.
4. When I asked him what will happen if I dont move back to location A and continue working in location B, he said I will get into trouble when I to for interview for my citizenship. Until then, it should be fine. Only case it will be a probelm when a query is put to the employer and he does not backs you up. Of couse, no one should lie and I dont want my employer to lie for me.
Thanks folks for all the replies. I got to know finally that the employer can setup the LC to provide for any relocation. It looks like my employer usually does that so that the employees does not loose out in a relocation scenario.
Thanks for all the inputs
CADude
03-19 11:24 PM
I talk to USCIS CC/IO last week. She told me that it will take approx 90 days to assign my case to AO. So my case is still getting dust on room and not with officer. It's sucks but wait continue...
PD: July 2001 (EB-3 India)
RD: July 2nd 2007
ND: Oct 10th 2007
I have bigger problem to worry about. I am process of lay-off from employer whom I am working last 7 years. :)
I called up their customer service no and was able to reach an IO at TSC and asked about the FBI name check status. I did speak to an IO 3 to 4 times over a period of 6 months and initially it was pending but later on it got cleared. I did not ask for the exact date it was cleared but it was on feb1st 2008 that I found that it was cleared. But they did tell me the exact date on which the FBI name check was initiated. It was initiated on Aug 1st 2007 where are my 485 RD is June21st 2007.
PD: July 2001 (EB-3 India)
RD: July 2nd 2007
ND: Oct 10th 2007
I have bigger problem to worry about. I am process of lay-off from employer whom I am working last 7 years. :)
I called up their customer service no and was able to reach an IO at TSC and asked about the FBI name check status. I did speak to an IO 3 to 4 times over a period of 6 months and initially it was pending but later on it got cleared. I did not ask for the exact date it was cleared but it was on feb1st 2008 that I found that it was cleared. But they did tell me the exact date on which the FBI name check was initiated. It was initiated on Aug 1st 2007 where are my 485 RD is June21st 2007.
more...
ab_tak_chappan
08-13 12:51 AM
looks like vldrao got his GC and took a hike ;)
pappu
11-09 02:10 PM
Pappu,
Is this survey open to every one beyond donor forum.
Yes. It is open to everyone and is under 'Action Items for everyone' forum.
Is this survey open to every one beyond donor forum.
Yes. It is open to everyone and is under 'Action Items for everyone' forum.
more...
sush
10-03 06:46 PM
The latest one I see is 07/28/2007
sam_hoosier
05-07 03:58 PM
I am suspecting it will not be favorable at all
Stop scaring people :) We have absolutely no way of knowing what the new regulations would be.
Stop scaring people :) We have absolutely no way of knowing what the new regulations would be.
more...
clif
06-15 01:35 PM
Experts, Please advice on this :
:confused: My H1B is about to expire in Oct 2007 and I haven't yet filed for 7th year extension. I have approved I-140 with April 2006 PD. Should I file for 7th year ext. of H1B or I-485 or both?
Is it safe to file for extension now or will it affect I-485 filing in July if the extension takes 2-3 months to be approved? My company is asking me for documents to file for extension and I have no idea about their plans for I-485 filing.
Also, less importantly, if I file for H1B extension, will I get 1 year ext. or 3 year ext? :confused:
:confused: My H1B is about to expire in Oct 2007 and I haven't yet filed for 7th year extension. I have approved I-140 with April 2006 PD. Should I file for 7th year ext. of H1B or I-485 or both?
Is it safe to file for extension now or will it affect I-485 filing in July if the extension takes 2-3 months to be approved? My company is asking me for documents to file for extension and I have no idea about their plans for I-485 filing.
Also, less importantly, if I file for H1B extension, will I get 1 year ext. or 3 year ext? :confused:
amitjoey
09-14 04:11 PM
It looks like a case of misunderstanding. Did you explain why you had the change of heart?. Explain your personal situation -like you are explaining here- with the pregnancy and commute time and doctors visits that are required every week?. I am not sure why a sane person wont understand the reasons why you decided not to join them. Further, if they do not understand, ask them if they have filed paperwork for H1?. If NO, then what is the claim of $3000 for?
more...
freakin_gc
02-12 02:31 PM
yeah she is second generation Indo S.African (another 3rd world country). Will you please let how to change country of chargeability with out talking to any immigration attorney
citizenry does not matter...but country of Birth does..If she was Born in SA..then u can change ur chargability.
citizenry does not matter...but country of Birth does..If she was Born in SA..then u can change ur chargability.
bmoni
12-26 09:51 AM
I will be calling in.
more...
karthiknv143
06-01 05:13 PM
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
lyn
04-12 04:21 PM
I agree with gc_check this would avoid people getting into GC line in front of people have been waiting for years. Where is the link to submit comments?
more...
konga1978
01-22 10:34 AM
Hi friends,
I live in weston (south florida). This thread is effort to gather as many as we can from south florida, help and bring awarness regarding Green Card processing to make things work faster.
Cheers,
Naveen
I live in weston (south florida). This thread is effort to gather as many as we can from south florida, help and bring awarness regarding Green Card processing to make things work faster.
Cheers,
Naveen
kpchal2
03-03 11:06 AM
thanks for the response. can you please post the result of the transfer
also any one in the forum who had experience with the ac21 transfer +ve or negative can you please advise about your experiences. it is really a stressful situation with every thing being this way.
also any one in the forum who had experience with the ac21 transfer +ve or negative can you please advise about your experiences. it is really a stressful situation with every thing being this way.
we_can
03-07 02:02 PM
Pankaj, I have sent you an email.
Blog Feeds
02-01 08:30 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)
sdeshpan
06-24 06:18 PM
Remember you are bonded labor if you are on H1B or Work Permit. They will use you & your illegal brothers every election year and this is one of those years ..... everything is chatter until something heppens.
Don't get your hopes high.... just get your head down and work for them.
and what's the point of posting this twice...10 minutes apart? Those who will, will take your point! :)
Don't get your hopes high.... just get your head down and work for them.
and what's the point of posting this twice...10 minutes apart? Those who will, will take your point! :)
No comments:
Post a Comment