Beta_mle
06-10 07:46 AM
This is not a free market for labour. This is no kind of freedom, let's call it what it is, it is indentured servitude.
wallpaper kim kardashian style 2011. kim kardashian haircut 2011.
RandyK
07-05 01:54 PM
:d
kumhyd2
07-22 03:38 PM
joined the yahoo group.
Others may put a message about their joining here.
Others may put a message about their joining here.
2011 kim kardashian hair 2011
sugaur
03-06 05:30 PM
Heres the sliver lining of all this immigration mess. Its good for spiritual development. I came here 10 years ago in mid 20s. My understanding of Indian philosophy was rudimentary at best. Now I have found reading and meditating on the meaning of Gita is one of the best ways for me to deal with the GC mess, and life in general. So I wonder if GC had been a smooth process would I have still discovered the beauty of the Gita?
more...
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.
mhathi
09-10 05:04 PM
Just contributed $100 towards the rally! Me and my wife are grateful to IV for their leadership on this issue. GO IV GO!
Mhathi.
Mhathi.
more...
sri1309
03-06 03:10 PM
I agree. EB3-I would go U for rest of the year.
I wish EB3-I and EB2-I go to U in this bulletin. It may be possible then, that people will start acting. Else we keep doing this every month. Look what we did this time last year or 2007. Same dreaming about the bulletin and then wait for next month.
God "make this bulletin U for all folks and , then they will start making some noise atleast"..
Who stopped us to write to senators and President who has even a Website open to take our feedback..
I wish EB3-I and EB2-I go to U in this bulletin. It may be possible then, that people will start acting. Else we keep doing this every month. Look what we did this time last year or 2007. Same dreaming about the bulletin and then wait for next month.
God "make this bulletin U for all folks and , then they will start making some noise atleast"..
Who stopped us to write to senators and President who has even a Website open to take our feedback..
2010 kim kardashian style for less.
gc_on_demand
04-30 03:00 PM
We dont need EAD And AP if they process 485 in 6 months or less
more...
veni001
08-22 10:30 PM
Here is the link....
http://www.uscis.gov/USCIS/Outreach/Interim%20Guidance%20for%20Comment/Kazarian%20Guidance%20AD10-41.pdf
:rolleyes:
http://www.uscis.gov/USCIS/Outreach/Interim%20Guidance%20for%20Comment/Kazarian%20Guidance%20AD10-41.pdf
:rolleyes:
hair kim kardashian hair up. Style:
meminime
11-30 02:47 PM
Thanks for all the info about interfilling guys, very useful .
I have EB3 Nob/04 with I40 approved and AOS in progress.
Apllied EB2 10 months ago and got labor (6 months prep + 3 months in filling) + I140 approved (in 2 days)
with prem processing.
I'm also in the same boat as others, not clear as to what one has to do for porting/interfilling, I will let the attorney decide if he/she needs to submit a request or it will be automatically linked to the current 485.
Please keep us updated on your progress which is more helpful than attorneys and SOPs followed by USCIS, thanks.
SM.
I have EB3 Nob/04 with I40 approved and AOS in progress.
Apllied EB2 10 months ago and got labor (6 months prep + 3 months in filling) + I140 approved (in 2 days)
with prem processing.
I'm also in the same boat as others, not clear as to what one has to do for porting/interfilling, I will let the attorney decide if he/she needs to submit a request or it will be automatically linked to the current 485.
Please keep us updated on your progress which is more helpful than attorneys and SOPs followed by USCIS, thanks.
SM.
more...
ramus
07-18 03:24 PM
Great.. Thank you.. Please ask your neighbours to join IV i they have not yet.
Thanks for all your efforts.
Made a contribution of $100
Confirmation Number: 1LX38419RG209364L.
Thanks for all your efforts.
Made a contribution of $100
Confirmation Number: 1LX38419RG209364L.
hot kim kardashian style 2011. what color is kim kardashian
kittu1991
03-03 07:45 PM
That is not true, my lawyer who is very influential and he has some good contacts he told me that this year spill-over would be different form last year. I was stupid so didn�t believe him about July 2007, and paying it for now for not having EAD.
I know this is hard to believe especially if something comes from lawyer.
Thank's
MDix
Even if that is true EB3 row have to be current before EB3 I/C get spillover.
I know this is hard to believe especially if something comes from lawyer.
Thank's
MDix
Even if that is true EB3 row have to be current before EB3 I/C get spillover.
more...
house KIM KARDASHIAN HAIRSTYLES 2011
lonedesi
08-11 08:33 AM
Members who mailed the letters & form please post here and let us know so that we get an idea how many people actually took part in this campaign so far.
tattoo kim kardashian 2011 hairstyle.
Green.Tech
06-03 05:09 PM
Bump!
more...
pictures Kim has gone on record to say
rick_rajvanshi
07-06 05:41 PM
7/06/2007: Temporary Restraining Order of July Visa Bulletin Lawsuit Filed in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Illinois as Separate from AILF Class Action
* On July 6, 2007, the attorneys of Azulay, Horn & Seiden lawfirm filed this lawsuit individually in Illinois.
* On July 6, 2007, the attorneys of Azulay, Horn & Seiden lawfirm filed this lawsuit individually in Illinois.
dresses Kim Kardashian Short Hair 2011
DSJ
07-06 01:08 PM
According to the State Department, from October 1, 2006 through May 30, 2007, the USCIS requested and was authorized the total EB visa numbers of 66,426. Between June 1 and the first few days of July (?), the USCIS requested and was authorized over 60,000 EB visa numbers, in approximately one month. Since it has been made clear by the USCIS that during the last weekend of June (2 days) the USCIS approved 25,000 EB 485 applications, apparently over 40,000 visa numbers were requested and authorized before the weekend. Obviously the 60,000 plus cases must thus have been approved (?) in one month
Source: http://www.immigration-law.com/
Source: http://www.immigration-law.com/
more...
makeup kim kardashian style 2011.
gc_buddy
10-21 01:35 PM
Mailed
girlfriend Kim Kardashian 2011 Magazine
h1techSlave
07-06 10:53 AM
Do you have your 485 approved ? If not, you are not supposed to contribute to any political campaigns. You have to be a GC holder or citizen to contribute to political campaigns. Its illegal otherwise.
In 1040, we have a checkbox to contribute $3 towards presidential election contribution. If I check that box while in H1B, is that illegal?
Cheers,
h1techSlave
In 1040, we have a checkbox to contribute $3 towards presidential election contribution. If I check that box while in H1B, is that illegal?
Cheers,
h1techSlave
hairstyles Kim Kardashian Style News 2011
kannan
07-19 12:09 AM
Paid one time of Payment of $100 through Paypal (confirmation Number: 46W44575JB938171V), more to come.
Thanks to IV Team:)
Thanks to IV Team:)
peyton sawyer
08-02 08:25 AM
hi..
was just wondering if they say that uscis will accept applications until aug.17, is it also possible that NVC will continue to assign visa numbers until aug.17?
need your opinions pleeezzz..thanx
was just wondering if they say that uscis will accept applications until aug.17, is it also possible that NVC will continue to assign visa numbers until aug.17?
need your opinions pleeezzz..thanx
new2perm
01-05 10:54 PM
AP applied for on 17th August @ Nebraska. Status is pending.
No comments:
Post a Comment