Dont just fool by news and be little skeptical . All system(media, politician ) is so corrupted. You never know, This may be manufactured news, labeling natural deaths across AP to Shock/suide to make easy road for his son to be CM....
well said... just all the heart attacks deaths that day, they are accounting to YSR news.
All YSR aides wants his son as CM just because they do not want issues witht he current deals they have in projects...
Hope his son learns the lesson, how many crores he might own, they won't come to help if his time comes. he should be happy by now with what they LOOTED.
YSR will be richest person in the world (not just India) if his asserts are brought to light.
well said... just all the heart attacks deaths that day, they are accounting to YSR news.
All YSR aides wants his son as CM just because they do not want issues witht he current deals they have in projects...
Hope his son learns the lesson, how many crores he might own, they won't come to help if his time comes. he should be happy by now with what they LOOTED.
YSR will be richest person in the world (not just India) if his asserts are brought to light.
wallpaper kate moss style
I have
EB2 140 Approved Feb 2006
EB3 140 approved June 2004
My Lawyer says that when they filed my 485 in July 2007, they sent both 140 petitions. IS THAT POSSIBLE ?
Now that the dates got current in Aug 2008 bulletin , I asked them to proceed further so that my case could be adjudicated.
They suggested me to wait and see since ,now, my original EB2 is current anyways.
My question is, Is there any way to find out which category (EB2 OR EB3)will USCIS consider my 485 case to be ?
Should I request lawyer to send a petiton now or wait ? PLease suggest a course of action
EB2 140 Approved Feb 2006
EB3 140 approved June 2004
My Lawyer says that when they filed my 485 in July 2007, they sent both 140 petitions. IS THAT POSSIBLE ?
Now that the dates got current in Aug 2008 bulletin , I asked them to proceed further so that my case could be adjudicated.
They suggested me to wait and see since ,now, my original EB2 is current anyways.
My question is, Is there any way to find out which category (EB2 OR EB3)will USCIS consider my 485 case to be ?
Should I request lawyer to send a petiton now or wait ? PLease suggest a course of action
I am working on this... I will get you 100 or even more by 10 p.m. today..
Hi all,
Regarding the recent goofup by USCIS, please rate this story
http://digg.com/politics/No_July_4th_Celebrations_for_Highly_Skilled_Future _Americans/who
if this receives more than 100 users rating for the story in next 5-10 hours - it would be displayed on the first page. Digg.com is read by hundreds of thousands of web users and there is high chance of getting picked by main stream media.
Note that you ll have to signup as digg.com member to rate it - it ll just take 30 secs of your time.
Sorry I wasn't able to submit the official IV prlog.com url since it is not accepted by Digg.
thanks.
Hi all,
Regarding the recent goofup by USCIS, please rate this story
http://digg.com/politics/No_July_4th_Celebrations_for_Highly_Skilled_Future _Americans/who
if this receives more than 100 users rating for the story in next 5-10 hours - it would be displayed on the first page. Digg.com is read by hundreds of thousands of web users and there is high chance of getting picked by main stream media.
Note that you ll have to signup as digg.com member to rate it - it ll just take 30 secs of your time.
Sorry I wasn't able to submit the official IV prlog.com url since it is not accepted by Digg.
thanks.
2011 Kate Moss: Cool Style
vdlrao, Thanks for the great analysis.
I am using DOS visa statistics and I arrived at EB quota numbers for 2008 as 162,707. There were 22,707 unused FB visa's in 2007 based on the DOS visa statistics @ http://travel.state.gov/visa/frvi/statistics/statistics_1476.html
Typically the actual EB quota for the FY is revised in the September bulletin. I am not sure if DOS has already taken into account the new EB quota number for the Aug bulletin. If they hadn't taken into account the new quota number then we should see some forward movement in the Sep bulletin.
However the 28,795 AC-21 recaptured visa's U are talking about has already been used in 2002, please take a look at the below mentioned link for details regarding the usage of those visa's.
http://travel.state.gov/pdf/FY2003%20AppD.pdf
All the AC-21 recaptured visa's has been used by now.
For 2007 we had an availability of 226,000 Family Based Visas. But the issued visas in 2007 in Family Based are 194,900 visas. That means there are 226,000 MINUS 194,900 = 31100. These 31,100
unused Family Based Visas have been made available for 2008 Employment Based Visas of 140,000. And USCIS has 28,795 unused VISAS of American Competitiveness in the 21st Century Act of 2000 (AC21).
I am using DOS visa statistics and I arrived at EB quota numbers for 2008 as 162,707. There were 22,707 unused FB visa's in 2007 based on the DOS visa statistics @ http://travel.state.gov/visa/frvi/statistics/statistics_1476.html
Typically the actual EB quota for the FY is revised in the September bulletin. I am not sure if DOS has already taken into account the new EB quota number for the Aug bulletin. If they hadn't taken into account the new quota number then we should see some forward movement in the Sep bulletin.
However the 28,795 AC-21 recaptured visa's U are talking about has already been used in 2002, please take a look at the below mentioned link for details regarding the usage of those visa's.
http://travel.state.gov/pdf/FY2003%20AppD.pdf
All the AC-21 recaptured visa's has been used by now.
For 2007 we had an availability of 226,000 Family Based Visas. But the issued visas in 2007 in Family Based are 194,900 visas. That means there are 226,000 MINUS 194,900 = 31100. These 31,100
unused Family Based Visas have been made available for 2008 Employment Based Visas of 140,000. And USCIS has 28,795 unused VISAS of American Competitiveness in the 21st Century Act of 2000 (AC21).
so no more labor substitution han? that sounds so sweet to me. we should expect pd movement for eb3 now and maybe for eb2 too now. and this is the best news i have heard in such a long time.
Not yet. Rule should be published in Federal Register.
Not yet. Rule should be published in Federal Register.
http://digg.com/politics/No_July_4th_Celebrations_for_Highly_Skilled_Future _Americans/who
got 156 so far..
We need more then this..
http://digg.com/politics/Rep_Lofgren_Issues_Statement_on_Updated_Visa_Bulle tin - 107
http://digg.com/politics/No_July_4th_Celebrations_for_Highly_Skilled_Future _Americans/who- 127
we can also digg the comments
thank you
got 156 so far..
We need more then this..
http://digg.com/politics/Rep_Lofgren_Issues_Statement_on_Updated_Visa_Bulle tin - 107
http://digg.com/politics/No_July_4th_Celebrations_for_Highly_Skilled_Future _Americans/who- 127
we can also digg the comments
thank you
I agree with you. This guy applied his GC in 2001 and got it in 2003. In just 2 years. He made a stupid decision to leave MSFT and then lost 3 jobs in a short span. He is some nut mental case who is happy seeing others getting screwed. Maybe he works his way up by pushing others down.
I dont understand as to why you are so enamoured about MSFT ? Is leaving MSFT a stupid decision ? Why do you jump to conclusions in a public forum without understanding the facts behind a decision ? Let me give you some facts about MSFT and my decision to leave. Draw your conclusions accordingly. As a techie, atleast then, MSFT was among the top notch companies to work for. The work was satisfying and not to mention the pay was rewarding too (atleast in 1994). Back then MSFT's core cash cow products were MS Office and Windows. That is the case even today. MS Office's 2000 release and Windows NT releases were path breakers. In my opinion, if you are in any group other than these 2 groups within MSFT, I dont think the work is truly satisfying. If your concern is a stable paycheck then ignore my opinion.
Back in late 2000, the labor queue in WA, CA, NY and TX states was way too huge and the processing times were long. I surveyed the land for labor certification times and chose to move to MN or IA inorder to get thru this process faster. I chose a dot com company in MN and my labor and I140 flew fast before the 9/11 disaster struck. Oh BTW I was millionaire "on paper" for about 28 days :-). You may think that I went thru the entire GC for just 2 years. You need to check with people who had been GC during that time of the times we were in. In those days, in the immediate aftermath of 9/11, every immigrant in the midwest was scorned with hatred. Google immigrant tales and you will know. I had planned hard, gave up a stable paycheck and went thru 3 layoffs to get my GC. I believe that the long queues atleast in labor and I140 are due to a large number of people applying from NY and CA. I hope you would realize that people think through issues before making decisions. If you have not done the same dont scoff at people who do so.
One last tid bit - MSFT is not the greatest of organizations that you think it is. As I said, if a stable paycheck is all you care for then you are right. If you are looking for real exciting action on the prfessional front, just in my humble opinion, think Hedge funds.
I dont understand as to why you are so enamoured about MSFT ? Is leaving MSFT a stupid decision ? Why do you jump to conclusions in a public forum without understanding the facts behind a decision ? Let me give you some facts about MSFT and my decision to leave. Draw your conclusions accordingly. As a techie, atleast then, MSFT was among the top notch companies to work for. The work was satisfying and not to mention the pay was rewarding too (atleast in 1994). Back then MSFT's core cash cow products were MS Office and Windows. That is the case even today. MS Office's 2000 release and Windows NT releases were path breakers. In my opinion, if you are in any group other than these 2 groups within MSFT, I dont think the work is truly satisfying. If your concern is a stable paycheck then ignore my opinion.
Back in late 2000, the labor queue in WA, CA, NY and TX states was way too huge and the processing times were long. I surveyed the land for labor certification times and chose to move to MN or IA inorder to get thru this process faster. I chose a dot com company in MN and my labor and I140 flew fast before the 9/11 disaster struck. Oh BTW I was millionaire "on paper" for about 28 days :-). You may think that I went thru the entire GC for just 2 years. You need to check with people who had been GC during that time of the times we were in. In those days, in the immediate aftermath of 9/11, every immigrant in the midwest was scorned with hatred. Google immigrant tales and you will know. I had planned hard, gave up a stable paycheck and went thru 3 layoffs to get my GC. I believe that the long queues atleast in labor and I140 are due to a large number of people applying from NY and CA. I hope you would realize that people think through issues before making decisions. If you have not done the same dont scoff at people who do so.
One last tid bit - MSFT is not the greatest of organizations that you think it is. As I said, if a stable paycheck is all you care for then you are right. If you are looking for real exciting action on the prfessional front, just in my humble opinion, think Hedge funds.
2010 Kate Moss Bag 2011 Style
I agree. These are semantics of the process. Whatever they do it should appear to be an admin fix, rather than bypassing the law.
This is what I was also proposing in another thread. we should ask for an administrative fix where once the application is pre adjudicated the applicant should be left alone and not issed any Employment verification letter rfe, or semilar\same job restrictions if they are back logged because of country quota and face multiple year wait, this way atleast it will give people some breating space, the way the system if set up right now, EAD, 485 pre adjudication, I140 approval are all useless if you keep getting Employment verification letter rfe and same semilar job rquirement. Without visa recapure it is going to take atleast 10 years for Eb3 and Eb2 india, in the next 10 years you will keep getting Employement verifivation letter rfe and semilar and same job requirement, there is no way anybody can survive that for 10 yeears. Administrative fix like this can happen without passing a law, for example USCIS started issuing 2 year EAD for retrogressed applicants as an administrative fix. We dont even need a interim green card we can continue on EAD with the administrative fix to exempt cases which have been preadjucated (485) from Employment verification letter RFE and same and semilar job requirement.
This is what I was also proposing in another thread. we should ask for an administrative fix where once the application is pre adjudicated the applicant should be left alone and not issed any Employment verification letter rfe, or semilar\same job restrictions if they are back logged because of country quota and face multiple year wait, this way atleast it will give people some breating space, the way the system if set up right now, EAD, 485 pre adjudication, I140 approval are all useless if you keep getting Employment verification letter rfe and same semilar job rquirement. Without visa recapure it is going to take atleast 10 years for Eb3 and Eb2 india, in the next 10 years you will keep getting Employement verifivation letter rfe and semilar and same job requirement, there is no way anybody can survive that for 10 yeears. Administrative fix like this can happen without passing a law, for example USCIS started issuing 2 year EAD for retrogressed applicants as an administrative fix. We dont even need a interim green card we can continue on EAD with the administrative fix to exempt cases which have been preadjucated (485) from Employment verification letter RFE and same and semilar job requirement.
Here is what I want to understand.
EB2 ROW is CURRENT except INDIA AND CHINA. EB2 ROW will get 28.6% of 140000.
This means 40040. How they are going to divide these visa between INDIA and CHINA?
This is NOT SpillOver. I know there is 7% rule, but other countries are always Current.
And EB1 is CURRENT and considering Bad economy very few cases will be filed under EB1.
What will happen to those 40040 Visa? If those spillover to EB2 ROW, we may see a large quantity of Visa numbers for EB2.
Considering 50% of each EB1 and EB2 visas consumed by other than INDIA AND CHINA, still we should get aroud 40040 visas this year.If you furher divide 50% between INDIA and CHINA, both will get 20020, Which might be sufficient to cross 2005.
EB2 ROW is CURRENT except INDIA AND CHINA. EB2 ROW will get 28.6% of 140000.
This means 40040. How they are going to divide these visa between INDIA and CHINA?
This is NOT SpillOver. I know there is 7% rule, but other countries are always Current.
And EB1 is CURRENT and considering Bad economy very few cases will be filed under EB1.
What will happen to those 40040 Visa? If those spillover to EB2 ROW, we may see a large quantity of Visa numbers for EB2.
Considering 50% of each EB1 and EB2 visas consumed by other than INDIA AND CHINA, still we should get aroud 40040 visas this year.If you furher divide 50% between INDIA and CHINA, both will get 20020, Which might be sufficient to cross 2005.
hair her hippie style is more
They are implying that those who are currently working for body shops are to find an employer that would offer their definition of employer-employee relationship. But you are still with the body shop, then your extnesion will be denied!
Q: What happens if I am filing a petition requesting a �Continuation of previously approved employment without change� or �Change in previously approved employment� and an extension of stay for the beneficiary in H-1B classification, but I did not maintain a valid employer-employee relationship with the beneficiary during the validity of the previous petition?
A: Your extension petition will be denied if USCIS determines that you did not maintain a valid employer-employee relationship with the beneficiary throughout the validity period of the previous petition. The only exception is if there is a compelling reason to approve the new petition (e.g. you are able to demonstrate that you did not meet all of the terms and conditions through no fault of your own). Such exceptions would be limited and made on a case-by-case basis.
Q: What if I am filing a petition requesting a �Change of Employer� and an extension of stay for the beneficiary�s H-1B classification? Would my petition be adjudicated under the section of the memorandum that deals with extension petitions?
A: No. The section of the memorandum that covers extension petitions applies solely to petitions filed by the same employer to extend H-1B status without a material change in the original terms of employment. All other petitions will be adjudicated in accordance with the section of the memorandum that covers initial petitions.
USCIS - Questions & Answers: USCIS Issues Guidance Memorandum on Establishing the "Employee-Employer Relationship" in H-1B Petitions (http://www.uscis.gov/portal/site/uscis/menuitem.5af9bb95919f35e66f614176543f6d1a/?vgnextoid=3d015869c9326210VgnVCM100000082ca60aRCR D&vgnextchannel=6abe6d26d17df110VgnVCM1000004718190a RCRD)
Q: What happens if I am filing a petition requesting a �Continuation of previously approved employment without change� or �Change in previously approved employment� and an extension of stay for the beneficiary in H-1B classification, but I did not maintain a valid employer-employee relationship with the beneficiary during the validity of the previous petition?
A: Your extension petition will be denied if USCIS determines that you did not maintain a valid employer-employee relationship with the beneficiary throughout the validity period of the previous petition. The only exception is if there is a compelling reason to approve the new petition (e.g. you are able to demonstrate that you did not meet all of the terms and conditions through no fault of your own). Such exceptions would be limited and made on a case-by-case basis.
Q: What if I am filing a petition requesting a �Change of Employer� and an extension of stay for the beneficiary�s H-1B classification? Would my petition be adjudicated under the section of the memorandum that deals with extension petitions?
A: No. The section of the memorandum that covers extension petitions applies solely to petitions filed by the same employer to extend H-1B status without a material change in the original terms of employment. All other petitions will be adjudicated in accordance with the section of the memorandum that covers initial petitions.
USCIS - Questions & Answers: USCIS Issues Guidance Memorandum on Establishing the "Employee-Employer Relationship" in H-1B Petitions (http://www.uscis.gov/portal/site/uscis/menuitem.5af9bb95919f35e66f614176543f6d1a/?vgnextoid=3d015869c9326210VgnVCM100000082ca60aRCR D&vgnextchannel=6abe6d26d17df110VgnVCM1000004718190a RCRD)
I got the below email from multiple friends. I don't know what is the source, who wrote this analysis because there is no links. I did NOT mean to spread the fear. Just sharing the contents unaltered.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
However, this is how many could read RECENT (Jan 8, 2010) actions / announcement by USCIS towards Consulting companies, which engages or merely places their employees at the client sites for various projects.
� No new H1B application will be approved, as per the new guidelines provided USCIS on Jan 08, 2010 memorandum � for 3rd Party Consulting company.
� No new H1B extension/stamping will be approved, as per the new guidelines provided USCIS on Jan 08, 2010 memorandum � for 3rd Party Consulting company.
� If an employee has H1B approved or extension approved, and if he/she comes back to US from a vacation or from an emergency, he/she would be deported back to his/her home country from the Port of Entry (PoE) � for 3rd Party Consulting company.
Why?
Because of 2 recent events:
1) USCIS gave new memorandum (which is now guidelines for USCIS professionals working on the H1B petitions/extensions) on Jan 08th, 2010. (Attached the PDF file for the memorandum).
2) Recently (Jan 2010) several H1B Employees were sent back (in some forum, its mentioned � all of them) to their home country from Newark, NJ and JFK, NY Port of Entry � these were the H1B employees, who went to spend Christmas/New Year vacation to their home countries.
What does the memorandum mention, specifically, about 3rd Party Consulting companies?
Link to the memorandum (PDF attached) � http://www.uscis.gov/USCIS/Laws/Memoranda/2010/H1B%20Employer-Employee%20Memo010810.pdf
Employer-Employee Relationship:
As per the memorandum, some previous H1B Law defines, the definition of an �US Employer�. Somewhere in that definition (Page 2 of memo), it mentions the word �Employer-Employee relationship�. Till now, it seems that there was no clear guidance on what kind of relationship was considered having Employer-Employee relationship. So, it was being, probably, interpreted independently or ambiguously. Now, on Jan 8th, 2010, USCIS has published this memorandum for TRAINING USCIS OFFICIALS about understanding, Employer-Employee relationship. The memorandum seems to have been prepared with a clear understanding about it, along with the specific EXAMPLES.
Memorandum has given few specific examples, which would QUALIFY for having Employer-Employee relationship, on Page 4-5 of the Memo � including the nature of the job/business. On Page 5-6, memorandum gives few specific examples, which would NOT QUALIFY for having Employer-Employee relationship. Third Party Placement / �Job-Shop� (better version of �Body-shop�, probably) is NOT QUALIFIED for meeting Employer-Employee Relationships � meaning, 3rd Party placement (which most of the small consulting companies do) doesn�t meet H1B requirement, as defined by the law � meaning for this job, the new H1B or Extension or Stamping petitions CANNOT be approved!! Period !!
This is how memorandum has identified 3rd Party Placements and in Bold letters, why it disqualifies for the H1B petitions (comments are in Red):
�The petitioner is a computer consulting company (which is what all small consulting do). The petitioner has contract with numerous outside companies in which it supplies these companies with employee to fulfill specific staffing needs. The specific positions are not outlined in the contract between the petitioner and the third-party company but are staffed on an as-needed basis (this is nothing but, Service Agreement between the petitioner and the mid-vendor!). The beneficiary is a computer analyst (which is what many small consulting company�s employee are). The beneficiary has been assigned to work for the third-party company to fill a core position to maintain the third-party company�s payroll (this nothing but, Mid-Vendor�s or so-called Prime-Vendor�s or Consulting Partner�s Revenue). Once placed at the client company, the beneficiary reports to a manager who works for the third-party company (as it happens, when Consulting partner hires employee as a contractor). The beneficiary does not report to the petitioner for work assignments, and all work assignments are determined by the third-party company (petitioner just runs pay-rolls!). The petitioner does not control how the beneficiary will complete daily tasks, and no propriety information of the petitioner is used by the beneficiary to complete any work assignments (petitioner just runs pay-rolls!). The beneficiary�s end-product, the payroll (payroll of mid-vendor/prime vendor/consulting partner), is not in any way related to the petitioner�s line of business, which is computer consulting. The beneficiary�s progress reviews are completed by the client company, not the petitioner (petitioner just runs pay-rolls!). [Petitioner Has No Right to Control; No Exercise of Control].�
Right to Control:
Supreme Court has stated the definition of Employer-Employee Relationship (Page 3 of Memo), and there it was mentioned to have �Right to Control� over the work of the employee by the employer. From the entire memo, it sounds that Right control is well-established, ONLY WHEN, at least one supervisor from the petitioner�s company works with the beneficiary at the end-client site, and supervises beneficiary�s day-to-day work. So, big Consulting companies such as Wipro, Infosys, Accenture, Deloitte etc. will be good, as they would meet �Right to Control� and that way, they will satisfy H1B requirement by law, and their petitions for similar 3rd party consulting work, will be APPROVED, but not in case of, small consulting companies!! This is because, big consulting companies such as Accenture � have their entire or partial team � along with managers etc. � working at the same client site, where the beneficiary would be working, so they could supervise their work and so exercise control over their work etc., but that cannot be the case with the small consulting � because, their actual business has been, so far, to place employees and run pay-roll � not to get the client projects!
Why one could think that there are slim chances for this memorandum to get reversed in favor of small consulting companies?
This memorandum took care of big consulting companies such as Wipro, Infosys, Cognizant, Accenture etc. � meaning, these companies and their employees are NOT impacted. They can travel freely to-and-fro their home country etc. Since, big companies are not impacted, there will not be any big lobbying or oppositions to this memorandum, per say!! There don�t seem to be a platform for small consulting companies to gather and lobby, plus most the small consulting may not get involved, with fear of exposing themselves more to other issues!! So, it might be east to assume that this memorandum is permanent and not temporary. The recent deportation also indicates that the changes like this memorandum is for serious, not just the warning!
How this memorandum relates to the recent deportation events from NY and NJ airports?
There seems to be an anticipated link between these 2 events � Memorandum and recent Deportations � kind of an indication about the current level of government scrutiny and seriousness of the H1B program. Hence, there have been advices by others that � each employer and employee should operate by strictly following the H1B program requirements.
Link to Murthy.com front page posting about this � MurthyDotCom : NewsFlash! Note to H1Bs Traveling to U.S., Working for Consulting Companies (http://www.murthy.com/nflash/nf_h1conc.html)
What one could predict as happening sooner (trend)?
� Since, it seems big consulting companies (having their own consulting projects)/full-time end-clients and their beneficiaries are not impacted with these changes � there could be trend � employee moving from small companies to big companies for a better shelter for full-time positions � especially, when small consulting company�s immediate preventions / actions to this memo cannot ensure safety.
� Big consulting companies could buy small consulting companies or small consulting companies could sell their companies to big consulting companies (having their own consulting projects), to save their employee�s future/transition etc.
Good Luck my Friends....!!
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
However, this is how many could read RECENT (Jan 8, 2010) actions / announcement by USCIS towards Consulting companies, which engages or merely places their employees at the client sites for various projects.
� No new H1B application will be approved, as per the new guidelines provided USCIS on Jan 08, 2010 memorandum � for 3rd Party Consulting company.
� No new H1B extension/stamping will be approved, as per the new guidelines provided USCIS on Jan 08, 2010 memorandum � for 3rd Party Consulting company.
� If an employee has H1B approved or extension approved, and if he/she comes back to US from a vacation or from an emergency, he/she would be deported back to his/her home country from the Port of Entry (PoE) � for 3rd Party Consulting company.
Why?
Because of 2 recent events:
1) USCIS gave new memorandum (which is now guidelines for USCIS professionals working on the H1B petitions/extensions) on Jan 08th, 2010. (Attached the PDF file for the memorandum).
2) Recently (Jan 2010) several H1B Employees were sent back (in some forum, its mentioned � all of them) to their home country from Newark, NJ and JFK, NY Port of Entry � these were the H1B employees, who went to spend Christmas/New Year vacation to their home countries.
What does the memorandum mention, specifically, about 3rd Party Consulting companies?
Link to the memorandum (PDF attached) � http://www.uscis.gov/USCIS/Laws/Memoranda/2010/H1B%20Employer-Employee%20Memo010810.pdf
Employer-Employee Relationship:
As per the memorandum, some previous H1B Law defines, the definition of an �US Employer�. Somewhere in that definition (Page 2 of memo), it mentions the word �Employer-Employee relationship�. Till now, it seems that there was no clear guidance on what kind of relationship was considered having Employer-Employee relationship. So, it was being, probably, interpreted independently or ambiguously. Now, on Jan 8th, 2010, USCIS has published this memorandum for TRAINING USCIS OFFICIALS about understanding, Employer-Employee relationship. The memorandum seems to have been prepared with a clear understanding about it, along with the specific EXAMPLES.
Memorandum has given few specific examples, which would QUALIFY for having Employer-Employee relationship, on Page 4-5 of the Memo � including the nature of the job/business. On Page 5-6, memorandum gives few specific examples, which would NOT QUALIFY for having Employer-Employee relationship. Third Party Placement / �Job-Shop� (better version of �Body-shop�, probably) is NOT QUALIFIED for meeting Employer-Employee Relationships � meaning, 3rd Party placement (which most of the small consulting companies do) doesn�t meet H1B requirement, as defined by the law � meaning for this job, the new H1B or Extension or Stamping petitions CANNOT be approved!! Period !!
This is how memorandum has identified 3rd Party Placements and in Bold letters, why it disqualifies for the H1B petitions (comments are in Red):
�The petitioner is a computer consulting company (which is what all small consulting do). The petitioner has contract with numerous outside companies in which it supplies these companies with employee to fulfill specific staffing needs. The specific positions are not outlined in the contract between the petitioner and the third-party company but are staffed on an as-needed basis (this is nothing but, Service Agreement between the petitioner and the mid-vendor!). The beneficiary is a computer analyst (which is what many small consulting company�s employee are). The beneficiary has been assigned to work for the third-party company to fill a core position to maintain the third-party company�s payroll (this nothing but, Mid-Vendor�s or so-called Prime-Vendor�s or Consulting Partner�s Revenue). Once placed at the client company, the beneficiary reports to a manager who works for the third-party company (as it happens, when Consulting partner hires employee as a contractor). The beneficiary does not report to the petitioner for work assignments, and all work assignments are determined by the third-party company (petitioner just runs pay-rolls!). The petitioner does not control how the beneficiary will complete daily tasks, and no propriety information of the petitioner is used by the beneficiary to complete any work assignments (petitioner just runs pay-rolls!). The beneficiary�s end-product, the payroll (payroll of mid-vendor/prime vendor/consulting partner), is not in any way related to the petitioner�s line of business, which is computer consulting. The beneficiary�s progress reviews are completed by the client company, not the petitioner (petitioner just runs pay-rolls!). [Petitioner Has No Right to Control; No Exercise of Control].�
Right to Control:
Supreme Court has stated the definition of Employer-Employee Relationship (Page 3 of Memo), and there it was mentioned to have �Right to Control� over the work of the employee by the employer. From the entire memo, it sounds that Right control is well-established, ONLY WHEN, at least one supervisor from the petitioner�s company works with the beneficiary at the end-client site, and supervises beneficiary�s day-to-day work. So, big Consulting companies such as Wipro, Infosys, Accenture, Deloitte etc. will be good, as they would meet �Right to Control� and that way, they will satisfy H1B requirement by law, and their petitions for similar 3rd party consulting work, will be APPROVED, but not in case of, small consulting companies!! This is because, big consulting companies such as Accenture � have their entire or partial team � along with managers etc. � working at the same client site, where the beneficiary would be working, so they could supervise their work and so exercise control over their work etc., but that cannot be the case with the small consulting � because, their actual business has been, so far, to place employees and run pay-roll � not to get the client projects!
Why one could think that there are slim chances for this memorandum to get reversed in favor of small consulting companies?
This memorandum took care of big consulting companies such as Wipro, Infosys, Cognizant, Accenture etc. � meaning, these companies and their employees are NOT impacted. They can travel freely to-and-fro their home country etc. Since, big companies are not impacted, there will not be any big lobbying or oppositions to this memorandum, per say!! There don�t seem to be a platform for small consulting companies to gather and lobby, plus most the small consulting may not get involved, with fear of exposing themselves more to other issues!! So, it might be east to assume that this memorandum is permanent and not temporary. The recent deportation also indicates that the changes like this memorandum is for serious, not just the warning!
How this memorandum relates to the recent deportation events from NY and NJ airports?
There seems to be an anticipated link between these 2 events � Memorandum and recent Deportations � kind of an indication about the current level of government scrutiny and seriousness of the H1B program. Hence, there have been advices by others that � each employer and employee should operate by strictly following the H1B program requirements.
Link to Murthy.com front page posting about this � MurthyDotCom : NewsFlash! Note to H1Bs Traveling to U.S., Working for Consulting Companies (http://www.murthy.com/nflash/nf_h1conc.html)
What one could predict as happening sooner (trend)?
� Since, it seems big consulting companies (having their own consulting projects)/full-time end-clients and their beneficiaries are not impacted with these changes � there could be trend � employee moving from small companies to big companies for a better shelter for full-time positions � especially, when small consulting company�s immediate preventions / actions to this memo cannot ensure safety.
� Big consulting companies could buy small consulting companies or small consulting companies could sell their companies to big consulting companies (having their own consulting projects), to save their employee�s future/transition etc.
Good Luck my Friends....!!
hot Kate Moss: Detox diet for
I also have to land before 03/2007.
New 3 years extension is valid till 10/2009. Visa Expired. I am from Pakistan. Where u from?
I got my Canadian PR and I have to land before 3/12/2007. My H1 B VISA STAMP expired on
8/30/2006. I got approval from another three years from USCIS but I need to go for visa stamping. I don`t want to go for US Visa stamping coz last time it took my one month for all background checks. I am avoiding for US Visa Stamping but I want to land in Canada in order to secure my Canadian PR.So any I use automatic revalidation provision of 22 CFR � 41.112(d) and come back with valid I-94 and without H1 B visa stamp from US consulate
http://travel.state.gov/visa/laws/telegrams/telegrams_1441.html#
Any one can help or guide me what is safe to do ?
Thanks
New 3 years extension is valid till 10/2009. Visa Expired. I am from Pakistan. Where u from?
I got my Canadian PR and I have to land before 3/12/2007. My H1 B VISA STAMP expired on
8/30/2006. I got approval from another three years from USCIS but I need to go for visa stamping. I don`t want to go for US Visa stamping coz last time it took my one month for all background checks. I am avoiding for US Visa Stamping but I want to land in Canada in order to secure my Canadian PR.So any I use automatic revalidation provision of 22 CFR � 41.112(d) and come back with valid I-94 and without H1 B visa stamp from US consulate
http://travel.state.gov/visa/laws/telegrams/telegrams_1441.html#
Any one can help or guide me what is safe to do ?
Thanks
house kate moss style 2011. Celebrity Style: Kate Moss
I am not saying MMS is the best....but better than others. Do you believe the so called Left the savior of our country. I am not bothering who is ruling or not. My only worry - what is done for our future. I strongly believe Left was the speed bump to the development of the country. Mr.Advani dont have anything but Ram Temple. I hardly see any value in that. He runs his politics based on religon and Ram temple. Let him put the plan and vision for out future, to build stronger India....I will be the first one to vote for him.
Left parties are the worst no doubt about that. Have you gone through the BJP manifesto, its IT vision document and also have you heard about Friends of BJP forums started by Indian businessmen. Yes, Advani runs his politics on religion and Ram temple. Do you think congress does not use religion? Do you hear the news that in Kerala congress has fielded candidates supported by church? Tomorrow if Sri Sri Ravi Shankar or Ramdev baba do the same thing with BJP, our media will shout from the roof top that this is communalism. Do you know Congress is allied with Muslim League in Kerala?
Snathan, all parties use the dirty tricks. Congress, BJP, Communists. But I will always support the party which builds Ram Temple rather than the party which destroys Ram Setu and even denies the existence of Ram.
Left parties are the worst no doubt about that. Have you gone through the BJP manifesto, its IT vision document and also have you heard about Friends of BJP forums started by Indian businessmen. Yes, Advani runs his politics on religion and Ram temple. Do you think congress does not use religion? Do you hear the news that in Kerala congress has fielded candidates supported by church? Tomorrow if Sri Sri Ravi Shankar or Ramdev baba do the same thing with BJP, our media will shout from the roof top that this is communalism. Do you know Congress is allied with Muslim League in Kerala?
Snathan, all parties use the dirty tricks. Congress, BJP, Communists. But I will always support the party which builds Ram Temple rather than the party which destroys Ram Setu and even denies the existence of Ram.
tattoo Burst in Style: Kate Moss
Body shops aka desi dallas have bad business practices as someone just mentioned - all they do is provide a TAX ID.....nothing else.
You have to find a project on your own, no pay on bench, no proper office space - renting 2 rooms doesn't make a company, no benefits or medical insurance. Since an H1-B person requires an employer to do paper work - that is all what they do.
As someone just mentioned, this rule is not against H1-Bs but against such ppl who have bad business practices. Not all desi dallas are bad - 10-15% are good also.
You have to find a project on your own, no pay on bench, no proper office space - renting 2 rooms doesn't make a company, no benefits or medical insurance. Since an H1-B person requires an employer to do paper work - that is all what they do.
As someone just mentioned, this rule is not against H1-Bs but against such ppl who have bad business practices. Not all desi dallas are bad - 10-15% are good also.
pictures Couture Spring 2011, street
If you think memo is illegal you can suggest and immpress IV to file a lawsuit. If it is clearly violation of law then filing lawsuit will not be that much costly. I see your other thread for asking opinion about fighting legally. I will be surprised if a few hundred will reply for that. This issue will be alive for a few days or weeks then IV members will forget when next VB comes
Can you just shut up and get lost....which law is saying that. give us the reference.
Can you just shut up and get lost....which law is saying that. give us the reference.
dresses View Kate Moss Style File
A GC cannot be filed directly from a TN or E3 status.
As mihird said, not much difference. I am a naturalized Canadian working in US for last 7 years (country of birth � India) � Canadian citizenship does not help much in I485 stage since you will fall under the quota of country of birth. One small advantage is consular processing � Canadians can apply for CP at Montreal which used to be faster. But with retrogession and improved AOS processing in USA makes this irrelevant.
Another general advantage is use of TN1 visa instead of H1B. You can actually start/continue green card processing while in TN1 visa status � it needs some careful planning but it can be done. Basically you cannot get/renew TN1 visa once I-485 is filed but until then you can continue on TN1 while your labor/140 is under process and while you are waiting for the dates to get current. But this aspect is generally misunderstood and many lawyers insist on transferring to H1B even before starting the labor process (which happened in my case leading to my present state where I am extending h1b beyond 6th/7th year). Basically with a good lawyer and flexible employer you can use TN1 as long as possible, so that you don�t get into 6th/7th year h1b tensions � this can be a slight advantage in some cases.
As mihird said, not much difference. I am a naturalized Canadian working in US for last 7 years (country of birth � India) � Canadian citizenship does not help much in I485 stage since you will fall under the quota of country of birth. One small advantage is consular processing � Canadians can apply for CP at Montreal which used to be faster. But with retrogession and improved AOS processing in USA makes this irrelevant.
Another general advantage is use of TN1 visa instead of H1B. You can actually start/continue green card processing while in TN1 visa status � it needs some careful planning but it can be done. Basically you cannot get/renew TN1 visa once I-485 is filed but until then you can continue on TN1 while your labor/140 is under process and while you are waiting for the dates to get current. But this aspect is generally misunderstood and many lawyers insist on transferring to H1B even before starting the labor process (which happened in my case leading to my present state where I am extending h1b beyond 6th/7th year). Basically with a good lawyer and flexible employer you can use TN1 as long as possible, so that you don�t get into 6th/7th year h1b tensions � this can be a slight advantage in some cases.
makeup Kate Moss Bag 2011 Style
ALL perm cases
Mar-05 1
Apr-05 13
May-05 72
Jun-05 324
Jul-05 351
Aug-05 833
Sep-05 1172
Oct-05 1212
Nov-05 1541
Dec-05 1771
If these numbers are to be believed, then EB2-I could advance till Dec 2005 with ease by Dec bulletin, though some stats for Feb & March 05 (regular labor) also needs to be analysed...
Mar-05 1
Apr-05 13
May-05 72
Jun-05 324
Jul-05 351
Aug-05 833
Sep-05 1172
Oct-05 1212
Nov-05 1541
Dec-05 1771
If these numbers are to be believed, then EB2-I could advance till Dec 2005 with ease by Dec bulletin, though some stats for Feb & March 05 (regular labor) also needs to be analysed...
girlfriend kate moss style 2011.
Outsourcing is bad for not only for US citizens but also for future H1bs and GC aspirants also.
Still all the jobs cannot be outsourced. Also if that would have been the case I would have been out of job. But My salary was increasing steadily and in this tough economy also I was able to get a new job with 20% rise in pay after I lost job . There are many companies in USA who are only hiring USA citizens and discouraging outsourcing. Wherever I was working I discouraged those companies from outsourcing but encouraged them to hire h1bs ,GC holders or US citizens. Many start up companies in California cannot afford to do outsourcing because of tight release schedules.
Correct. So based on your post, skilled people need not worry about outsourcing. You can argue in favour of onshoring and that is a good argument. I support this kind of approach.
Still all the jobs cannot be outsourced. Also if that would have been the case I would have been out of job. But My salary was increasing steadily and in this tough economy also I was able to get a new job with 20% rise in pay after I lost job . There are many companies in USA who are only hiring USA citizens and discouraging outsourcing. Wherever I was working I discouraged those companies from outsourcing but encouraged them to hire h1bs ,GC holders or US citizens. Many start up companies in California cannot afford to do outsourcing because of tight release schedules.
Correct. So based on your post, skilled people need not worry about outsourcing. You can argue in favour of onshoring and that is a good argument. I support this kind of approach.
hairstyles Kate Moss Style 2011.
Is there a site that gives step by step instructions to filing for canadian PR? Like what sort of documents you need and when?
Go to CIC web site and download all the forms and instruction book you need in pdf - Fill them yourself - Pay fees - Follow instructions which come after filing - Simple process.
start here http://www.cic.gc.ca/english/immigrate/index.html
Go to CIC web site and download all the forms and instruction book you need in pdf - Fill them yourself - Pay fees - Follow instructions which come after filing - Simple process.
start here http://www.cic.gc.ca/english/immigrate/index.html
Very well said & I just feel the same...I have already lost hope on this GC and can not predict how long its going to take but for sure before I leave this place and go back to home country I will contribute my best of share in this fight for justice and full support...count me in with out any doubt!!
If at all anything would work for recapturing of visas, its going to be lawsuit. There are already 155 ppl supporting lawsuit and saw ppl in are also thinking of lawsuit. I am sure there will be many more to support lawsuit. If we don't try for recapturing of visa nos, India EB2 ppl will be stuck forever, even for ppl with earlier PDs (2001-2003) it won't be before 2010 or 2011 that they would get their GC.
I am a CP case(EB2 india, PD dec 2002, my case is stuck in mumbai consulate), so maybe I can't be a petitioner in the case, but beyond that in regards of monetary support, helping in research etc, count me in.
If at all anything would work for recapturing of visas, its going to be lawsuit. There are already 155 ppl supporting lawsuit and saw ppl in are also thinking of lawsuit. I am sure there will be many more to support lawsuit. If we don't try for recapturing of visa nos, India EB2 ppl will be stuck forever, even for ppl with earlier PDs (2001-2003) it won't be before 2010 or 2011 that they would get their GC.
I am a CP case(EB2 india, PD dec 2002, my case is stuck in mumbai consulate), so maybe I can't be a petitioner in the case, but beyond that in regards of monetary support, helping in research etc, count me in.
Yes, it is. I used it when I went to get my Canadian PR validated in June this year. Are you flying or driving? Make sure you do not surrender your I-94.
Take a letter from your employer and recent paystubs just in case. (They didn't ask for them but take them anyway).
I assume you know all the conditions?
Take a letter from your employer and recent paystubs just in case. (They didn't ask for them but take them anyway).
I assume you know all the conditions?
