jetflyer
12-15 11:13 AM
What a nobel idea. IV has thousands of members and we all are with you. What we don't seems to have is LEADER. Yes, we are lacking leaders like you, If you start I am sure all IV members will follow you. Just drop us a line when you are ready to start. We all are counting on you.
J.F.
Dear Friends,
What about if some of us will go for hunger strike in front of USCIC building? may be the will listen to us then.
please dont give reds if you dont like it, just ignore it. man I am very frustrated with the situation.
MC
J.F.
Dear Friends,
What about if some of us will go for hunger strike in front of USCIC building? may be the will listen to us then.
please dont give reds if you dont like it, just ignore it. man I am very frustrated with the situation.
MC
wallpaper ford focus electric car bev
vayumahesh
01-10 11:36 AM
Finally a happy ending to my green card journey. Received our cards on Saturday. Thank You IV and I wish all the best for everyone.
rashbhat
08-12 10:05 AM
Just thought let me update my case here.
I filed my 485 on July 2nd @ NSC and my checks got cleared yesterday (8/11/07). So as per murthy's coment I tried looking @ back of the checks to get my LIN #'s and I was able to trace it in the USCIS web site and it shows "Application received and the Receipt notice mailed".
So I feel like they are aggressively working on the applications which are filed on July 2nd and hopefully everyone will get their Receipt notice by end of this week.
Hope this will help many people and give a good hopes.
Thanks
I filed my 485 on July 2nd @ NSC and my checks got cleared yesterday (8/11/07). So as per murthy's coment I tried looking @ back of the checks to get my LIN #'s and I was able to trace it in the USCIS web site and it shows "Application received and the Receipt notice mailed".
So I feel like they are aggressively working on the applications which are filed on July 2nd and hopefully everyone will get their Receipt notice by end of this week.
Hope this will help many people and give a good hopes.
Thanks
2011 An electric-red Ford Focus.
CantLeaveAmerica
04-01 01:26 AM
We're much better off here in the US when you compare our compatriots suffering in Britain. Britain has enforced a lot more regulations on immigrants, much to their chagrin.
Let's grin and bear it and hope to see the 'green' light at the end of the tunnel.
That's exactly the point..USCIS is HEADED by fools...the problem lies within...the heads dont really care if their staff is underpaid and over-worked..but the fact of it is that they just don't have the money nor manpower to get the work done. When USCIS adjudicated all those cases in 2002, it was not of their own volition but because Congress mandated it..6 years later they dont care for the immigrants..u think they'd (policy makers) care 2 hoots for the the USCIS officers...just take a look at the Infopass centers...from my experience I havent seen more than 2 officers helping customers at a time..no money..no manpower
Let's grin and bear it and hope to see the 'green' light at the end of the tunnel.
That's exactly the point..USCIS is HEADED by fools...the problem lies within...the heads dont really care if their staff is underpaid and over-worked..but the fact of it is that they just don't have the money nor manpower to get the work done. When USCIS adjudicated all those cases in 2002, it was not of their own volition but because Congress mandated it..6 years later they dont care for the immigrants..u think they'd (policy makers) care 2 hoots for the the USCIS officers...just take a look at the Infopass centers...from my experience I havent seen more than 2 officers helping customers at a time..no money..no manpower
more...
ItIsNotFunny
10-21 03:22 PM
I am sending PMs to senior members of forum requesting to send emails. Started with "A" :)
tsnaresh
09-28 07:42 AM
Filed my first GC in 2001, didn't go well (3-year degree issue). Refiled in 2004 and waiting ....13 plus years since landed in US (1997).
more...
indyanguy
11-05 08:11 PM
So far lot of discussions on how to start LLC/Inc
but how to start a company without changing current status
Here is my status:
My wife and I are on H1 and we got our EAD's now the question are:-
My wife remains on her H1 for safe....until we get GC.
Is it possible me to stay on H1 and start a LLC using my EAD to do a parttime business ?
Please provide Pros and cons if any.....
Thanks
According to some lawyers, once you start using your EAD for either full time or part time work, your H1 is invalidated
but how to start a company without changing current status
Here is my status:
My wife and I are on H1 and we got our EAD's now the question are:-
My wife remains on her H1 for safe....until we get GC.
Is it possible me to stay on H1 and start a LLC using my EAD to do a parttime business ?
Please provide Pros and cons if any.....
Thanks
According to some lawyers, once you start using your EAD for either full time or part time work, your H1 is invalidated
2010 The new electric car system
bigboy007
06-02 08:26 PM
True , hope it will relieve as house sees through it and will make life of all easier by making it amendments or even drop the whole law , We dont want it.
But also can some one point to me to place where it says H1B is not dual intent , i could only find DUAL iNTENT for some students.
But also can some one point to me to place where it says H1B is not dual intent , i could only find DUAL iNTENT for some students.
more...
mirage
08-03 11:45 PM
Pani,
Thanks for Drafting this letter. I would add Rep. Zoe Logfren(Chairwoman of the immigartion subcommittee in the house & Senator John Cornyn Chairman of the immigartion subcommittee in the Senate) officials usually respond when things are addressed to Lawmakers too..
Guys please send out this letter.
I will appreciate if you could add these 2 in your 'Copy to' section...
Senator John Cornyn
Chairman - United States Senate Judiciary subCommittee on
Immigration, Border Security and Citizenship
517 Hart Senate Office Bldg.
Washington, DC 20510
Main: 202-224-2934
Fax: 202-228-2856
Congresswoman Zoe Lofgren
Chairwoman - United States House Judiciary Subcommittee on Immigration, Citizenship,
Refugees, Border Security, and International Law
102 Cannon HOB
Washington, D.C. 20515
Telephone (202) 225-3072
Thanks
Thanks for Drafting this letter. I would add Rep. Zoe Logfren(Chairwoman of the immigartion subcommittee in the house & Senator John Cornyn Chairman of the immigartion subcommittee in the Senate) officials usually respond when things are addressed to Lawmakers too..
Guys please send out this letter.
I will appreciate if you could add these 2 in your 'Copy to' section...
Senator John Cornyn
Chairman - United States Senate Judiciary subCommittee on
Immigration, Border Security and Citizenship
517 Hart Senate Office Bldg.
Washington, DC 20510
Main: 202-224-2934
Fax: 202-228-2856
Congresswoman Zoe Lofgren
Chairwoman - United States House Judiciary Subcommittee on Immigration, Citizenship,
Refugees, Border Security, and International Law
102 Cannon HOB
Washington, D.C. 20515
Telephone (202) 225-3072
Thanks
hair The bright orange Ford Focus
anilsal
07-16 07:13 AM
of why IV is an organization of its members and THEY make IV's campaigns successful.
more...
pappu
08-12 12:29 PM
The senator is missing it or dodging it - it clearly means one thing -we are invisible as constituents. We are being taken for a ride only because we do not speak up or go meet our lawmakers. They do not see us as ordinary constituents having the same issues as their other constituents. The whole human -angle is missing.
We have to go meet our lawmakers and explain to them our part of the story/ They need to be told and made aware that we live in their constituencies and our grievances are genuine and need to be addressed.
And although this particular bill does not affect people that are here already.. Beware!! the noose is tightening- the next on the chopping block is EB Immigrants.To answer your question: Indian companies in India or Indian politicians complaining will not do much impact. After passing this bill politicians will cosy up and say good things to rebuild relations. The real impact can happen if Indians in New York state who can vote stand up against such laws. Same goes for the Desi companies who have tried to raise the voice against USCIS memo. They lack grassroots advocacy and support. Their Indian US citizen friends are busy organizing Diwali melas and Shahrukh Khan stage shows. Immigration voice can be extremely successful if politicians see us as an immigrant lobby. Just like they see Jewish lobby or Hispanic lobby. This is why participation of IV greencard members and citizen friends is important to advocate for changes that helps the immigrant community. I this case too, IV community should not turn a blind eye to what happens around us. Just because we do not work for such companies or we already have EAD does not mean we do not see beyond the headline of this issue. We spend more time analyzing , over analyzing, predicting and tracking rather than actively understanding the politics of issues that are causing all the problems we are facing. To some extent this law passed because Indians in USA did not care due to their narrow outlook and priorities in politics.
We have to go meet our lawmakers and explain to them our part of the story/ They need to be told and made aware that we live in their constituencies and our grievances are genuine and need to be addressed.
And although this particular bill does not affect people that are here already.. Beware!! the noose is tightening- the next on the chopping block is EB Immigrants.To answer your question: Indian companies in India or Indian politicians complaining will not do much impact. After passing this bill politicians will cosy up and say good things to rebuild relations. The real impact can happen if Indians in New York state who can vote stand up against such laws. Same goes for the Desi companies who have tried to raise the voice against USCIS memo. They lack grassroots advocacy and support. Their Indian US citizen friends are busy organizing Diwali melas and Shahrukh Khan stage shows. Immigration voice can be extremely successful if politicians see us as an immigrant lobby. Just like they see Jewish lobby or Hispanic lobby. This is why participation of IV greencard members and citizen friends is important to advocate for changes that helps the immigrant community. I this case too, IV community should not turn a blind eye to what happens around us. Just because we do not work for such companies or we already have EAD does not mean we do not see beyond the headline of this issue. We spend more time analyzing , over analyzing, predicting and tracking rather than actively understanding the politics of issues that are causing all the problems we are facing. To some extent this law passed because Indians in USA did not care due to their narrow outlook and priorities in politics.
hot Ford Focus
chocolate
06-05 08:36 AM
Veni
I guess you are also speculating .. When people read the notes from aila (point 4) ,people do speculate till it becomes or does not become law.
http://www.aila.org/content/default.aspx?docid=22481
My labor is approved and i am yet to file 140/485/EAD/AP. Am i in trouble?Its still a bill right?Not a law.:mad: :mad:
I guess you are also speculating .. When people read the notes from aila (point 4) ,people do speculate till it becomes or does not become law.
http://www.aila.org/content/default.aspx?docid=22481
My labor is approved and i am yet to file 140/485/EAD/AP. Am i in trouble?Its still a bill right?Not a law.:mad: :mad:
more...
house 2012 ford focus electric front
eb3_nepa
03-09 01:21 PM
Black_logs are you ABSOLUTELY sure that they eat into the EB3 numbers? On the Visa Bulletin, they have a seperate entry below the EB3. Just curious if we are getting this Schedule A thing correctly
tattoo Ford Focus Electric Pictures.
diptam
08-02 04:00 PM
Whenever i read your Post i feel Good - The Rep that i spoke to USCIS told me that July 2nd filers has minimum wait till Aug 15th :D
By the way there is a Prediction for OCT Bulletin in Market >>
EB3 India retrogressed to MAY 2001 and so on , so forth - Enjoy...
http://www.bibdaily.com/pdfs/Jan%20P...n%208-2-07.pdf
I had an email conversation with my lawyer regarding 180 day portability. She said that the count for 180 days should begin with notice date for safe side.
However the count begins with Receipt Date which is a day or 2 off from the actual application receive date (mail received date).
This is what i got from my lawyer.
By the way there is a Prediction for OCT Bulletin in Market >>
EB3 India retrogressed to MAY 2001 and so on , so forth - Enjoy...
http://www.bibdaily.com/pdfs/Jan%20P...n%208-2-07.pdf
I had an email conversation with my lawyer regarding 180 day portability. She said that the count for 180 days should begin with notice date for safe side.
However the count begins with Receipt Date which is a day or 2 off from the actual application receive date (mail received date).
This is what i got from my lawyer.
more...
pictures Ford Focus Electric Hatchback
485Mbe4001
08-13 05:14 PM
Thank you. you are one of the very few, i commend you on your post and support.
The last couple of VBs have brought out the worst amongst us, so much for together we stand, after reading the posts, it was more like 'you stand while i climb over you' :)
I started a thread couple of weeks back. It met an untimely death because of lack of participation from people. Just to revive your memory :
http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/showthread.php?t=20406
Today we are here almost on the verge of disintegration as an organization. And this is because we always believed in our minds that we are nothing but a bunch of opportunists coming together for our individual cause of getting a GC. What we see today is an outcome of what we always believed. Soon EB2 will disappear, and EB3 will be left alone fighting for their GC's. And at some point of time they will also go away, all that's left will be "guests" using IV as a discussion forum. May be what I suggested can be termed as "Quixotic" but unless we aim high, we will never reach high.
Guys, I am an EB2 with PD in 2004, but I will always stand together with you, no matter what. A GC for myself alone will never satisfy me, because number of my friends, my family members are in EB3, and I am not mean enough to celebrate for myself when majority of my friends and family members are sad.
The last couple of VBs have brought out the worst amongst us, so much for together we stand, after reading the posts, it was more like 'you stand while i climb over you' :)
I started a thread couple of weeks back. It met an untimely death because of lack of participation from people. Just to revive your memory :
http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/showthread.php?t=20406
Today we are here almost on the verge of disintegration as an organization. And this is because we always believed in our minds that we are nothing but a bunch of opportunists coming together for our individual cause of getting a GC. What we see today is an outcome of what we always believed. Soon EB2 will disappear, and EB3 will be left alone fighting for their GC's. And at some point of time they will also go away, all that's left will be "guests" using IV as a discussion forum. May be what I suggested can be termed as "Quixotic" but unless we aim high, we will never reach high.
Guys, I am an EB2 with PD in 2004, but I will always stand together with you, no matter what. A GC for myself alone will never satisfy me, because number of my friends, my family members are in EB3, and I am not mean enough to celebrate for myself when majority of my friends and family members are sad.
dresses The Focus Electric will be
zerozerozeven
07-11 09:25 AM
PD - Jul 07
Any hopes for me in the Sep bulletin? hope they move it by another 14 to 15 months ...USCIS...pls...my wife badly needs an EAD to start working
Any hopes for me in the Sep bulletin? hope they move it by another 14 to 15 months ...USCIS...pls...my wife badly needs an EAD to start working
more...
makeup 2013 Ford Focus Electric Car
willwin
06-11 11:49 AM
anyone wants to guess as to when EB3(I) will reach 2003 Dec. I know it is long long time away but it has to reach that date some time in the future.
Going by what has happened this year, assuming no legislation relief in the near future, dates are NOT going to move forward for EB3 for a very long time. The movement would be slow for EB2 I as well.
Reason, USCIS would have more resources (available) starting next FY and also if they were able to use up all VISA numbers in a FY when they had to handle several hundred thousands of EAD/AP besides naturalization cases, starting next year it is going to be an easy bet for them. So, the dates would move forward very slowly (with all the new I140 approvals coming in).
However, if there was any legislation relief, then it would be a different ball game altogether. May be we will see a repeat of 2002-2004 when all categories were current.
Going by what has happened this year, assuming no legislation relief in the near future, dates are NOT going to move forward for EB3 for a very long time. The movement would be slow for EB2 I as well.
Reason, USCIS would have more resources (available) starting next FY and also if they were able to use up all VISA numbers in a FY when they had to handle several hundred thousands of EAD/AP besides naturalization cases, starting next year it is going to be an easy bet for them. So, the dates would move forward very slowly (with all the new I140 approvals coming in).
However, if there was any legislation relief, then it would be a different ball game altogether. May be we will see a repeat of 2002-2004 when all categories were current.
girlfriend Ford#39;s first electric car
ind_game
05-20 04:30 PM
Did any of you get the same letter with the same content below .........what baffles me is the last sentence that says "The application will be reopened and the processing continued. Once the processing is completed, you will receive a notice under separate cover."
Your help is really appreciated in this.........Sorry I am little bit pessimistic here......
FINAL UPDATE
HURRAHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHYYYYYYYYYYYYYY
My I-485 case got reopened after being in denial status for three months............ My attorney got a letter from USCIS.
::::::::::::::::::To recap::::::::::::::
I went to the Congressional office on 05/14/2009 morning.
Congressional office made a call to Nebraska Service Center regarding the case on the same day afternoon (05/14/2009 afternoon)
USCIS sent letter to my attorney on Friday (05/15/2009).
My attorney received it this morning (05/19/2009).
Looks like magic........Whoever has been working on my case from the past three months made a huge reversal decision in just a few hours on 05/14/2009 afternoon with atmost attention........I like this sudden surge in commitment and care on my case.......
Here is the wording:
Quote""""""""""""""""""""""""
Reference is made to the Notice of Appeal or Motion (Form I-290B) filed on April 23, 2009. You are seeking reopen the decision rendered by USCIS on February 17, 2009, denying application filed by you.
The motion as submitted has been reviewed. It meets the requirements of Title 8, COde of Federal Regulations, $103.5 concerning the proper filing of a motion. Accordingly, the request to reopen the previous decision will be and is hereby granted.
The facts and issues in this matter were properly discussed in the decision, supra, and need not be repeated here as they are a matter of record.
After a complete review of the record of proceedings, including your motion, the grounds for denial have been overcome.
The application will be reopened and the processing continued. Once the processing is completed, you will receive a notice under separate cover.
Sincerely
"""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""Unquote
Your help is really appreciated in this.........Sorry I am little bit pessimistic here......
FINAL UPDATE
HURRAHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHYYYYYYYYYYYYYY
My I-485 case got reopened after being in denial status for three months............ My attorney got a letter from USCIS.
::::::::::::::::::To recap::::::::::::::
I went to the Congressional office on 05/14/2009 morning.
Congressional office made a call to Nebraska Service Center regarding the case on the same day afternoon (05/14/2009 afternoon)
USCIS sent letter to my attorney on Friday (05/15/2009).
My attorney received it this morning (05/19/2009).
Looks like magic........Whoever has been working on my case from the past three months made a huge reversal decision in just a few hours on 05/14/2009 afternoon with atmost attention........I like this sudden surge in commitment and care on my case.......
Here is the wording:
Quote""""""""""""""""""""""""
Reference is made to the Notice of Appeal or Motion (Form I-290B) filed on April 23, 2009. You are seeking reopen the decision rendered by USCIS on February 17, 2009, denying application filed by you.
The motion as submitted has been reviewed. It meets the requirements of Title 8, COde of Federal Regulations, $103.5 concerning the proper filing of a motion. Accordingly, the request to reopen the previous decision will be and is hereby granted.
The facts and issues in this matter were properly discussed in the decision, supra, and need not be repeated here as they are a matter of record.
After a complete review of the record of proceedings, including your motion, the grounds for denial have been overcome.
The application will be reopened and the processing continued. Once the processing is completed, you will receive a notice under separate cover.
Sincerely
"""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""Unquote
hairstyles %2FFord+Focus+Electric+
pappu
06-10 11:28 AM
snhn
what is a DWI?thanks.
Drunk With ImmigrationVoice. :D
what is a DWI?thanks.
Drunk With ImmigrationVoice. :D
pappu
08-12 10:55 AM
Senate Passage of Border Security Legislation
August 12, 2010
Today, I come to the floor to seek unanimous consent to pass a smart, tough, and effective $600 million bill that will significantly enhance the security and integrity of our nation’s southern border—which currently lacks the resources needed to fully combat the drug smugglers, gun-runners, human-traffickers, money launderers and other organized criminals that seek to do harm to innocent Americans along our border….
The best part of this border package, Mr. President, is that it is fully paid for and does not increase the deficit by a single penny. In actuality, the Congressional Budget Office has determined that this bill will yield a direct savings to taxpayers of $50 million….
The emergency border funds we are passing today are fully paid for by assessing fees on certain types of companies who hire foreign workers using certain types of visas in a way that Congress did not intend. I want to take a moment to explain exactly what we are doing in this bill a little further because I want everyone to clearly understand how these offsets are designed.
In 1990, Congress realized that the world was changing rapidly and that technological innovations like the internet were creating a high demand in the United States for high-tech workers to create new technologies and products. Consequently, Congress created the H-1B visa program to allow U.S. employers to hire foreign tech workers in special circumstances when they could not find an American citizen who was qualified for the job.
Many of the companies that use this program today are using the program in the exact way Congress intended. That is, these companies (like Microsoft, IBM, and Intel) are hiring bright foreign students educated in our American universities to work in the U.S. for 6 or 7 years to invent new product lines and technologies so that Microsoft, IBM, and Intel can sell more products to the American public. Then—at the expiration of the H-1B visa period—these companies apply for these talented workers to earn green cards and stay with the company.
When the H-1B visa program is used in this manner, it is a good program for everyone involved. It is good for the company. It is good for the worker. And it is good for the American people who benefit from the products and jobs created by the innovation of the H-1B visa holder.
Every day, companies like Oracle, Cisco, Apple and others use the H-1B visa program in the exact way I have just described—and their use of the program has greatly benefitted this country.
But recently, some companies have decided to exploit an unintended loophole in the H-1B visa program to use the program in a manner that many in Congress, including myself, do not believe is consistent with the program’s intent.
Rather than being a company that makes something, and simply needs to bring in a talented foreign worker to help innovate and create new products and technologies—these other companies are essentially creating “multinational temp agencies” that were never contemplated when the H-1B program was created.
The business model of these newer companies is not to make any new products or technologies like Microsoft or Apple does. Instead, their business model is to bring foreign tech workers into the United States who are willing to accept less pay than their American counterparts, place these workers into other companies in exchange for a “consulting fee,” and transfer these workers from company to company in order to maximize profits from placement fees. In other words, these companies are petitioning for foreign workers simply to then turn around and provide these same workers to other companies who need cheap labor for various short term projects.
Don’t take my word for it. If you look at the marketing materials of some of the companies that fall within the scope covered by today’s legislation, their materials boast about their “outsourcing expertise” and say that their advantage is their ability to conduct what they call “labor arbitrage” which is—in their own words—“transferring work functions to a lower cost environment for increased savings.”
The business model used by these companies within the United States is creating three major negative side effects. First, it is ruining the reputation of the H-1B program, which is overwhelmingly used by good actors for beneficial purposes. Second, according to the Economic Policy institute, it is lowering the wages for American tech workers already in the marketplace. Third, it is also discouraging many of our smartest students from entering the technology industry in the first place. Students can see that paying hundreds of thousands of dollars for advanced schooling is not worth the cost when the market is being flooded with foreign temporary workers willing to do tech-work for far less pay because their foreign education was much cheaper and they intend to move back home when their visa expires to a country where the cost of living is far less expensive.
This type of use of the H-1B visa program will be addressed as part of comprehensive immigration reform and will likely be dramatically restricted. We will be reforming the legal immigration system to encourage the world’s best and brightest individuals to come to the United States and create the new technologies and businesses that will employ countless American workers, but will discourage businesses from using our immigration laws as a means to obtain temporary and less-expensive foreign labor to replace capable American workers.
Nevertheless, I do wish to clarify a previous mischaracterization of these firms, where I labeled them as “chop shops.” That statement was incorrect, and I wish to acknowledge that. In the tech industry, these firms are sometimes known as “body shops” and that’s what I should have said.
While I strongly oppose the manner in which these firms are using the H-1B visa to accomplish objectives that Congress never intended, it would be unfortunate if anyone concluded from my remarks that these firms are engaging in illegal behavior.
But I also want to make clear that the purpose of this fee is not to target businesses from any particular country. Many news articles have reported that the only companies that will be affected by this fee are companies based in India and that, ipso facto, the purpose of this legislation must be to target Indian IT companies.
Well, it is simply untrue that the purpose of this legislation is to target Indian companies. We are simply raising fees for businesses who use the H-1B visa to do things that are contrary to the program’s original intent.
Visa fees will only increase for companies with more than 50 workers who continue to employ more than 50 percent of their employees through the H-1B program. Congress does not want the H-1B visa program to be a vehicle for creating multinational temp agencies where workers do not know what projects they will be working on—or what cities they will be working in—when they enter the country.
The fee is based solely upon the business model of the company, not the location of the company.
If you are using the H-1B visa to innovate new products and technologies for your own company to sell, that is a good thing regardless of whether the company was originally founded in India, Ireland, or Indiana.
But if you are using the H-1B visa to run a glorified international temp agency for tech workers in contravention of the spirit of the program, I and my colleagues believe that you should have to pay a higher fee to ensure that American workers are not losing their jobs because of unintended uses of the visa program that were never contemplated when the program was created.
This belief is consistent regardless of whether the company using these staffing practices was founded in Bangalore, Beijing, or Boston.
Raising the fees for companies hiring more than 50 percent of their workforce through foreign visas will accomplish two important goals. First, it will provide the necessary funds to secure our border without raising taxes or adding to the deficit. Second, it will level the playing field for American workers so that they do not lose out on good jobs here in America because it is cheaper to bring in a foreign worker rather than hire an American worker.
Let me tell you what objective folks around the world are saying about the impact of this fee increase. In an August 6, 2010, Wall Street Journal article, Avinash Vashistha—the CEO of a Bangalore based off-shoring advisory consulting firm—told the Journal that the new fee in this bill “would accelerate Indian firms’ plans to hire more American-born workers in the U.S.” What’s wrong with that? In an August 7, 2010 Economic Times Article, Jeya Kumar, a CEO of a top IT company, said that this bill would “erode cost arbitrage and cause a change in the operational model of Indian offshore providers.”
The leaders of this business model are agreeing that our bill will make it more expensive to bring in foreign tech workers to compete with American tech workers for jobs here in America. That means these companies are going to start having to hire U.S. tech workers again.
So Mr. President, this bill is not only a responsible border security bill, it has the dual advantage of creating more high-paying American jobs.
Finally, Mr. President, I want to be clear about one other thing. Even though passing this bill will secure our border, I again say that the only way to fully restore the rule of law to our entire immigration system is by passing comprehensive immigration reform….
The urgency for immigration reform cannot be overstated because it is so overdue. The time for excuses is now over, it is now time to get to work.
August 12, 2010
Today, I come to the floor to seek unanimous consent to pass a smart, tough, and effective $600 million bill that will significantly enhance the security and integrity of our nation’s southern border—which currently lacks the resources needed to fully combat the drug smugglers, gun-runners, human-traffickers, money launderers and other organized criminals that seek to do harm to innocent Americans along our border….
The best part of this border package, Mr. President, is that it is fully paid for and does not increase the deficit by a single penny. In actuality, the Congressional Budget Office has determined that this bill will yield a direct savings to taxpayers of $50 million….
The emergency border funds we are passing today are fully paid for by assessing fees on certain types of companies who hire foreign workers using certain types of visas in a way that Congress did not intend. I want to take a moment to explain exactly what we are doing in this bill a little further because I want everyone to clearly understand how these offsets are designed.
In 1990, Congress realized that the world was changing rapidly and that technological innovations like the internet were creating a high demand in the United States for high-tech workers to create new technologies and products. Consequently, Congress created the H-1B visa program to allow U.S. employers to hire foreign tech workers in special circumstances when they could not find an American citizen who was qualified for the job.
Many of the companies that use this program today are using the program in the exact way Congress intended. That is, these companies (like Microsoft, IBM, and Intel) are hiring bright foreign students educated in our American universities to work in the U.S. for 6 or 7 years to invent new product lines and technologies so that Microsoft, IBM, and Intel can sell more products to the American public. Then—at the expiration of the H-1B visa period—these companies apply for these talented workers to earn green cards and stay with the company.
When the H-1B visa program is used in this manner, it is a good program for everyone involved. It is good for the company. It is good for the worker. And it is good for the American people who benefit from the products and jobs created by the innovation of the H-1B visa holder.
Every day, companies like Oracle, Cisco, Apple and others use the H-1B visa program in the exact way I have just described—and their use of the program has greatly benefitted this country.
But recently, some companies have decided to exploit an unintended loophole in the H-1B visa program to use the program in a manner that many in Congress, including myself, do not believe is consistent with the program’s intent.
Rather than being a company that makes something, and simply needs to bring in a talented foreign worker to help innovate and create new products and technologies—these other companies are essentially creating “multinational temp agencies” that were never contemplated when the H-1B program was created.
The business model of these newer companies is not to make any new products or technologies like Microsoft or Apple does. Instead, their business model is to bring foreign tech workers into the United States who are willing to accept less pay than their American counterparts, place these workers into other companies in exchange for a “consulting fee,” and transfer these workers from company to company in order to maximize profits from placement fees. In other words, these companies are petitioning for foreign workers simply to then turn around and provide these same workers to other companies who need cheap labor for various short term projects.
Don’t take my word for it. If you look at the marketing materials of some of the companies that fall within the scope covered by today’s legislation, their materials boast about their “outsourcing expertise” and say that their advantage is their ability to conduct what they call “labor arbitrage” which is—in their own words—“transferring work functions to a lower cost environment for increased savings.”
The business model used by these companies within the United States is creating three major negative side effects. First, it is ruining the reputation of the H-1B program, which is overwhelmingly used by good actors for beneficial purposes. Second, according to the Economic Policy institute, it is lowering the wages for American tech workers already in the marketplace. Third, it is also discouraging many of our smartest students from entering the technology industry in the first place. Students can see that paying hundreds of thousands of dollars for advanced schooling is not worth the cost when the market is being flooded with foreign temporary workers willing to do tech-work for far less pay because their foreign education was much cheaper and they intend to move back home when their visa expires to a country where the cost of living is far less expensive.
This type of use of the H-1B visa program will be addressed as part of comprehensive immigration reform and will likely be dramatically restricted. We will be reforming the legal immigration system to encourage the world’s best and brightest individuals to come to the United States and create the new technologies and businesses that will employ countless American workers, but will discourage businesses from using our immigration laws as a means to obtain temporary and less-expensive foreign labor to replace capable American workers.
Nevertheless, I do wish to clarify a previous mischaracterization of these firms, where I labeled them as “chop shops.” That statement was incorrect, and I wish to acknowledge that. In the tech industry, these firms are sometimes known as “body shops” and that’s what I should have said.
While I strongly oppose the manner in which these firms are using the H-1B visa to accomplish objectives that Congress never intended, it would be unfortunate if anyone concluded from my remarks that these firms are engaging in illegal behavior.
But I also want to make clear that the purpose of this fee is not to target businesses from any particular country. Many news articles have reported that the only companies that will be affected by this fee are companies based in India and that, ipso facto, the purpose of this legislation must be to target Indian IT companies.
Well, it is simply untrue that the purpose of this legislation is to target Indian companies. We are simply raising fees for businesses who use the H-1B visa to do things that are contrary to the program’s original intent.
Visa fees will only increase for companies with more than 50 workers who continue to employ more than 50 percent of their employees through the H-1B program. Congress does not want the H-1B visa program to be a vehicle for creating multinational temp agencies where workers do not know what projects they will be working on—or what cities they will be working in—when they enter the country.
The fee is based solely upon the business model of the company, not the location of the company.
If you are using the H-1B visa to innovate new products and technologies for your own company to sell, that is a good thing regardless of whether the company was originally founded in India, Ireland, or Indiana.
But if you are using the H-1B visa to run a glorified international temp agency for tech workers in contravention of the spirit of the program, I and my colleagues believe that you should have to pay a higher fee to ensure that American workers are not losing their jobs because of unintended uses of the visa program that were never contemplated when the program was created.
This belief is consistent regardless of whether the company using these staffing practices was founded in Bangalore, Beijing, or Boston.
Raising the fees for companies hiring more than 50 percent of their workforce through foreign visas will accomplish two important goals. First, it will provide the necessary funds to secure our border without raising taxes or adding to the deficit. Second, it will level the playing field for American workers so that they do not lose out on good jobs here in America because it is cheaper to bring in a foreign worker rather than hire an American worker.
Let me tell you what objective folks around the world are saying about the impact of this fee increase. In an August 6, 2010, Wall Street Journal article, Avinash Vashistha—the CEO of a Bangalore based off-shoring advisory consulting firm—told the Journal that the new fee in this bill “would accelerate Indian firms’ plans to hire more American-born workers in the U.S.” What’s wrong with that? In an August 7, 2010 Economic Times Article, Jeya Kumar, a CEO of a top IT company, said that this bill would “erode cost arbitrage and cause a change in the operational model of Indian offshore providers.”
The leaders of this business model are agreeing that our bill will make it more expensive to bring in foreign tech workers to compete with American tech workers for jobs here in America. That means these companies are going to start having to hire U.S. tech workers again.
So Mr. President, this bill is not only a responsible border security bill, it has the dual advantage of creating more high-paying American jobs.
Finally, Mr. President, I want to be clear about one other thing. Even though passing this bill will secure our border, I again say that the only way to fully restore the rule of law to our entire immigration system is by passing comprehensive immigration reform….
The urgency for immigration reform cannot be overstated because it is so overdue. The time for excuses is now over, it is now time to get to work.
nyte_crawler
04-26 12:38 PM
You have been calling H1 PD will be fair for some time now. I dont think it is. It is infact unfair for those who have the intention to immigrate. (Sorry to say this time and time again)
Let's say,
Person A comes in Jan 1999, works for several companies and infact jumped around for higher pay and better prospects and just before the 6th year is finished he/she applies for the GC process.
Person B comes in Dec 1999, works for a year and decides to settle and applies for the GC process and get stuck with the employer.
According to your argument, who gets a better deal, Person A. But is it fair. Absolutely Not. Lets say you walk into a grocery store, but want to stand infront of the queue in the check-out line just because you entered in the grocery store first does not makes sense. :)
Learning01, thanks for hijacking the topic to SS and Medicare. :)
I dont expect the wait to be any less longer .. But I would surely welcome priority date being based on H1 start date as it would be more fair method
Let's say,
Person A comes in Jan 1999, works for several companies and infact jumped around for higher pay and better prospects and just before the 6th year is finished he/she applies for the GC process.
Person B comes in Dec 1999, works for a year and decides to settle and applies for the GC process and get stuck with the employer.
According to your argument, who gets a better deal, Person A. But is it fair. Absolutely Not. Lets say you walk into a grocery store, but want to stand infront of the queue in the check-out line just because you entered in the grocery store first does not makes sense. :)
Learning01, thanks for hijacking the topic to SS and Medicare. :)
I dont expect the wait to be any less longer .. But I would surely welcome priority date being based on H1 start date as it would be more fair method
No comments:
Post a Comment