ivjobs
04-23 06:37 PM
what's the update on this?
Did it pass?
Did it pass?
wallpaper and Kristen Stewart have
chanduv23
03-26 04:48 AM
The corporation can always say they have a policy to not hire someone with temporary work permit and there is no law against it. It is sad but that's how it is.
I don't think so. EAD is a valid form of employment, just like a Greed Card. If it is not then why certain employers hire u on EAB and why crtain do not?
It is just a matter of filtering out by claiming policy.
Most times, the hiring manager never gets into these things. Hiring manager is more concerned about skills and about how a peron fits the job best, but then in big corporations a lot of nepotism works (which is a different topic altogether and we can discuss nepotism in a different thread). It is the matter of how resumes are presented to the hiring manager and how the manager can be influenced prior to submitting the resume.
If a reqruiter or a HR starts fussing about ur resume and goes back and forth about EAD etc.... ur resume is never even going to the hiring manager no matter how much you convince.
In one instance, when I applied for a job, the reqruiting agency did all the initial crap discussion about skills, visa status etc..... after 2 days she gets back to me and first question is, "I know you are past 180 days on EAD, but can you tell me when you will get a Green card", I told her "I will get it anaytime and will continue using EAD till then". She said "Oh great". Then after an hour she calls me back "I just noticed on your resume that you have 2 short term projects, we place people in these companies and they stay for years together" , I said "contract projects can be short term/long term and there were personal reasons for me to hop these projects but you are most welcome to talk to the managers who I worked with", she dais "Oh absolutely not a problem". Then after half an hour she calls me "This work location may not be the best for you especially because you have to pay a toll on whitestone bridge, would you want to consider something in Manhattan?" I respond "Toll is fine, please go ahead and submit". Then she responds "Hmmm, ok".
I did figure that she did not want to deal with EAD but she was taking me on a roller coaster going back and forth. she never submitted my resume to tyhe hiring manager.
I don't think so. EAD is a valid form of employment, just like a Greed Card. If it is not then why certain employers hire u on EAB and why crtain do not?
It is just a matter of filtering out by claiming policy.
Most times, the hiring manager never gets into these things. Hiring manager is more concerned about skills and about how a peron fits the job best, but then in big corporations a lot of nepotism works (which is a different topic altogether and we can discuss nepotism in a different thread). It is the matter of how resumes are presented to the hiring manager and how the manager can be influenced prior to submitting the resume.
If a reqruiter or a HR starts fussing about ur resume and goes back and forth about EAD etc.... ur resume is never even going to the hiring manager no matter how much you convince.
In one instance, when I applied for a job, the reqruiting agency did all the initial crap discussion about skills, visa status etc..... after 2 days she gets back to me and first question is, "I know you are past 180 days on EAD, but can you tell me when you will get a Green card", I told her "I will get it anaytime and will continue using EAD till then". She said "Oh great". Then after an hour she calls me back "I just noticed on your resume that you have 2 short term projects, we place people in these companies and they stay for years together" , I said "contract projects can be short term/long term and there were personal reasons for me to hop these projects but you are most welcome to talk to the managers who I worked with", she dais "Oh absolutely not a problem". Then after half an hour she calls me "This work location may not be the best for you especially because you have to pay a toll on whitestone bridge, would you want to consider something in Manhattan?" I respond "Toll is fine, please go ahead and submit". Then she responds "Hmmm, ok".
I did figure that she did not want to deal with EAD but she was taking me on a roller coaster going back and forth. she never submitted my resume to tyhe hiring manager.
optimystic
03-24 02:54 PM
That's true actually. They have no business asking you about details of what your work authorization status is. All they need to know is that you are legally allowed to work. Doesn't matter EAD, GC or US citizenship. Sponsoring for H1B might come up during the hiring stage but that doesn't apply here.
Hypothetically in an interview, if directly asked, and if I am planning on using EAD, I would simply tell them that I have authorization from the DHS to work for any employer, and leave it at that. If they persist, I will tell them that I have the required documents for I-9. No need for more details unless some kind of security clearance is required.
Its a little hard to understand how the issue of 'work authorization' cannot be raised during interview or hiring process.
- Say I am an employer who has a critical project that needs a person to be on job for at least few months, to ensure that the project goes smoothly
- The DHS/USICS/DOL or the Fed (or whoever it is) has told me that it is illegal for me to hire anyone without proper work authorization
- I may not have sufficient funds to sponsor H1B
- During the interview process I want to know whether the candidate a) has work authorization b) how long his work authorization is valid for? so that I can prescreen and not trouble candidates with the whole interview process only to tell them later that I can't hire them.
Based on the criteria above I dont see how it is illegal to ask what type of work authorization one has, and if EAD , how long it is valid. It may be illegal to disqualify a candidate who has EAD with validity for the required amount of time. But I sure can ask about the details within legal limits, can't I?
I dont think DOL or whatever dept it is, that regulates employment, can force an employer that they have to treat seekers of H1B Visa [and/or EAD people with for example only 1 month validity left] on par with US citizens (On the other hand, it is the vice versa that they are more concerned about :) )....I mean what if the financial position of the employer cannot afford him to sponsor an H1B or take the risk of employing an EAD guy with only 1 month validity and risk financial loss if that guy had to quit after a month due to EAD renewal delay etc.... Would they be forced to sponsor H1B or take a risk by hiring the 1 month EAD guy?
What might be illegal though is rejecting to employ EAD people with reasonable amount of validity left on their card.
Isn't that right? [ I am just curious...I am not supporting the employer here, but just trying to understand the practical enforcement of the legality of such issues]
Regards.
Hypothetically in an interview, if directly asked, and if I am planning on using EAD, I would simply tell them that I have authorization from the DHS to work for any employer, and leave it at that. If they persist, I will tell them that I have the required documents for I-9. No need for more details unless some kind of security clearance is required.
Its a little hard to understand how the issue of 'work authorization' cannot be raised during interview or hiring process.
- Say I am an employer who has a critical project that needs a person to be on job for at least few months, to ensure that the project goes smoothly
- The DHS/USICS/DOL or the Fed (or whoever it is) has told me that it is illegal for me to hire anyone without proper work authorization
- I may not have sufficient funds to sponsor H1B
- During the interview process I want to know whether the candidate a) has work authorization b) how long his work authorization is valid for? so that I can prescreen and not trouble candidates with the whole interview process only to tell them later that I can't hire them.
Based on the criteria above I dont see how it is illegal to ask what type of work authorization one has, and if EAD , how long it is valid. It may be illegal to disqualify a candidate who has EAD with validity for the required amount of time. But I sure can ask about the details within legal limits, can't I?
I dont think DOL or whatever dept it is, that regulates employment, can force an employer that they have to treat seekers of H1B Visa [and/or EAD people with for example only 1 month validity left] on par with US citizens (On the other hand, it is the vice versa that they are more concerned about :) )....I mean what if the financial position of the employer cannot afford him to sponsor an H1B or take the risk of employing an EAD guy with only 1 month validity and risk financial loss if that guy had to quit after a month due to EAD renewal delay etc.... Would they be forced to sponsor H1B or take a risk by hiring the 1 month EAD guy?
What might be illegal though is rejecting to employ EAD people with reasonable amount of validity left on their card.
Isn't that right? [ I am just curious...I am not supporting the employer here, but just trying to understand the practical enforcement of the legality of such issues]
Regards.
2011 twilight kristen stewart bella
seekerofpeace
10-06 01:33 PM
Thanks apb,
You are on the right track....Again no need to thank me....the help in the forum is mutual...I had gained strength from it and I'll reciprocate in every possible way...I am not one to vanish from the forum once I am done and see you guys waiting......well experience with USCIS is like a psychological trauma...it stays long and being a scorpio I can't forget things at all especially injustices....So I'll be there along the way for all you guys....and help you in whatever way I can......
That being said every case is different and gloom and doom scenario should not take over your spirits....I am a cynic by birth and see the glass always half empty but once thing that is different for me is that I never give up......and neither should any of you guys however bad the situation is....be a cynic be a pessimist be a paranoid if you can't help but BE PERSISTENT and UNRELENTING...
SoP
You are on the right track....Again no need to thank me....the help in the forum is mutual...I had gained strength from it and I'll reciprocate in every possible way...I am not one to vanish from the forum once I am done and see you guys waiting......well experience with USCIS is like a psychological trauma...it stays long and being a scorpio I can't forget things at all especially injustices....So I'll be there along the way for all you guys....and help you in whatever way I can......
That being said every case is different and gloom and doom scenario should not take over your spirits....I am a cynic by birth and see the glass always half empty but once thing that is different for me is that I never give up......and neither should any of you guys however bad the situation is....be a cynic be a pessimist be a paranoid if you can't help but BE PERSISTENT and UNRELENTING...
SoP
more...
Canadian_Dream
06-29 05:31 PM
For USCIS isn't the date received that matters not the date postmarked ? Never heard them honoring postmarked date. I could be wrong though !!!
If its mailed out today, then you are ok. Its the POSTMARKED date that is seen. So even if it reaches there in July, as long as it went OUT today, they will have to accept it under June's batch of applications coz it is postmarked in June (june 29).
If its mailed out today, then you are ok. Its the POSTMARKED date that is seen. So even if it reaches there in July, as long as it went OUT today, they will have to accept it under June's batch of applications coz it is postmarked in June (june 29).
mhathi
09-09 11:46 AM
Here is a select list that I was working on since morning. Someone else please post the numbers for others.
Hank Johnson, GA - 202-225-1605
Betty Sutton, OH - 202-225-3401
Brad Sherman, CA - 202-225-5911
Anthony Weiner, NY - 202-225-6616
Adam Schiff, CA - 202-225-4176
Artur Davis, AL - 202-225-2665
Keith Ellison, MN - 202-225-4755
Tammy Baldwin, WI - 202-225-2906
Hank Johnson, GA - 202-225-1605
Betty Sutton, OH - 202-225-3401
Brad Sherman, CA - 202-225-5911
Anthony Weiner, NY - 202-225-6616
Adam Schiff, CA - 202-225-4176
Artur Davis, AL - 202-225-2665
Keith Ellison, MN - 202-225-4755
Tammy Baldwin, WI - 202-225-2906
more...
singhsa3
08-22 06:27 PM
It is unfortunate that people don't even try to understand the issue and just go about complaining it.
Most people can't even differentiate between what is law and what is not. What are difficult things to accomplish and what are not.
It is absolutely imperative that 5882 pass otherwise the situation will continue to exist.
Here are the my estimated waits for EB3-I
PD(end of the calendar year) and its corresponding wait in years
2001 1 year
2002 3 years
2003 4 years (Bad economy in 2002 and early 2003)
2004 7 years (Case surge in 2003 and 2004 due to booming economy)
2005 8 years (fewer cases in 2005 due to PERM)
2006 10 years
2007 12 years
2008 .....
I think we are fighting the wrong fight. I do recognize the whole EB system is unfair and in particular to I/C/M/P.
The letter campaign is a great initiative, but I am not sure if we are focusing on the right problem. By saying that the new "interpretation of the spillover" is cruel to EB3 I/C/M/P is plain wrong. Both old and new interpretations were unfair to EB3 I/C/M/P.
Old interpretation resulted in good forward movement to EB3 ROW while EB2 crawls.
New interpretation results in good forward movement to EB2 while EB3 crawls.
How does EB3 ICMP benefit from both the interpretations?
EB3 is clogged because of the 245i cases. Unless we focus on the exact problem no amount of letters to lawmakers will not yield any result.
Writing letters to lawmakers is not going to provide any impact for this year Here is my reason it takes 3-5 weeks for the lawmakers to get the letters in DC because of special security screening requirements. By the time they receive the letters the Congress would pretty much be done with their term. The best option would be to meet with the lawmakers in their local office or in DC and appraise them of the long wait.
Please do understand that one of the reason USCIS changed their interpretation is because many folks with Ph D's and MS from ICMP where waiting for years to get GC"s and USCIS/DOS looked stupid in explaining the reason for the long wait for such folks. Even in the "visa wastage" hearing in the House immigration committee (on Apr 30) the DOS/USCIS was having trouble explaining the long wait times. One of the witness in the hearing was a PhD from China and had been waiting for years for his GC.
Come on folks. EB2 forward movement is good for EB3's, because EB2 will soon become current and the spillovers will be soon coming to EB3 after EB3 ROW is current. I am anticipating DOS will turn EB2 current in the second half of the year and this will ensure all the spillovers will flow into EB3's because EB2's with PD mid-2007 to now will not be able to clear the NC 180 day barrier. Cheer up folks and let us focus on the real problem getting more number of visa's through recapture.
If you feel strongly about the cause you should meet with your lawmakers office and address the issue. Letter campaign in not going to yield any short term impact. Please take the time to meet with your lawmakers
why are we giving so much importance to Ron. If he is so concerned about this issue why can't he take up this issue with AILA? He is a member of AILA.
Most people can't even differentiate between what is law and what is not. What are difficult things to accomplish and what are not.
It is absolutely imperative that 5882 pass otherwise the situation will continue to exist.
Here are the my estimated waits for EB3-I
PD(end of the calendar year) and its corresponding wait in years
2001 1 year
2002 3 years
2003 4 years (Bad economy in 2002 and early 2003)
2004 7 years (Case surge in 2003 and 2004 due to booming economy)
2005 8 years (fewer cases in 2005 due to PERM)
2006 10 years
2007 12 years
2008 .....
I think we are fighting the wrong fight. I do recognize the whole EB system is unfair and in particular to I/C/M/P.
The letter campaign is a great initiative, but I am not sure if we are focusing on the right problem. By saying that the new "interpretation of the spillover" is cruel to EB3 I/C/M/P is plain wrong. Both old and new interpretations were unfair to EB3 I/C/M/P.
Old interpretation resulted in good forward movement to EB3 ROW while EB2 crawls.
New interpretation results in good forward movement to EB2 while EB3 crawls.
How does EB3 ICMP benefit from both the interpretations?
EB3 is clogged because of the 245i cases. Unless we focus on the exact problem no amount of letters to lawmakers will not yield any result.
Writing letters to lawmakers is not going to provide any impact for this year Here is my reason it takes 3-5 weeks for the lawmakers to get the letters in DC because of special security screening requirements. By the time they receive the letters the Congress would pretty much be done with their term. The best option would be to meet with the lawmakers in their local office or in DC and appraise them of the long wait.
Please do understand that one of the reason USCIS changed their interpretation is because many folks with Ph D's and MS from ICMP where waiting for years to get GC"s and USCIS/DOS looked stupid in explaining the reason for the long wait for such folks. Even in the "visa wastage" hearing in the House immigration committee (on Apr 30) the DOS/USCIS was having trouble explaining the long wait times. One of the witness in the hearing was a PhD from China and had been waiting for years for his GC.
Come on folks. EB2 forward movement is good for EB3's, because EB2 will soon become current and the spillovers will be soon coming to EB3 after EB3 ROW is current. I am anticipating DOS will turn EB2 current in the second half of the year and this will ensure all the spillovers will flow into EB3's because EB2's with PD mid-2007 to now will not be able to clear the NC 180 day barrier. Cheer up folks and let us focus on the real problem getting more number of visa's through recapture.
If you feel strongly about the cause you should meet with your lawmakers office and address the issue. Letter campaign in not going to yield any short term impact. Please take the time to meet with your lawmakers
why are we giving so much importance to Ron. If he is so concerned about this issue why can't he take up this issue with AILA? He is a member of AILA.
2010 hair hairstyles Kristen
needhelp!
01-11 05:40 PM
source is USCIS Ombudsman
�218,759 EB visa numbers available for recapture since 1994. See Page 34 in the report for the full breakdown. Click on the link for the Ombudsman report (http://www.dhs.gov/xlibrary/assets/CISOMB_Annual%20Report_2007.pdf) May 2007.
What is the source for the number 218,000? Is this purely speculation or in some official reports? USCIS Ombudsman report, some official USCIS publication or from any other organization?
Thanks!
�218,759 EB visa numbers available for recapture since 1994. See Page 34 in the report for the full breakdown. Click on the link for the Ombudsman report (http://www.dhs.gov/xlibrary/assets/CISOMB_Annual%20Report_2007.pdf) May 2007.
What is the source for the number 218,000? Is this purely speculation or in some official reports? USCIS Ombudsman report, some official USCIS publication or from any other organization?
Thanks!
more...
eb_retrogession
02-24 02:13 PM
Draft Text of the Comprehensive Immigration Reform Act of 2006 (Chairman Specter�s Mark)
http://www.aila.org/content/default.aspx?docid=18639
From a quick glance, I see all the provisions talked about in various bills for EB category except for recapture of unused visas. Very broad markup.
http://www.aila.org/content/default.aspx?docid=18639
From a quick glance, I see all the provisions talked about in various bills for EB category except for recapture of unused visas. Very broad markup.
hair hair Bella#39;s wedding gown
xlr8r
09-24 12:25 PM
10/10/2007. :)
what was your i-485 notice date?
what was your i-485 notice date?
more...
whitecollarslave
08-06 10:15 PM
Who is funding this?
hot When Kristen Stewart#39;s
chanduv23
03-25 07:12 PM
I have sent an email to the id listed on that site (osccrt@usdoj.gov)with emails from Capital One which says they are not in favor of EADs. Will update once I hear back.
Great, keep us posted.
Great, keep us posted.
more...
house hairstyles kristen stewart
gc_us
09-18 12:09 AM
Happy for those who go the receipts notice.
Mine was signed by J. Barrett on July 2nd @ 10:25 AM and got no update so far.
Tried calling USCIS they don't answer properly.
Lawyers saying can't do anything but wait and watch.
Any idea after 90 days if it's still not in their system then what to do
Mine was signed by J. Barrett on July 2nd @ 10:25 AM and got no update so far.
Tried calling USCIS they don't answer properly.
Lawyers saying can't do anything but wait and watch.
Any idea after 90 days if it's still not in their system then what to do
tattoo kristen stewart bella swan.
tampacoolie
07-14 01:38 PM
I think this guy is smoking crack by fudging the numbers. CNN should block these kind of idiotic broadcasting. We all should fight for this injustic. I am sick of this guy. These kind of propoganda only leads to Nazi ideology in USA.
more...
pictures kristen stewart bella hair
snathan
03-30 05:43 PM
If USCIS is providing spillover visas to EB2 in May, shouldn't the PDs of China and India (countries with most demand) have the same PDs in May VB? Doesn't this also mean that in the worst case the PD of EB2 India will be Jul 22 2006 (the current PD of China) in May VB?
-CinBoy
First they will move India to July 22 2006, if there are more visa numbers both I/C will move togather.
-CinBoy
First they will move India to July 22 2006, if there are more visa numbers both I/C will move togather.
dresses Kristen Stewart#39;s hair
BharatPremi
09-24 06:13 PM
Look at histrocial approval you will know your assumption is incorrect. ROW gets more than half the numbers in any category.
Yes, it is possible that my assumption is not correct. That is why it is an assumtion:).
But till I get some "authentic" base to count on I do not have any way other than logical assumption.
As data what you presented, it was indeed a low rate of approvals for Eb3-I with comparison to EB3-ROW but that was mainly due to the fact that lot many Indians were screwed and stuck in state based labor queue and PERM queue and I-140 queues for years where as EB-ROWS guys did not face that punishment as intensively as we did.
Yes, it is possible that my assumption is not correct. That is why it is an assumtion:).
But till I get some "authentic" base to count on I do not have any way other than logical assumption.
As data what you presented, it was indeed a low rate of approvals for Eb3-I with comparison to EB3-ROW but that was mainly due to the fact that lot many Indians were screwed and stuck in state based labor queue and PERM queue and I-140 queues for years where as EB-ROWS guys did not face that punishment as intensively as we did.
more...
makeup hair Kristen Stewart doesn#39
nogreen4decade
09-15 12:37 PM
I received this email today.
Application Type: I485 , APPLICATION TO REGISTER PERMANENT RESIDENCE OR TO ADJUST STATUS
Your Case Status: Card/ Document Production
485 Journey:
1) Filed 485 in July'07.
2) Changed job in September '08 and also filed AC21 in December 2008
3) My PD got current this month.
4) Infopass on September 1st,2010. IO said, my case is sitting at NSC and also pending FBI background check. So I lowered my hopes to get my approval anytime soon, because of all pre-adjudicated cases.
5) Got CPO email this morning (September 15th,2010)
Thanks for IV contributions to immigration related issues. I am going to contribute more soon.
Application Type: I485 , APPLICATION TO REGISTER PERMANENT RESIDENCE OR TO ADJUST STATUS
Your Case Status: Card/ Document Production
485 Journey:
1) Filed 485 in July'07.
2) Changed job in September '08 and also filed AC21 in December 2008
3) My PD got current this month.
4) Infopass on September 1st,2010. IO said, my case is sitting at NSC and also pending FBI background check. So I lowered my hopes to get my approval anytime soon, because of all pre-adjudicated cases.
5) Got CPO email this morning (September 15th,2010)
Thanks for IV contributions to immigration related issues. I am going to contribute more soon.
girlfriend makeup Kristen Stewart, Bella
CADude
09-26 12:12 PM
Good Luck. We will make difference for remaining July 2nd filer.
Attorney via AILA can make a difference, if he/she wish so. I can't even contact my own attorney. crap company policy.
OK,
July 2nd filer and hear nothing.
Faxed congressman’s office yesterday (Tuesday) morning. The immigration staff called back right for more information. She said she would make an inquiry through her channel.
She called me just now (Wednesday morning): my application is lost – meaning USCIS can’t locate me in their system. This is not new. She probably just called the USCIS customer service line but they can’t say crap like call back after 90 to 120 days. The staff was told that USCIS asked to give them a week to do some inquiry into their system and she will call me back next Wednesday.
On Monday, my attorney has sent an inquiry to the local Senator’s office on the 4 pending cases he has filed. Not heard anything back yet.
Given all the crap I have heard from USCIS customer service, I have NOT made a single call. That would have not made any difference on the fact I am not on the system anyway.
Will post back if there is development.
Attorney via AILA can make a difference, if he/she wish so. I can't even contact my own attorney. crap company policy.
OK,
July 2nd filer and hear nothing.
Faxed congressman’s office yesterday (Tuesday) morning. The immigration staff called back right for more information. She said she would make an inquiry through her channel.
She called me just now (Wednesday morning): my application is lost – meaning USCIS can’t locate me in their system. This is not new. She probably just called the USCIS customer service line but they can’t say crap like call back after 90 to 120 days. The staff was told that USCIS asked to give them a week to do some inquiry into their system and she will call me back next Wednesday.
On Monday, my attorney has sent an inquiry to the local Senator’s office on the 4 pending cases he has filed. Not heard anything back yet.
Given all the crap I have heard from USCIS customer service, I have NOT made a single call. That would have not made any difference on the fact I am not on the system anyway.
Will post back if there is development.
hairstyles house kristen stewart hair
apb
10-02 02:45 PM
Awaiting interview call when the dates are current.
vdlrao
01-05 12:21 AM
This is TRUE and a Very Valid One. And this the time for such a bill.
gc__aspirant
05-08 09:39 PM
I paid the whole amount for all the fees and attorney fee together and they did all the other stuff.
No comments:
Post a Comment