Blog Feeds
01-21 09:50 AM
A fat report and one with some helpful recommendations and statistics. Here are some of the more interesting items I found - - Of the top 150 H-1B employers, 24 were deemed H-1B dependent (a high percentage of workers on the H-1B) and 9 had prior H-1B violations. - Real earnings growth for US workers in occupations with proportionately more H-1B workers - particularly IT - was actually much stronger than the general US worker. - Engineers and IT professionals on H-1Bs were more than twice as likely as their US counterparts to have advanced degrees. - The proportion of...
More... (http://blogs.ilw.com/gregsiskind/2011/01/government-accountability-office-releases-report-on-h-1b-program.html)
More... (http://blogs.ilw.com/gregsiskind/2011/01/government-accountability-office-releases-report-on-h-1b-program.html)
wallpaper over it by katharine mcphee
Green.Tech
08-22 09:38 AM
Is this what you are looking for pappu?
https://www.dol.gov/esa/whd/forms/fts_wh4.htm
https://www.dol.gov/esa/whd/forms/fts_wh4.htm
joreal
08-25 04:29 PM
hi,
I have approved labor & I-140 with my employer and they filed for my H1B extension. If i would like to change the employer, what is the process i should go through with new employer regarding my GC? will they have to apply labor again for me or can they use this approved labor & I-140 and continue my GC from then so that i will not lose my priority date? If they cannot use my labor, is there any other way to use my priority date.Please advise on how to proceed...
Thanks in advance...
I have approved labor & I-140 with my employer and they filed for my H1B extension. If i would like to change the employer, what is the process i should go through with new employer regarding my GC? will they have to apply labor again for me or can they use this approved labor & I-140 and continue my GC from then so that i will not lose my priority date? If they cannot use my labor, is there any other way to use my priority date.Please advise on how to proceed...
Thanks in advance...
2011 katharine mcphee pregnant
ashokmads
02-13 04:10 PM
Hi All,
My parents I94 is expiring on March 27th 2008.
We had filed for extension (form I 539) in California Service Centre with receipt date of Jan 02 2008.
Calif is currently processing Oct 2007 I529s.
My concerns are :
1) I think their stay here is legal till we hear back from USCIS on their extension. Please confirm if this is true.
2) If they get declined , they have to leave immediately. Is that period of stay considered illegal?
3) Is overstaying with legal extension an issue if they need to come again after 6 months or so? What is the criteria they look for for frequency of visits/stay periods at port of entry.
Will greatly appreciat all your personal experiences /wise opinion on this matter of pressing concern for us.
Thanks
Ash
My parents I94 is expiring on March 27th 2008.
We had filed for extension (form I 539) in California Service Centre with receipt date of Jan 02 2008.
Calif is currently processing Oct 2007 I529s.
My concerns are :
1) I think their stay here is legal till we hear back from USCIS on their extension. Please confirm if this is true.
2) If they get declined , they have to leave immediately. Is that period of stay considered illegal?
3) Is overstaying with legal extension an issue if they need to come again after 6 months or so? What is the criteria they look for for frequency of visits/stay periods at port of entry.
Will greatly appreciat all your personal experiences /wise opinion on this matter of pressing concern for us.
Thanks
Ash
more...
rkp27
10-28 11:15 AM
I was cited under open container law in state of NJ newark pennstation.will this impact on my immigration status . I am a july 2007 filer waiting for the GC and working on EAD
Blog Feeds
12-18 10:40 PM
Just when U.S. employers thought the bad vibes emanating from U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) could get no worse, the agency tasked with deciding whether to approve or reject requests for immigration benefits has come up with VIBE -- its new Verification Initiative for Business Enterprises which costs a whopping $35,506,760.43. Just imagine . . . . . . a program in which USCIS, by using VIBE, "will acquire information from an [Independent Information Provider (IIP)] . . ., which can be used to verify the eligibility of a company while detecting multiple types of misrepresentations." . . ....
More... (http://blogs.ilw.com/angelopaparelli/2009/12/bad-bad-bad-immigration-vibrations-from-uscis.html)
More... (http://blogs.ilw.com/angelopaparelli/2009/12/bad-bad-bad-immigration-vibrations-from-uscis.html)
more...
Blog Feeds
01-18 09:00 AM
Here's an article I co-wrote for Bloomberg on I-9 and E-Verify issues facing health care employers. Not so much political as practical, but for those readers in health care or who advise health care clients, it may be helpful. Employment Eligibility Immigration Compliance: Managing I-9 and E-Verify Risk in the Healthcare Industry -
More... (http://blogs.ilw.com/gregsiskind/2011/01/immigration-employment-compliance-and-the-health-care-industry.html)
More... (http://blogs.ilw.com/gregsiskind/2011/01/immigration-employment-compliance-and-the-health-care-industry.html)
2010 2010 katharine mcphee blonde
bkarnik
04-04 11:56 AM
Can you provide a link to the bulletin?
Any comments abt the dates?
Any comments abt the dates?
more...
textus
01-19 12:52 PM
Hi Guys:
I'm in a process of transfering my H1B to a new employer. I've already hired a lawyer and paid him his fee. The lawyer spoke to my employer and everything was going fine. Now, my new employer tells me that his company "froze hiring" untill further notice !?!
I'm wondering
1. Is my employer lying and why?
2. Can I somehow make my employer pay me back the money I already paid to the lawyer?
I'm in a process of transfering my H1B to a new employer. I've already hired a lawyer and paid him his fee. The lawyer spoke to my employer and everything was going fine. Now, my new employer tells me that his company "froze hiring" untill further notice !?!
I'm wondering
1. Is my employer lying and why?
2. Can I somehow make my employer pay me back the money I already paid to the lawyer?
hair katharine mcphee hair.
Macaca
03-18 07:25 AM
Some paras from Congress's Oversight Offensive (http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/03/16/AR2007031601989.html), By David S. Broder (http://projects.washingtonpost.com/staff/email/david+s.+broder/), Sunday, March 18, 2007
Ten weeks into the new Congress, it is clear that revelation, not legislation, is going to be its real product.
While President Bush threatens to use his veto pen to stop some bills and Senate Republicans block other measures from even reaching his desk, no force in Washington can halt the Democrats' investigative juggernaut from uncovering the secrets inside this administration.
For the first six years of the Bush administration, these aides were allowed free rein to carry out whatever policy or political assignments they wished -- or supposed that the president wanted done. A Congress under firm Republican control was somnolent when it came to oversight of the executive branch. No Republican committee chairman wanted to turn over rocks in a Republican administration.
You have to feel a twinge of sympathy now for the Bush appointees who suddenly find unsympathetic Democratic chairmen such as Henry Waxman, John Conyers, Patrick Leahy and Carl Levin investigating their cases. Even if those appointees are scrupulously careful about their actions now, who knows what subpoenaed memos and e-mails in their files will reveal about the past?
They will pay the price for the temporary breakdown in the system of checks and balances that occurred between 2001 and this year -- when the Republican Congress forgot its responsibility to hold the executive branch accountable.
It was a fundamental dereliction of duty by Congress, and it probably did more to encourage bad decisions and harmful actions by executive-branch political appointees than the much-touted lobbying influence. In reality, many Republican members of Congress did not mind what was happening because they were able to get favors done in that permissive climate. Now, the Democratic investigators will publicize instances of influence by members of Congress, and the political fallout will not stop with New Mexico's Pete Domenici and Heather Wilson.
Democrats find it easier to investigate than to legislate. With their major initiatives, from a minimum-wage boost to a shutdown of the Iraq war, stymied by Republican opposition, the Democrats are understandably making "accountability" their new goal -- meaning more and more investigations.
Fulfilling that promise, later in the week the House passed a series of bills that stripped some of the secrecy from executive branch documents and decisions.
Accountability is certainly important, but Democrats must know that people were really voting for action on Iraq, health care, immigration, energy and a few other problems. Investigations are useful, but only legislation on big issues changes lives.
Ten weeks into the new Congress, it is clear that revelation, not legislation, is going to be its real product.
While President Bush threatens to use his veto pen to stop some bills and Senate Republicans block other measures from even reaching his desk, no force in Washington can halt the Democrats' investigative juggernaut from uncovering the secrets inside this administration.
For the first six years of the Bush administration, these aides were allowed free rein to carry out whatever policy or political assignments they wished -- or supposed that the president wanted done. A Congress under firm Republican control was somnolent when it came to oversight of the executive branch. No Republican committee chairman wanted to turn over rocks in a Republican administration.
You have to feel a twinge of sympathy now for the Bush appointees who suddenly find unsympathetic Democratic chairmen such as Henry Waxman, John Conyers, Patrick Leahy and Carl Levin investigating their cases. Even if those appointees are scrupulously careful about their actions now, who knows what subpoenaed memos and e-mails in their files will reveal about the past?
They will pay the price for the temporary breakdown in the system of checks and balances that occurred between 2001 and this year -- when the Republican Congress forgot its responsibility to hold the executive branch accountable.
It was a fundamental dereliction of duty by Congress, and it probably did more to encourage bad decisions and harmful actions by executive-branch political appointees than the much-touted lobbying influence. In reality, many Republican members of Congress did not mind what was happening because they were able to get favors done in that permissive climate. Now, the Democratic investigators will publicize instances of influence by members of Congress, and the political fallout will not stop with New Mexico's Pete Domenici and Heather Wilson.
Democrats find it easier to investigate than to legislate. With their major initiatives, from a minimum-wage boost to a shutdown of the Iraq war, stymied by Republican opposition, the Democrats are understandably making "accountability" their new goal -- meaning more and more investigations.
Fulfilling that promise, later in the week the House passed a series of bills that stripped some of the secrecy from executive branch documents and decisions.
Accountability is certainly important, but Democrats must know that people were really voting for action on Iraq, health care, immigration, energy and a few other problems. Investigations are useful, but only legislation on big issues changes lives.
more...
gcdeena
01-14 12:39 PM
Hi,
Just i have applied for AP through efile. From here what's the procedure? Do i need to send the support documentation? if so, what are all the documents i need to send? please through some light on this. also will i get another bio metrics appointment?
Thanks in advance your reply.
Just i have applied for AP through efile. From here what's the procedure? Do i need to send the support documentation? if so, what are all the documents i need to send? please through some light on this. also will i get another bio metrics appointment?
Thanks in advance your reply.
hot images Katharine McPhee News
rajeshalex
09-16 04:47 AM
Ask your brother to get a leave letter from his company. It should help.
Rajesh
Rajesh
more...
house hot Katharine McPhee and
schulde
August 25th, 2004, 05:52 AM
...man so much noise...
I'm finding the same thing with my D2H. Take a look at the auto photo I attached earlier today for the noise in the shadows there - yuck. I've also seen an exposure shifting problem during any kind of motordrive and autoexposure. If I select manual mode it seems to go away. But I've examined shot sequences where EXIF data indicates identical Aperture and Shutter and yet there is a shift. I wonder if these things have that much production variance to cause noise and calibration problems like this.
Rick
what do other d2h shooters think?
thanks
phat[/QUOTE]
I'm finding the same thing with my D2H. Take a look at the auto photo I attached earlier today for the noise in the shadows there - yuck. I've also seen an exposure shifting problem during any kind of motordrive and autoexposure. If I select manual mode it seems to go away. But I've examined shot sequences where EXIF data indicates identical Aperture and Shutter and yet there is a shift. I wonder if these things have that much production variance to cause noise and calibration problems like this.
Rick
what do other d2h shooters think?
thanks
phat[/QUOTE]