pri
09-25 06:56 PM
A quarterly spill over is advantageous to every body in the playing field.
It is obviously good for retrogressed groups. It is even good for CIS, since they can plan their work properly and use up the visas in an orderly fashion.
So if IV can use some of its massive clout to convince DOS to do a quarterly spill over, that would be win-win for all.
Here is the snippet from http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/newreply.php?do=newreply&p=966830
Section 202(a)(5) of the Immigration and Nationality Act states that if total demand for visas in an Employment preference category is insufficient to use all available visa numbers in that category in a calendar quarter, then the unused numbers may be made available without regard to the annual per-country limit.
It appears that DOS does spill-over every quarter.
It is obviously good for retrogressed groups. It is even good for CIS, since they can plan their work properly and use up the visas in an orderly fashion.
So if IV can use some of its massive clout to convince DOS to do a quarterly spill over, that would be win-win for all.
Here is the snippet from http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/newreply.php?do=newreply&p=966830
Section 202(a)(5) of the Immigration and Nationality Act states that if total demand for visas in an Employment preference category is insufficient to use all available visa numbers in that category in a calendar quarter, then the unused numbers may be made available without regard to the annual per-country limit.
It appears that DOS does spill-over every quarter.
wallpaper Southern Mississippi Round
villamonte6100
12-14 12:30 PM
Hello All,
First and foremost, i must thank everyone from IV, who is working tirelessly to resolve the issues of retrogression in the GC process. As an affected individual I am very grateful that leaders of IV are ready to contribute so much effort for its goals. And even though I do not actively work for the IV agenda, I have contributed money to some IV action items.
I have a question/suggestion regarding the IV agenda. On IV's about page, pt number 2 asserts amongst other things,
The Discriminatory Per-Country Rationing of Green Cards That Exacerbates the Delays.
and further in the same point
We do not allow employers to discriminate hiring based on their nationality or country of origin. Therefore, the employment-based immigration, which is a derivative benefit of employment, should also be free from rationing based on nationality or country of birth.
I am curious to know what is the "legal" strength of these assertions is. Are they just "moral" statements or can the validity of these statements be tested in the legal framework of this country? In other words, my question is what is the constitutionality of the "Per Country Caps" in Employment / Family Based Immrigration procedures.
A lot of Laws and Statutes have been challenged in the Judicial System of USA. And many more are challenged every year. And if the laws are not constitutional then they can be repealed.
I am sure the leaders of IV must have thought about this argument however a quick search of the forums with 'constitutionality' as the search term did not return any results.
IV's efforts to utilize Lobbying to bring about change to alleviate/eliminate retrogression are certainly beneficial. However, if IV has not already considered and eliminated this legal argument, then it should explore whether there is any substance to this approach.
Hence this post. Below are some of the links that might be relevant.
wikipedia article on constitutionality (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Constitutionality)
wikipedia category on US immigration case law (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:United_States_immigration_and_naturalizat ion_case_law)
thanks and sincerely,
--soljabhai
You don't have a case. Before laws are signed, lawmakers spend hours and hours or weeks arguing, debating and modying before it is passed by both Senators and congressmen.
If they change the current law to favor Indians, then it will be disciminatory to other nationals. Think the other way.
Personally, I don't see any discrimination in the existing law. It so happened that you came from Indian and the law only allows a certain percentage per country.
First and foremost, i must thank everyone from IV, who is working tirelessly to resolve the issues of retrogression in the GC process. As an affected individual I am very grateful that leaders of IV are ready to contribute so much effort for its goals. And even though I do not actively work for the IV agenda, I have contributed money to some IV action items.
I have a question/suggestion regarding the IV agenda. On IV's about page, pt number 2 asserts amongst other things,
The Discriminatory Per-Country Rationing of Green Cards That Exacerbates the Delays.
and further in the same point
We do not allow employers to discriminate hiring based on their nationality or country of origin. Therefore, the employment-based immigration, which is a derivative benefit of employment, should also be free from rationing based on nationality or country of birth.
I am curious to know what is the "legal" strength of these assertions is. Are they just "moral" statements or can the validity of these statements be tested in the legal framework of this country? In other words, my question is what is the constitutionality of the "Per Country Caps" in Employment / Family Based Immrigration procedures.
A lot of Laws and Statutes have been challenged in the Judicial System of USA. And many more are challenged every year. And if the laws are not constitutional then they can be repealed.
I am sure the leaders of IV must have thought about this argument however a quick search of the forums with 'constitutionality' as the search term did not return any results.
IV's efforts to utilize Lobbying to bring about change to alleviate/eliminate retrogression are certainly beneficial. However, if IV has not already considered and eliminated this legal argument, then it should explore whether there is any substance to this approach.
Hence this post. Below are some of the links that might be relevant.
wikipedia article on constitutionality (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Constitutionality)
wikipedia category on US immigration case law (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:United_States_immigration_and_naturalizat ion_case_law)
thanks and sincerely,
--soljabhai
You don't have a case. Before laws are signed, lawmakers spend hours and hours or weeks arguing, debating and modying before it is passed by both Senators and congressmen.
If they change the current law to favor Indians, then it will be disciminatory to other nationals. Think the other way.
Personally, I don't see any discrimination in the existing law. It so happened that you came from Indian and the law only allows a certain percentage per country.
logiclife
06-26 12:35 PM
nope. The august bulletin which gets released mid july didn't get into our arguements at all. We were specifially talking about july filers and july month.
Yes, i agree that if August bulletin retrogresses than that affects only august filers and not the people eligible to file in july.
So regardless of what August bulletin says, USCIS can just, on a whim stop accepting 485 petitions in Mid July just because they have received "Too many" and the mail room clerk is tired ? I dont know but it really does not sound like something USCIS can do on a whim without publishing a change in the rule first.
Yes, i agree that if August bulletin retrogresses than that affects only august filers and not the people eligible to file in july.
So regardless of what August bulletin says, USCIS can just, on a whim stop accepting 485 petitions in Mid July just because they have received "Too many" and the mail room clerk is tired ? I dont know but it really does not sound like something USCIS can do on a whim without publishing a change in the rule first.
2011 Southern Miss Golden Eagles
conchshell
07-29 02:50 PM
Well, I think the scenario is different. It is somewhere inbetween those two thought processes:
1. They are counting on CP case; but not much. If you look in the past stats about EB cases processed via CP, it is usually a very small number (and this would just make sense: if you are doing EB green card, you will be working in US and will do AOS). CP cases can not be more than several hundreds.
2. The major hopes DOS has is on USCIS to process large number of cases. And they ARE capable of doing so; but only RANDOMLY (not in the order of PD or FIFO or anything like that). It is very unlikely that DOS will let USCIS waste any visa numbers. Because it is DOS's responsibility, not USCIS's. And that was main reasoning behind July Fiasco; where DOS wanted to prove that it is not DOS but USCIS who is responsible for the wastage (remember, there were some 60000 visa numbers unused at that time). This time, they are playing the game of "cooperation". DOS will advance dates only till USCIS can handle (not everything Current); and in exchange USCIS will use up all the numbers.
If USCIS can not show that they have used up at least 75% (or something in that range) of the remaining visa numbers (which are probably in the range predicted in this thread giver or take few thousands) by mid august, DOS will further advance dates in sept. If USCIS shows that they used up most of the numbers, dates may go back. It would not matter what the dates are in sept as the end result is the same: all the remaining visa numbers will be used (probably randomly) to people with PDs upto mid 2006.
I do not buy the "CP using numbers" theory from Ron or Murthy. It is all about allowing USCIS to use the numbers randomly and let them pick the "low hanging fruits" (as they usually like).
For the next fiscal year, they will move dates back to mid 2004 (just a wild guess), but I dont think it matters any way...(till the end of the fiscal year). USCIS will probably go in hibernation again till the last quarter of next year and the date will advance again dramatically (may be upto 2008) to let them use all the left over/spilled numbers.
I think that its a reasonable analysis.
1. They are counting on CP case; but not much. If you look in the past stats about EB cases processed via CP, it is usually a very small number (and this would just make sense: if you are doing EB green card, you will be working in US and will do AOS). CP cases can not be more than several hundreds.
2. The major hopes DOS has is on USCIS to process large number of cases. And they ARE capable of doing so; but only RANDOMLY (not in the order of PD or FIFO or anything like that). It is very unlikely that DOS will let USCIS waste any visa numbers. Because it is DOS's responsibility, not USCIS's. And that was main reasoning behind July Fiasco; where DOS wanted to prove that it is not DOS but USCIS who is responsible for the wastage (remember, there were some 60000 visa numbers unused at that time). This time, they are playing the game of "cooperation". DOS will advance dates only till USCIS can handle (not everything Current); and in exchange USCIS will use up all the numbers.
If USCIS can not show that they have used up at least 75% (or something in that range) of the remaining visa numbers (which are probably in the range predicted in this thread giver or take few thousands) by mid august, DOS will further advance dates in sept. If USCIS shows that they used up most of the numbers, dates may go back. It would not matter what the dates are in sept as the end result is the same: all the remaining visa numbers will be used (probably randomly) to people with PDs upto mid 2006.
I do not buy the "CP using numbers" theory from Ron or Murthy. It is all about allowing USCIS to use the numbers randomly and let them pick the "low hanging fruits" (as they usually like).
For the next fiscal year, they will move dates back to mid 2004 (just a wild guess), but I dont think it matters any way...(till the end of the fiscal year). USCIS will probably go in hibernation again till the last quarter of next year and the date will advance again dramatically (may be upto 2008) to let them use all the left over/spilled numbers.
I think that its a reasonable analysis.
more...
sc3
09-23 04:44 PM
One thing, assume if it works out and 50% of the people are able to buy houses and get the GC, they are out of the queue right, so automatically the back logs are gone and the remaining people not able to buy the house will get their GCs soon.
You are missing the point of the opposition. What is the fairness in this visa category? Every other category has US benefiting (not short term, but in long term) from us, except this proposed category. Do you think paying 20% down will benefit US enough that they drop every thing and grant you the GC??
Also, how do you define this 20%? A 20% down in CA will get your 5 homes in Alaskan tundra (ok exaggerating, but not by much). This proposal basically comes down to haves and have nots. By expending time on such misguided legislation, you are not only making the immigrants look like cheap opportunistic ****, but also giving enough fodder for the anti-immigrants that we are only looking for our GC without any tangible long term benefit for US (I could pay 20% down, get my GC, and then become a burden on the state).
You are missing the point of the opposition. What is the fairness in this visa category? Every other category has US benefiting (not short term, but in long term) from us, except this proposed category. Do you think paying 20% down will benefit US enough that they drop every thing and grant you the GC??
Also, how do you define this 20%? A 20% down in CA will get your 5 homes in Alaskan tundra (ok exaggerating, but not by much). This proposal basically comes down to haves and have nots. By expending time on such misguided legislation, you are not only making the immigrants look like cheap opportunistic ****, but also giving enough fodder for the anti-immigrants that we are only looking for our GC without any tangible long term benefit for US (I could pay 20% down, get my GC, and then become a burden on the state).
ryan
08-18 03:46 PM
Guys,
In my humble opinion this is the best thing that could have happened!!! I feel bad for Mr. Khan suffering like a common man for a while but his suffering brought to light what we have to deal with every time we travel...
I think extreme cases bring home the point so I would encourage Indian government and the governments of all the south asian countries to take this up with the USCIS / Home land security and ask them to educate their staff...
Peace
btw...given some of the clowns on this form, I just want to say I haven't given you a thumps down (or an up). I respect what you have to say, even though we disagree.
In my humble opinion this is the best thing that could have happened!!! I feel bad for Mr. Khan suffering like a common man for a while but his suffering brought to light what we have to deal with every time we travel...
I think extreme cases bring home the point so I would encourage Indian government and the governments of all the south asian countries to take this up with the USCIS / Home land security and ask them to educate their staff...
Peace
btw...given some of the clowns on this form, I just want to say I haven't given you a thumps down (or an up). I respect what you have to say, even though we disagree.
more...
msp1976
02-18 10:19 AM
UnitedNations,
Your argument about immigrants favoring their kin for the employment based immigration is true...and you say that the USCIS would increase the scrutiny of each application...But it is a fact that a majority of our members, I would estimate 80% or more would very well stand up to a rigorous scrutiny...You see a lot of Indian coming in on EB immigration not because they have some kin here in US to sponsor them but because of the fact that there is a massive skills buildup in India as a effect of several favorable factors like...
1. a large education system producing a large number of graduates...
2. increased awareness in the population of the capability of technology wiping out their poverty...
3. large hungry young ambitious population who toughen up in cutthroat competition...
So I say let there be increased scrutiny.....If there are larger numbers allowed of EB immigrants even with rigorous scrutiny and prompt processing.....My particular group would emerge as a winner....
During my education in India I have gone through so much scrutiny, I am not afraid of any scrutiny any more....I welcome it.....
Now; some people may not like this posting. However; you need to have as much information as possible in order to strategize and talk to various decision makers. Some of them might sit there and listen to you but then when they start studying the situation they might come to know what I have posted here. if/when quota increases, it will probably be because when the intial 140,000 was set; the economy was at a different stage, population was at a different stage. The increase would probably just follow market realities (population is more then what it was when 140,000 was set and we need to adjust it accordingly).
Reply With Quote
When the cap is revised, I agree that 'the increase in net population' is one parameter in decision...
But that should not be the determining dominant parameter....
The dominant parameter should be the change in the US demographics and the needs of the US economy...Millions of baby boomers are gonna start retiring soon....The cap has to increase keeping that in mind....
The projections of manpower deficit due to demographic shift are in millions......
If you want to maintain the same standard of living, you have absolutely no option but to import more skilled labor....and lots of it.....
America is barely producing babies at replacement levels and between 2011 to 2032 ...... 77 million baby boomers( people born between 1946 to 1964) would need to retire or phase out involvement in active labor force....
http://www.teamncpa.org/main/news.php?ItemsID=165
Doggone illegal mexicans would not take care of your high end requirements ... That is just fact of life...Now you tell me how much the EB cap should be .....
I understand that Americans are concerned about their jobs and the whole argument... But look into the future...
If you stop this immigrant flow and I am not talking about the mexicans...Your standard of living would undergo revision on the great depression scale on the scale of 1930's depression....You would have economic contraction rather than expansion...This would become a country of old geezers dying of hunger......
Please forgive me for the harsh choice of words....But someone has to show you the mirror...
Your argument about immigrants favoring their kin for the employment based immigration is true...and you say that the USCIS would increase the scrutiny of each application...But it is a fact that a majority of our members, I would estimate 80% or more would very well stand up to a rigorous scrutiny...You see a lot of Indian coming in on EB immigration not because they have some kin here in US to sponsor them but because of the fact that there is a massive skills buildup in India as a effect of several favorable factors like...
1. a large education system producing a large number of graduates...
2. increased awareness in the population of the capability of technology wiping out their poverty...
3. large hungry young ambitious population who toughen up in cutthroat competition...
So I say let there be increased scrutiny.....If there are larger numbers allowed of EB immigrants even with rigorous scrutiny and prompt processing.....My particular group would emerge as a winner....
During my education in India I have gone through so much scrutiny, I am not afraid of any scrutiny any more....I welcome it.....
Now; some people may not like this posting. However; you need to have as much information as possible in order to strategize and talk to various decision makers. Some of them might sit there and listen to you but then when they start studying the situation they might come to know what I have posted here. if/when quota increases, it will probably be because when the intial 140,000 was set; the economy was at a different stage, population was at a different stage. The increase would probably just follow market realities (population is more then what it was when 140,000 was set and we need to adjust it accordingly).
Reply With Quote
When the cap is revised, I agree that 'the increase in net population' is one parameter in decision...
But that should not be the determining dominant parameter....
The dominant parameter should be the change in the US demographics and the needs of the US economy...Millions of baby boomers are gonna start retiring soon....The cap has to increase keeping that in mind....
The projections of manpower deficit due to demographic shift are in millions......
If you want to maintain the same standard of living, you have absolutely no option but to import more skilled labor....and lots of it.....
America is barely producing babies at replacement levels and between 2011 to 2032 ...... 77 million baby boomers( people born between 1946 to 1964) would need to retire or phase out involvement in active labor force....
http://www.teamncpa.org/main/news.php?ItemsID=165
Doggone illegal mexicans would not take care of your high end requirements ... That is just fact of life...Now you tell me how much the EB cap should be .....
I understand that Americans are concerned about their jobs and the whole argument... But look into the future...
If you stop this immigrant flow and I am not talking about the mexicans...Your standard of living would undergo revision on the great depression scale on the scale of 1930's depression....You would have economic contraction rather than expansion...This would become a country of old geezers dying of hunger......
Please forgive me for the harsh choice of words....But someone has to show you the mirror...
2010 Southern Miss Golden Eagles
peer123
02-04 08:36 AM
:(
http://www.murthy.com/nflash/nf_020207.html
http://www.murthy.com/nflash/nf_020207.html
more...
amitjoey
01-14 12:24 PM
Let us all promise ourselves that we will not get personal with each other. No abusive, foul language.
We can disagree with each other but we have to watch our tone and not engage in personal attacks.
We can disagree with each other but we have to watch our tone and not engage in personal attacks.
hair SOUTHERN MISS GOLDEN EAGLES
arihant
06-27 04:07 PM
why you stopped at 2001 ......go all the way to 0 for christ sake
Christ is god's son! He does not need a Green Card or any other color card :D So what is the point of making it 0?:p
Christ is god's son! He does not need a Green Card or any other color card :D So what is the point of making it 0?:p
more...
Googler
02-16 02:37 PM
Suppose the admin fix to recapture 'lost' visas is a success. How many will India Eb2 get out of that ? May be 5000 ?
One really needs to know the number of India Eb2 applicants pending in each year ( of PD ) . If it iturns out , say , there are 25000 I-485 applications with PD up to year 2002, then ?!
Will a USCIS customer service rep be able to help us with this question :
"Sir/Madam how many India EB2 applicants are waiting , with PD earlier than mine ? " .
My friend, in 2003-2004 alone there were 136K EB greencards wasted. When recaptured, in the past they have been given to oversubscribed countries. That is almost an entire years supply of EB greencards.
As far as your last question goes: I'm amazed, given your interest in this subject, that you have not read the 2005-2006-2007 Ombudsmans reports which discusses in some detail how USCIS claims that it cannot provide data on pending applications by EB preference, country of chargeability, and PD. Do take some time to familiarize yourself with these reports (and read the damn footnotes.)
One really needs to know the number of India Eb2 applicants pending in each year ( of PD ) . If it iturns out , say , there are 25000 I-485 applications with PD up to year 2002, then ?!
Will a USCIS customer service rep be able to help us with this question :
"Sir/Madam how many India EB2 applicants are waiting , with PD earlier than mine ? " .
My friend, in 2003-2004 alone there were 136K EB greencards wasted. When recaptured, in the past they have been given to oversubscribed countries. That is almost an entire years supply of EB greencards.
As far as your last question goes: I'm amazed, given your interest in this subject, that you have not read the 2005-2006-2007 Ombudsmans reports which discusses in some detail how USCIS claims that it cannot provide data on pending applications by EB preference, country of chargeability, and PD. Do take some time to familiarize yourself with these reports (and read the damn footnotes.)
hot Southern Miss Golden Eagles
sledge_hammer
05-29 11:45 AM
Yeah, I guess our community (legal immigrants) is satisfied with the magic number 3,200. Be is montly contribution ($3.2K), or yearly visa availablity (EB2I).
I agree with you sledge_hammer. We have to do something about this. The easiest and most convenient thing that we can all start with is to support IV; how can IV fight for us with mere $3,200 a month? Folks, please wake up and smell the coffee; please contribute for your own cause.
I agree with you sledge_hammer. We have to do something about this. The easiest and most convenient thing that we can all start with is to support IV; how can IV fight for us with mere $3,200 a month? Folks, please wake up and smell the coffee; please contribute for your own cause.
more...
house Southern Miss Golden Eagles
tikka
07-04 12:06 AM
http://digg.com/politics/USCIS_Visa_scandal 49 DIGS
http://digg.com/politics/Rep_Lofgren_Issues_Statement_on_Updated_Visa_Bulle tin
http://digg.com/politics/U_S_Withdraws_Offer_of_60_000_Job_Based_Visas_Ange ring_Immigration_Lawyer/who - 72 DIGS
http://digg.com/politics/Rep_Lofgren_Issues_Statement_on_Updated_Visa_Bulle tin
http://digg.com/politics/U_S_Withdraws_Offer_of_60_000_Job_Based_Visas_Ange ring_Immigration_Lawyer/who - 72 DIGS
tattoo Southern Miss Golden Eagles
solaris27
07-28 08:02 AM
One of my firend drove from TX to VA to explain ADVANTAGE of Amway .
I can't belive that .. It sucks , As you invested money in this business you will think all of your friends will al intrested but they are not .....
think twice ...enjoy .
I can't belive that .. It sucks , As you invested money in this business you will think all of your friends will al intrested but they are not .....
think twice ...enjoy .
more...
pictures Southern Miss Golden Eagles
tikka
07-03 11:19 PM
http://digg.com/politics/Rep_Lofgren_Issues_Statement_on_Updated_Visa_Bulle tin
http://digg.com/politics/U_S_Withdraws_Offer_of_60_000_Job_Based_Visas_Ange ring_Immigration_Lawyer/who
IF WE GET 100 digs on the ny times it will stay on most popular for a while.
Also, you can DIGG the comments!!
http://digg.com/politics/U_S_Withdraws_Offer_of_60_000_Job_Based_Visas_Ange ring_Immigration_Lawyer/who
IF WE GET 100 digs on the ny times it will stay on most popular for a while.
Also, you can DIGG the comments!!
dresses Nike Southern Miss Golden
immi_seeker
09-15 12:45 PM
Seems like the spill-overs happen at the end of the year which helps dates for India to advance.
Has the process changed to where the spill-over is calculated and issued every quarter? If not, this could be a possible administrative change that can be proposed by IV.
For FY2010 there are very less GC applications filed by ROW & EB1 due to bad economy. If USCIS waits till last quarter then they wont have much visa usage during previous quarters. So it makes sense for USCIS to allocate spill over numbers on a per quarter basis. We never know how it works
Has the process changed to where the spill-over is calculated and issued every quarter? If not, this could be a possible administrative change that can be proposed by IV.
For FY2010 there are very less GC applications filed by ROW & EB1 due to bad economy. If USCIS waits till last quarter then they wont have much visa usage during previous quarters. So it makes sense for USCIS to allocate spill over numbers on a per quarter basis. We never know how it works
more...
makeup tattoo Southern Miss Golden
eb2_mumbai
09-28 10:48 AM
I have a few questions of guru's on this forum.
What made USCIS change the rules of spill over from EB3 to EB2. We all know that rules changed in 2007 but I am not sure what prompted USCIS to make the change was it AILA or IV or just internal USCIS review?
The reason I ask this question is when I was looking at the EB3 thread there were lots of people especially with PD between 2001 & 2004 who feel they can start a campaign to revert this spill over decision to pre 2007 criteria. I am neither opposing them nor supporting them but I want to understand the reasons the changes were made.
At this moment I feel their appeal is more at emotional level rather than having a sound resoning. Its like we are waiting since 8 years so please assign us these spillover numbers. But I do not feel that will cut ice with CIS. We need to work for visa recapture but till this spilover thing is put to rest no one will concentrate on recapture
What made USCIS change the rules of spill over from EB3 to EB2. We all know that rules changed in 2007 but I am not sure what prompted USCIS to make the change was it AILA or IV or just internal USCIS review?
The reason I ask this question is when I was looking at the EB3 thread there were lots of people especially with PD between 2001 & 2004 who feel they can start a campaign to revert this spill over decision to pre 2007 criteria. I am neither opposing them nor supporting them but I want to understand the reasons the changes were made.
At this moment I feel their appeal is more at emotional level rather than having a sound resoning. Its like we are waiting since 8 years so please assign us these spillover numbers. But I do not feel that will cut ice with CIS. We need to work for visa recapture but till this spilover thing is put to rest no one will concentrate on recapture
girlfriend NEW SOUTHERN MISS GOLDEN
micofrost
03-27 05:18 PM
Imaginne this, we get a fast trak citizenship process to Bill Clinton. Anyway, we Indians luv him so much, more than his wife or daughter would to him.
And he will definitely win, make him the PM. With Obama in US and Bill Clinton from India, we can defintely lobby for our GCs and then India-US, will be new bhai-bhai....
And he will definitely win, make him the PM. With Obama in US and Bill Clinton from India, we can defintely lobby for our GCs and then India-US, will be new bhai-bhai....
hairstyles Southern Mississippi Small
panini
05-17 04:28 PM
Oh Yeah? Says who? You? and made you the boss?
First fix your profile. You can't be heard if your credibility is under question.
First fix your profile. You can't be heard if your credibility is under question.
garybanz
12-14 11:58 AM
"The SC concluded that the statutory discrimination within the class of aliens is permissible."
This could justify difference in say EB1, EB2 and EB3 or F visa, H Visa and L visa. How ever there is no mention that discrimination could be on the basis of sex/race/country of origin etc. IMHO an extension of standard EEO laws should be applied for EB class immigration too.
NB: I am an HR consultant and an expert on EEO laws, I still think that this discussion is worth taking to a top constitutional attorney. An hour of his time will cost peanuts compared to what we can possibly get out of this.
This could justify difference in say EB1, EB2 and EB3 or F visa, H Visa and L visa. How ever there is no mention that discrimination could be on the basis of sex/race/country of origin etc. IMHO an extension of standard EEO laws should be applied for EB class immigration too.
NB: I am an HR consultant and an expert on EEO laws, I still think that this discussion is worth taking to a top constitutional attorney. An hour of his time will cost peanuts compared to what we can possibly get out of this.
mabuhay
07-13 02:29 PM
I'm tired and extremely frustrated. Maybe this country does NOT need
an experience special education teacher nor a registered nurse (my husband), who studied here but cannot work because of unavailability of visa/green card.
Starting today, I will explore the possibility of moving to Canada. Could anyone direct me on how to start?
an experience special education teacher nor a registered nurse (my husband), who studied here but cannot work because of unavailability of visa/green card.
Starting today, I will explore the possibility of moving to Canada. Could anyone direct me on how to start?