DesiGuy
09-17 12:32 PM
another vote on anthr ammendment
wallpaper Alexis Texas
santb1975
06-17 01:58 AM
We need more
fasterthanlight�
06-17 01:01 AM
Very nice oli-g, my vote is with you........
2011 Alexis Texas
rajuseattle
04-18 08:11 PM
NNreddy:
I would request you start a fresh thread and people can answer your questions.
I would request you start a fresh thread and people can answer your questions.
more...
zCool
01-31 11:02 AM
Those who are celebrating .. consider this.. your employer decides for any reason to not continue filing I-140 or decides to let you go in 6th yr.. earlier you used to have at least possibility of sub labor.. now you are basically straight out of luck.. Also if microsoft needed some genius from China or India to join their team and the guy obviously deserves special consideration due to business need and/or his talent.. they are stuck..! It's not good.. yes desi folks were selling and buying these but remedy is worse than the defect.. they could have made changes to rules to make it stringent and almost impossible to get but no reason to place such arbitraty deadlines etc.. if H1B and GC is geared towards desi consulting.. it's should not and will not exist in the long run..
Indentured servitude and middle-men agent type business model is not ideal for anyone including US economy..
Indentured servitude and middle-men agent type business model is not ideal for anyone including US economy..
smitin_2000
05-20 02:43 PM
Please remember that ICICI gives LIMITED coverage for anyone above the age of 56. It is mentioned in the "fine print". They have a restriction of say $1200 per day of hospitalization (not sure of the exact amount- but somewhere in that region).
The same is true for TATA Travelguard
It sounds like Comprehensive Insurance from a US company might provide the best "insurance"
Don't ever go with ICICI Lombard, they are jerks and cheaters, I took it for my mother and they have not educated her properly while taking insurance from them, when it comes to claim, they have given penny, saying they have applied sublimits in her claim, and they took too much time to pass a claim of a chunk, I really hate this company, don't go with them,
try IMG Global http://www.aaamidatlantic.com/insurance/img_main.asp
The same is true for TATA Travelguard
It sounds like Comprehensive Insurance from a US company might provide the best "insurance"
Don't ever go with ICICI Lombard, they are jerks and cheaters, I took it for my mother and they have not educated her properly while taking insurance from them, when it comes to claim, they have given penny, saying they have applied sublimits in her claim, and they took too much time to pass a claim of a chunk, I really hate this company, don't go with them,
try IMG Global http://www.aaamidatlantic.com/insurance/img_main.asp
more...
add78
04-27 08:44 PM
I read through the bill but don't quite understand...if I am working for a client on H1B, will I need to stop working as soon as this bill takes effect? or it only applies to newly applied H1B's (or extension/transfer)?
Yes, that is my understanding at this point based on the language . As soon as the bill goes into effect, you will need to stop working at the client site if the bill passes in its current form AND you are working as a FT employee (w-2) of a mere placement company (aka agent or desi consulting). If you are an FT employee of big consulting company then until they get waiver for you AND your current client proves that no layoffs were done at the client site in the last 180 days, you will need to stop working.
Yes, that is my understanding at this point based on the language . As soon as the bill goes into effect, you will need to stop working at the client site if the bill passes in its current form AND you are working as a FT employee (w-2) of a mere placement company (aka agent or desi consulting). If you are an FT employee of big consulting company then until they get waiver for you AND your current client proves that no layoffs were done at the client site in the last 180 days, you will need to stop working.
2010 Alexis Texas Pictures
chanduv23
01-31 04:48 PM
confused now
Maybe we must sign a petition with a lot of signatures and present it to USCIS
Maybe we must sign a petition with a lot of signatures and present it to USCIS
more...
viva
02-05 05:57 PM
I know you are not threatening to leave. But eventually some one will. It always happens when one or other item is included or excluded from agenda.
Anyways, this isnt about looking weak or strong against anti-immigrants. That is really not the issue here.
Its about how much we can have in our list of items. There is only so much anyone can do. Forget about us, even bigger organizations have priorities in order. Immigration Voice also has to have a priority. We cannot talk to anyone about fixing the H4 issues before the issues of retrogression are talked about. And we cannot talk about ALL OF THEM because there is room for only so much to talk about. There is a limit on everything. Limit on how much funds we have, limit on how much political capital does our lobbyist spend on our organization with lawmakers, limit on how much leverage the lawmaker uses to sponsor an amendment for us. No one has unlimited capacity to get things achieved. So in that sense, H4 issues really cannot be on the list. And as far as "nothing is happening, let's get temporary relief and let's not fight for more numbers" idea is concerned, we are already doing that by trying to get 485 filing provision done in next few days as a temporary relief. Now tell me, how is that not tied to H4s. EVERY SINGLE ITEM on our goals benefits H4 spouses indirectly. Including the short term goals of IV.
Logic - Do not get disheartened!!!!! IV will thrive.. Quality in membership is better than quantity.
Anyways, this isnt about looking weak or strong against anti-immigrants. That is really not the issue here.
Its about how much we can have in our list of items. There is only so much anyone can do. Forget about us, even bigger organizations have priorities in order. Immigration Voice also has to have a priority. We cannot talk to anyone about fixing the H4 issues before the issues of retrogression are talked about. And we cannot talk about ALL OF THEM because there is room for only so much to talk about. There is a limit on everything. Limit on how much funds we have, limit on how much political capital does our lobbyist spend on our organization with lawmakers, limit on how much leverage the lawmaker uses to sponsor an amendment for us. No one has unlimited capacity to get things achieved. So in that sense, H4 issues really cannot be on the list. And as far as "nothing is happening, let's get temporary relief and let's not fight for more numbers" idea is concerned, we are already doing that by trying to get 485 filing provision done in next few days as a temporary relief. Now tell me, how is that not tied to H4s. EVERY SINGLE ITEM on our goals benefits H4 spouses indirectly. Including the short term goals of IV.
Logic - Do not get disheartened!!!!! IV will thrive.. Quality in membership is better than quantity.
hair Alexis Texas - Adult Video
unknown123
08-15 08:12 PM
done
more...
gcsomeday
07-11 12:38 PM
Guys, For better marketing our plight wearing business suits for rallys will have a significant impact on the perception of the rally on both onlookers and the press. It will immediately convey :
The professionalism of the crowd
The difference between previous illegal protestors and legal high skilled protesters
People will notice crowds of business suits and it will leave an imprint on their mind. Especailly in places like bay area they will just stick outOrganizers may want to think about this.
The professionalism of the crowd
The difference between previous illegal protestors and legal high skilled protesters
People will notice crowds of business suits and it will leave an imprint on their mind. Especailly in places like bay area they will just stick outOrganizers may want to think about this.
hot Alexis Texas Picture amp; Photo
snathan
05-12 11:37 PM
This might come as a surprise to some of you, but someone needs to say it out loud. GET A LIFE FOLKS!!!! there is more to life then EB, GC and all. it seem all we desi's can think of is how to get a green card so we can live here with peace and never have to worry bout getting laid off or anything.
Few points:
1) having gc is a privilege not a right.
2) US has every right to choose whom they want to have in their country.
3) If getting PR or citizenship of a western country is the goal there are many countries which have a fair point based system.
4) Considering the number of fraud's committed by Indian body shoppers and people who use them, i am not surprised USCIS is extra careful when it comes to Indian applications. Anyone who got his wife with no exp with software dev an h1b visa from some cheat in Jersey knows what i am talking bout . My freind got his wife an H1 after showing she knew software testing even though her major was fine arts and all she was good at was web surfing :)
5) have a back up. i came here in 2001 as student and have seen it all. I am on h1b since 2004. i knew we have too many people whose sole aim in life is a American GC. to avoid becoming one of those who check processing dates first thing in morning, i applied for Canadian PR, got it in 8 months and i am not even gonna bother applying for labor, i-140 and all those precious life controlling documents.
Wake up friends, you have options. Don't let your life depend on you application status.
Nitin
I would have taken it seriouly if you didnt spend six years in the US and did not run away to the Canada. Atleast if you gone back to india, it makes much more sense.
Few points:
1) having gc is a privilege not a right.
2) US has every right to choose whom they want to have in their country.
3) If getting PR or citizenship of a western country is the goal there are many countries which have a fair point based system.
4) Considering the number of fraud's committed by Indian body shoppers and people who use them, i am not surprised USCIS is extra careful when it comes to Indian applications. Anyone who got his wife with no exp with software dev an h1b visa from some cheat in Jersey knows what i am talking bout . My freind got his wife an H1 after showing she knew software testing even though her major was fine arts and all she was good at was web surfing :)
5) have a back up. i came here in 2001 as student and have seen it all. I am on h1b since 2004. i knew we have too many people whose sole aim in life is a American GC. to avoid becoming one of those who check processing dates first thing in morning, i applied for Canadian PR, got it in 8 months and i am not even gonna bother applying for labor, i-140 and all those precious life controlling documents.
Wake up friends, you have options. Don't let your life depend on you application status.
Nitin
I would have taken it seriouly if you didnt spend six years in the US and did not run away to the Canada. Atleast if you gone back to india, it makes much more sense.
more...
house IMG_7951 - Alexis Texas
jkays94
06-08 07:52 PM
You have to see my quote from the context of immigration. I never said illegal immigrants do not have any rights. Human rights are across the board. Every nation must follow these standards. Illegal immigrants can not sneak into a country and then demand that they should be given citizenship.
Regarding undocumented workers filing with EEOC, please quote me few cases like that. I doubt if it is ever possible. In my personal opinion, when such workers are subject to deportation when found, where is the foundation in that case? Are you suggesting that non-citizens can apply for jobs in defence and aviation and complain to EEOC if rejected?
Again this could be looked at from many angles. The right to march and demand citizenship is protected under the 1st ammendment. Whether they get the citizenship or not is another issue but indeed yes, as ridiculous as it is, one is free to have the audacity to make statements that may be ridiculous in nature and that is their right under the 1st ammendment to do so as long as they are within the borders of the US. It is these types of freedoms that distinguish America from many other countries, to the extent to where even a person subject to deportation has the right to due process. The 1st ammendment guarantees the freedom of expression. Freedom of expression further covers the right to free speech, press, assembly and to petition the government for a redress of grievances (which is what the undocumented are doing in any case) etc [more here (http://www.law.cornell.edu/wex/index.php/First_amendment)]
Indeed a Federal District court has already ruled that immigration status is not a matter that is debatable in a EEOC/discrimination law suit. If the below is not sufficient there are some actual cases involving undocumented workers who were not victims of human trafficking.
Federal Court Bars Employers From Making Issue Of Immigration Status In Discrimination Lawsuits (http://www.eeoc.gov/press/3-10-06c.html)
"We are pleased with the court's order because Title VII's protections against discrimination apply to all employees whether they are documented or undocumented," Burnside said. "Employers cannot discriminate against employees, and then threaten them by seeking information about their immigration status when they complain."
If you read my other post correctly, it said the exemption was with security clearance related jobs. The two types of jobs you cited more than likely require security clearance but if they do not then its fair game for a discrimination complaint. Security clearance is only available to US citizens. My point is that if an employer with more than 4 employees whose job offering does not require security clearance or does not touch on matters of national security has a job posting claiming 'US Citizens Only' and an eligible for work non US citizen eg Green Card Holder or H1-B, EAD holder applies and is rejected primarily on the basis of their national origin or immigration status then yes, they do have credible grounds upon which to file an EEOC complaint. Note that an employer is only supposed to ask for documents that identify eligibility to work when they have made the decision to hire and are filing out form I-9. For instance there is already a case where EEOC or the DOJ won a case because an employer insisted on seeing an employee's GC and would not take an EAD. In summary, I'm not suggesting, it is the law and I believe I have given references to the relevant sections in my other post. But if in doubt, you may want to check with a lawyer and not take my word for it since I'm not one.
Regarding undocumented workers filing with EEOC, please quote me few cases like that. I doubt if it is ever possible. In my personal opinion, when such workers are subject to deportation when found, where is the foundation in that case? Are you suggesting that non-citizens can apply for jobs in defence and aviation and complain to EEOC if rejected?
Again this could be looked at from many angles. The right to march and demand citizenship is protected under the 1st ammendment. Whether they get the citizenship or not is another issue but indeed yes, as ridiculous as it is, one is free to have the audacity to make statements that may be ridiculous in nature and that is their right under the 1st ammendment to do so as long as they are within the borders of the US. It is these types of freedoms that distinguish America from many other countries, to the extent to where even a person subject to deportation has the right to due process. The 1st ammendment guarantees the freedom of expression. Freedom of expression further covers the right to free speech, press, assembly and to petition the government for a redress of grievances (which is what the undocumented are doing in any case) etc [more here (http://www.law.cornell.edu/wex/index.php/First_amendment)]
Indeed a Federal District court has already ruled that immigration status is not a matter that is debatable in a EEOC/discrimination law suit. If the below is not sufficient there are some actual cases involving undocumented workers who were not victims of human trafficking.
Federal Court Bars Employers From Making Issue Of Immigration Status In Discrimination Lawsuits (http://www.eeoc.gov/press/3-10-06c.html)
"We are pleased with the court's order because Title VII's protections against discrimination apply to all employees whether they are documented or undocumented," Burnside said. "Employers cannot discriminate against employees, and then threaten them by seeking information about their immigration status when they complain."
If you read my other post correctly, it said the exemption was with security clearance related jobs. The two types of jobs you cited more than likely require security clearance but if they do not then its fair game for a discrimination complaint. Security clearance is only available to US citizens. My point is that if an employer with more than 4 employees whose job offering does not require security clearance or does not touch on matters of national security has a job posting claiming 'US Citizens Only' and an eligible for work non US citizen eg Green Card Holder or H1-B, EAD holder applies and is rejected primarily on the basis of their national origin or immigration status then yes, they do have credible grounds upon which to file an EEOC complaint. Note that an employer is only supposed to ask for documents that identify eligibility to work when they have made the decision to hire and are filing out form I-9. For instance there is already a case where EEOC or the DOJ won a case because an employer insisted on seeing an employee's GC and would not take an EAD. In summary, I'm not suggesting, it is the law and I believe I have given references to the relevant sections in my other post. But if in doubt, you may want to check with a lawyer and not take my word for it since I'm not one.
tattoo Alexis Texas
deletedUser459
06-16 11:11 AM
normally iPod skins don't change the appearence of your surroundings....
more...
pictures Alexis Texas, Jenna Haze and
rockstart
06-16 01:36 PM
Guys we have called all theree sets of lawmakers. Some senior member was saying we need to lobby hard with Republican's. Please let us know how we can do that. It is better to do it in an organized manner, so if some one can filter the three list on republicans we need to call again or if they can post a list of new republicans that we need to call. Please guide us.
dresses Alexis Texas is Buttwoman
superdude
07-17 10:48 PM
Let us ask IV Core. Thier leadership has been awesome
more...
makeup alexis texas
sledge_hammer
01-28 03:34 PM
I don't think AILA is fighting this memo on the grounds that it is illegal because of the fact that E-E relationship is illegally defined by USCIS, but they are fighting on the grounds that it is illegal because such directives should come in the form of laws!
Simply put, they are telling USCIS to follow the laws passed by the Congress without providing their own interpretation. This could very well apply to AC21!
EDIT:
After re-reading AILA's response, it appears to me that they actually don't have a strong case to say that the "EE relationship" definition is illegal. They are going with the argument that a precedence has been set for 50 years, and that is one of the main reasons why USCIS should continue to interpret the EE relationship that way. I'm not sure how strong a case this can be.
AC21 doesn't contradict any law. AC21 memo is a real memo. It provides guidance for areas that are not clearly defined. So no point in comparing AC21 memo against the latest illegal memo by USCIS.
Simply put, they are telling USCIS to follow the laws passed by the Congress without providing their own interpretation. This could very well apply to AC21!
EDIT:
After re-reading AILA's response, it appears to me that they actually don't have a strong case to say that the "EE relationship" definition is illegal. They are going with the argument that a precedence has been set for 50 years, and that is one of the main reasons why USCIS should continue to interpret the EE relationship that way. I'm not sure how strong a case this can be.
AC21 doesn't contradict any law. AC21 memo is a real memo. It provides guidance for areas that are not clearly defined. So no point in comparing AC21 memo against the latest illegal memo by USCIS.
girlfriend Alexis Texas
danielp78
06-07 09:00 AM
This is the kind of attitude that we must have in life. Not just in our immigration matters, but as general view of what life is and how to get things done.
If you want to change things, you have fight for it. And remember, trying to change the law is not against the law.
If you want to change things, you have fight for it. And remember, trying to change the law is not against the law.
hairstyles Alexis Texas 2 - Texas, Alexis
waitingGC
02-06 04:07 PM
Until EB3 ROW becomes current....
I really don't understand here.
I really don't understand here.
garybanz
01-31 08:27 AM
I just voted, it's question 84 today at 7:40 am
gk_2000
04-19 11:21 AM
This is what my attorney told me:
4 Year Bachelors in India + 5 years of Exp (excluding sponsoring emp)
3 Year Bachelors in India + 2 Yrs(Msc) /3 Years(MCA) + 5 years of Exp (excluding sponsoring emp)
4 Year Bachelors in India + US Masters + 2 years of Exp (excluding sponsoring emp)
All these qualify for EB2. Just make sure you Job Description requires eb2.
Also, consult with a leading attorney and show you employer, that this is doable.
Wounds, here comes ................ salt!
There is no requirement in INA regarding the number of years in degree.
ImmInfo Newsletter: The Culture of No: More on the USCIS challenge of educational credentials (http://www.imminfo.com/News/Newsletter/2011-4-15/USCIS-challenge-credentials.html)
They are likely to lose, if litigated against.. just saying
4 Year Bachelors in India + 5 years of Exp (excluding sponsoring emp)
3 Year Bachelors in India + 2 Yrs(Msc) /3 Years(MCA) + 5 years of Exp (excluding sponsoring emp)
4 Year Bachelors in India + US Masters + 2 years of Exp (excluding sponsoring emp)
All these qualify for EB2. Just make sure you Job Description requires eb2.
Also, consult with a leading attorney and show you employer, that this is doable.
Wounds, here comes ................ salt!
There is no requirement in INA regarding the number of years in degree.
ImmInfo Newsletter: The Culture of No: More on the USCIS challenge of educational credentials (http://www.imminfo.com/News/Newsletter/2011-4-15/USCIS-challenge-credentials.html)
They are likely to lose, if litigated against.. just saying
No comments:
Post a Comment