appusheth
05-26 11:58 AM
Hello,
Citizen of India.
1st H1 valid until Sept 2008.
Consultate for CP will be Mumbai, India.
I have a couple of questions pertaining to GC.
My LC is approved 2 days back (Filed - May 17, Approved - May 25) I didnt know this happens so fast. We have not yet received the cetitified documents from the department so I dont know whether its EB2 or EB3.
My lawyer says it is upto the department to decide whether my case comes under EB2 or EB3? Is this right?
Now we plan to file the I-140 in June 07. Should I go for premium processing right from the first time? My company is ready to do this. But someone said on one of these websites that this creates a suspicion in the minds of the department. I dont know how true this is?
I am thinking to opt for Consular Processing. What do you recommend on this?
I have read that we can also file I-140/485 concurrently. What does that mean? I was under the impression that first I-140 needs to be approved and only then we can file the other papers.
I read in one of the posts that the 485 and EAD were approved becore I-140. How is that possible?
Now the main thing that is bothering me is the financial situation of the company. They have good money and they can afford to pay me well, but the old accountant messed up big time and filed all wrong taxes and di not maintain proper records etc. So on papers its not such a great company, but they have money for sure. How can this be a hurdle?
All your help will be highly appreciated.
Thank You.
Citizen of India.
1st H1 valid until Sept 2008.
Consultate for CP will be Mumbai, India.
I have a couple of questions pertaining to GC.
My LC is approved 2 days back (Filed - May 17, Approved - May 25) I didnt know this happens so fast. We have not yet received the cetitified documents from the department so I dont know whether its EB2 or EB3.
My lawyer says it is upto the department to decide whether my case comes under EB2 or EB3? Is this right?
Now we plan to file the I-140 in June 07. Should I go for premium processing right from the first time? My company is ready to do this. But someone said on one of these websites that this creates a suspicion in the minds of the department. I dont know how true this is?
I am thinking to opt for Consular Processing. What do you recommend on this?
I have read that we can also file I-140/485 concurrently. What does that mean? I was under the impression that first I-140 needs to be approved and only then we can file the other papers.
I read in one of the posts that the 485 and EAD were approved becore I-140. How is that possible?
Now the main thing that is bothering me is the financial situation of the company. They have good money and they can afford to pay me well, but the old accountant messed up big time and filed all wrong taxes and di not maintain proper records etc. So on papers its not such a great company, but they have money for sure. How can this be a hurdle?
All your help will be highly appreciated.
Thank You.
wallpaper one: The White Sox got the
optimystic
03-24 02:54 PM
That's true actually. They have no business asking you about details of what your work authorization status is. All they need to know is that you are legally allowed to work. Doesn't matter EAD, GC or US citizenship. Sponsoring for H1B might come up during the hiring stage but that doesn't apply here.
Hypothetically in an interview, if directly asked, and if I am planning on using EAD, I would simply tell them that I have authorization from the DHS to work for any employer, and leave it at that. If they persist, I will tell them that I have the required documents for I-9. No need for more details unless some kind of security clearance is required.
Its a little hard to understand how the issue of 'work authorization' cannot be raised during interview or hiring process.
- Say I am an employer who has a critical project that needs a person to be on job for at least few months, to ensure that the project goes smoothly
- The DHS/USICS/DOL or the Fed (or whoever it is) has told me that it is illegal for me to hire anyone without proper work authorization
- I may not have sufficient funds to sponsor H1B
- During the interview process I want to know whether the candidate a) has work authorization b) how long his work authorization is valid for? so that I can prescreen and not trouble candidates with the whole interview process only to tell them later that I can't hire them.
Based on the criteria above I dont see how it is illegal to ask what type of work authorization one has, and if EAD , how long it is valid. It may be illegal to disqualify a candidate who has EAD with validity for the required amount of time. But I sure can ask about the details within legal limits, can't I?
I dont think DOL or whatever dept it is, that regulates employment, can force an employer that they have to treat seekers of H1B Visa [and/or EAD people with for example only 1 month validity left] on par with US citizens (On the other hand, it is the vice versa that they are more concerned about :) )....I mean what if the financial position of the employer cannot afford him to sponsor an H1B or take the risk of employing an EAD guy with only 1 month validity and risk financial loss if that guy had to quit after a month due to EAD renewal delay etc.... Would they be forced to sponsor H1B or take a risk by hiring the 1 month EAD guy?
What might be illegal though is rejecting to employ EAD people with reasonable amount of validity left on their card.
Isn't that right? [ I am just curious...I am not supporting the employer here, but just trying to understand the practical enforcement of the legality of such issues]
Regards.
Hypothetically in an interview, if directly asked, and if I am planning on using EAD, I would simply tell them that I have authorization from the DHS to work for any employer, and leave it at that. If they persist, I will tell them that I have the required documents for I-9. No need for more details unless some kind of security clearance is required.
Its a little hard to understand how the issue of 'work authorization' cannot be raised during interview or hiring process.
- Say I am an employer who has a critical project that needs a person to be on job for at least few months, to ensure that the project goes smoothly
- The DHS/USICS/DOL or the Fed (or whoever it is) has told me that it is illegal for me to hire anyone without proper work authorization
- I may not have sufficient funds to sponsor H1B
- During the interview process I want to know whether the candidate a) has work authorization b) how long his work authorization is valid for? so that I can prescreen and not trouble candidates with the whole interview process only to tell them later that I can't hire them.
Based on the criteria above I dont see how it is illegal to ask what type of work authorization one has, and if EAD , how long it is valid. It may be illegal to disqualify a candidate who has EAD with validity for the required amount of time. But I sure can ask about the details within legal limits, can't I?
I dont think DOL or whatever dept it is, that regulates employment, can force an employer that they have to treat seekers of H1B Visa [and/or EAD people with for example only 1 month validity left] on par with US citizens (On the other hand, it is the vice versa that they are more concerned about :) )....I mean what if the financial position of the employer cannot afford him to sponsor an H1B or take the risk of employing an EAD guy with only 1 month validity and risk financial loss if that guy had to quit after a month due to EAD renewal delay etc.... Would they be forced to sponsor H1B or take a risk by hiring the 1 month EAD guy?
What might be illegal though is rejecting to employ EAD people with reasonable amount of validity left on their card.
Isn't that right? [ I am just curious...I am not supporting the employer here, but just trying to understand the practical enforcement of the legality of such issues]
Regards.
sc3
08-20 02:50 PM
The item mentioned above is for EB2, meaning any spill over to EB2 is from unused EB1.
for EB3 the ACT mentions the following
Visas shall be made available, in a number not to exceed 28.6 percent of such worldwide level, plus any visas not required for the classes specified in paragraphs (1) and (2), to the following classes of aliens who are not described in paragraph (2):
The meaning is EB3 gets all unused from EB1 and EB2... This is the catch, does this mean spillover from EB1 after EB2 catches up (or) spillover from EB1 even if EB2 is not current..
If they have done spillover from EB1 to EB3, even when EB2 is not current...we can give this a try.
Sorry for the confusion...Just got excited and went over the allocation of visas from the ACT
http://www.uscis.gov/propub/ProPubVAP.jsp?dockey=cb90c19a50729fb47fb0686648558 dbe
It actually comes down to the language. I haven't read the rollover from EB to FB (if at all it happens), but look at the language for EB1. It talks about regular number + any not used by EB5. The language for EB5 is lost when it trickles down.
Does it mean: 1. EB5 can only be used by Eb1 and not rolled down further?
or
2) Does it mean that any of the EB5 unused numbers that are also not required by Eb1 rolls down to EB2.
If it is choice 1, then I suspect we have no case. If however, it is choice 2, then it is clear through the language that spill over Eb1 goes to Eb2 and EB3 at the same time. If not, based on the language of EB1, Eb3 would have just said "unused numbers of EB2", which means it would use Eb1 numbers only if Eb2 did not need them.
Suggestion to go via AILA is a good one, but do we have contact into AILA??
for EB3 the ACT mentions the following
Visas shall be made available, in a number not to exceed 28.6 percent of such worldwide level, plus any visas not required for the classes specified in paragraphs (1) and (2), to the following classes of aliens who are not described in paragraph (2):
The meaning is EB3 gets all unused from EB1 and EB2... This is the catch, does this mean spillover from EB1 after EB2 catches up (or) spillover from EB1 even if EB2 is not current..
If they have done spillover from EB1 to EB3, even when EB2 is not current...we can give this a try.
Sorry for the confusion...Just got excited and went over the allocation of visas from the ACT
http://www.uscis.gov/propub/ProPubVAP.jsp?dockey=cb90c19a50729fb47fb0686648558 dbe
It actually comes down to the language. I haven't read the rollover from EB to FB (if at all it happens), but look at the language for EB1. It talks about regular number + any not used by EB5. The language for EB5 is lost when it trickles down.
Does it mean: 1. EB5 can only be used by Eb1 and not rolled down further?
or
2) Does it mean that any of the EB5 unused numbers that are also not required by Eb1 rolls down to EB2.
If it is choice 1, then I suspect we have no case. If however, it is choice 2, then it is clear through the language that spill over Eb1 goes to Eb2 and EB3 at the same time. If not, based on the language of EB1, Eb3 would have just said "unused numbers of EB2", which means it would use Eb1 numbers only if Eb2 did not need them.
Suggestion to go via AILA is a good one, but do we have contact into AILA??
2011 Chicago Sports Gear knows it
rockyrock
07-31 03:52 PM
Pappu, special thanks for researching this topic, and posting updates regularly.
Last week I too consulted a high profile (about $200 per 15 minutes... you should be able to guess, I am not sure I am alowed to mention the name) lawyer to discuss this issue. To give you a brief background, my lawyer did not include the Employment Verification letter
1) He told me that he would re-submit the AOS. The comparison to the medical clearance requirement, according to him, was pointless, as they are two different things. If USCIS issues a statement they will not reject solely based on the EVL, then we can assume that is the truth. Their statement on Medical clearance cannot be interpreted to say they won't reject on the basis of another missing requirement, say the EVL.
2) Filing two AOS packets can indeed also cause confusion, but it is a smaller risk according to him, and should be mitigated by a covering letter that says you are re-submitting to provide the XYZ document that was missed from the first packet.
Based on this info, I have asked my lawyer to get a confirmation from the USCIS on the document that he missed in my case-- the EVL. If USCIS okays that, we do not resubmit. If they don't do that within a week, I will try to re-submit... not going to be easy considering my lawyer may not be in agreement... but that is what would be the correct way out of this, according to the second opinion I got last week.
Thanks!
just a question on #2 above - if you are filing second AOS with EVL, why not just withdraw the first AOS once you get the receipt? Wouldn't this be safer?
Last week I too consulted a high profile (about $200 per 15 minutes... you should be able to guess, I am not sure I am alowed to mention the name) lawyer to discuss this issue. To give you a brief background, my lawyer did not include the Employment Verification letter
1) He told me that he would re-submit the AOS. The comparison to the medical clearance requirement, according to him, was pointless, as they are two different things. If USCIS issues a statement they will not reject solely based on the EVL, then we can assume that is the truth. Their statement on Medical clearance cannot be interpreted to say they won't reject on the basis of another missing requirement, say the EVL.
2) Filing two AOS packets can indeed also cause confusion, but it is a smaller risk according to him, and should be mitigated by a covering letter that says you are re-submitting to provide the XYZ document that was missed from the first packet.
Based on this info, I have asked my lawyer to get a confirmation from the USCIS on the document that he missed in my case-- the EVL. If USCIS okays that, we do not resubmit. If they don't do that within a week, I will try to re-submit... not going to be easy considering my lawyer may not be in agreement... but that is what would be the correct way out of this, according to the second opinion I got last week.
Thanks!
just a question on #2 above - if you are filing second AOS with EVL, why not just withdraw the first AOS once you get the receipt? Wouldn't this be safer?
more...
mrsr
06-27 10:33 PM
I think this what uscis says
NOTE: If using overnight delivery by any private service provider, send your package to:
USCIS
Nebraska Service Center
850 S Street
P.O. Box (Insert Correct P.O. Box Number)
Lincoln, NE 68508
Be sure to include the appropriate P.O. Box number on the shipping label
NOTE: If using overnight delivery by any private service provider, send your package to:
USCIS
Nebraska Service Center
850 S Street
P.O. Box (Insert Correct P.O. Box Number)
Lincoln, NE 68508
Be sure to include the appropriate P.O. Box number on the shipping label
anda007
07-11 02:31 AM
One more link -->
http://www.samachar.com/showurl.php?rurl=http://sify.com/news/fullstory.php?id=14490148&news=Green%20card%20seekers%20try%20%3CI%3EGandhig iri%3C/I%3E%20in%20US&pubDate=Wed%2C+11+Jul+2007+11%3A59%3A40+GMT&keyword=sifynews_home
http://www.samachar.com/showurl.php?rurl=http://sify.com/news/fullstory.php?id=14490148&news=Green%20card%20seekers%20try%20%3CI%3EGandhig iri%3C/I%3E%20in%20US&pubDate=Wed%2C+11+Jul+2007+11%3A59%3A40+GMT&keyword=sifynews_home
more...
InTheMoment
05-26 07:19 PM
First of all when it is visa information it is just that!
Please see answers below
Hi Friends,
I am in the process of filling I-485 form and got the following question, can you please help?
My stamped visa expired 1 year back and I am currently with H1B approval notice. In the 2nd page of I-485 form, under Part 3. Processing Information, I am wondering what I need to fill for the following columns.
1. Nonimmigrant visa number: Is this the EAC number of my current I797 or the visa number from my expired visa?. If it is from the expired visa, there are multiple numbers in the visa stamp, which one is the visa number?
------> The figures in red, not the control number on your
visa stamp.
2.Consulate where visa was issued: Is it the name of the consulate issued my last visa or Department?
------> If it was issued at a consulate state that, if
department mention department.
3.Date visa isssued: Is this is the date of last visa issued or the approval date of my current I797
-----> Again the one on your visa stamp.
Thanks advance for all your valuable suggestions.
Please see answers below
Hi Friends,
I am in the process of filling I-485 form and got the following question, can you please help?
My stamped visa expired 1 year back and I am currently with H1B approval notice. In the 2nd page of I-485 form, under Part 3. Processing Information, I am wondering what I need to fill for the following columns.
1. Nonimmigrant visa number: Is this the EAC number of my current I797 or the visa number from my expired visa?. If it is from the expired visa, there are multiple numbers in the visa stamp, which one is the visa number?
------> The figures in red, not the control number on your
visa stamp.
2.Consulate where visa was issued: Is it the name of the consulate issued my last visa or Department?
------> If it was issued at a consulate state that, if
department mention department.
3.Date visa isssued: Is this is the date of last visa issued or the approval date of my current I797
-----> Again the one on your visa stamp.
Thanks advance for all your valuable suggestions.
2010 Chicago White Sox Black-White
indianabacklog
01-27 08:53 PM
btw, since we have some engaged brits listening....is it worth the money to take the chunnel between paris and london? anyone done it? what's the best way to find cheap flights in europe? local insight would be much appreciated!!
as you can see i'm looking forward to london again ;)[/QUOTE]
The chunnel is a great way to travel to Paris, much more door to door than flying and nearly as quick if you count the waiting around in the airport.
The only way to get cheap flights in Europe is to use one of the cheap charter companies, such as Easy Jet, BMI Baby, Ryanair etc. There are more. There is a website that I use to use called cheapflights? If you go to Yahoo UK and search for cheap flights lots of options will appear. I am pleased you enjoyed your stay in London. I like the city, but to visit, just like New York.
as you can see i'm looking forward to london again ;)[/QUOTE]
The chunnel is a great way to travel to Paris, much more door to door than flying and nearly as quick if you count the waiting around in the airport.
The only way to get cheap flights in Europe is to use one of the cheap charter companies, such as Easy Jet, BMI Baby, Ryanair etc. There are more. There is a website that I use to use called cheapflights? If you go to Yahoo UK and search for cheap flights lots of options will appear. I am pleased you enjoyed your stay in London. I like the city, but to visit, just like New York.
more...
snathan
03-29 11:33 AM
This is good but the numbers are very less to do anything in the bigger picture(EB2+EB3 pending). Atleast something is better than nothing.
Hope this doesn't lead to laxing on the advocacy day agenda or less efforts from EB2 people on the verge. EB3 people stuck wtih pre -perm labor, no substitution should also be helped, and way to do it , recapture of unused numbers, hold on diversity lottery. Going through advocacy efforts. A united effort has a higher chance.
It may not have any impact on EB3 this year...but once the EB2 is cleared it will have an impact on EB3; may be in a year or two.
Hope this doesn't lead to laxing on the advocacy day agenda or less efforts from EB2 people on the verge. EB3 people stuck wtih pre -perm labor, no substitution should also be helped, and way to do it , recapture of unused numbers, hold on diversity lottery. Going through advocacy efforts. A united effort has a higher chance.
It may not have any impact on EB3 this year...but once the EB2 is cleared it will have an impact on EB3; may be in a year or two.
hair at Chicago White Sox Game
vdlrao
01-05 12:21 AM
This is TRUE and a Very Valid One. And this the time for such a bill.
more...
imneedy
05-19 10:49 AM
From http://www.immigration-law.com/
05/17/2007: USCIS Terminates 05/18/2007 PPS for Labor Certification Substitution I-140 Petitions
USCIS announced today that beginning on Friday, May 18, 2007, it will terminate Premium Processing Service for Form I-140 petitions that request labor certification substitution. USCIS anticipates a substantial increase in the number of petitioning employers that will file Form I-140 petitions requesting Premium Processing Service and seeking labor certification substitution prior to July 16, 2007. The volume of such petitions filed requesting Premium Process Service is expected to exceed USCIS� capacity to provide the Premium Process Service according to the program guidelines. For the announcement, please click here.
http://www.uscis.gov/files/pressrelease/PPSPermRule051707.pdf
Well, bad news for those looking for labor substitution. But I believe you can still file I-140 with premium processing if you have your own labor.
----------------------------------------
EB 3 India PD : 21 July 2003
I-140 (Premium) Approved : 15 May 2007
I-485/AP/EAD : Waiting for dates to become current :rolleyes:
----------------------------------------
05/17/2007: USCIS Terminates 05/18/2007 PPS for Labor Certification Substitution I-140 Petitions
USCIS announced today that beginning on Friday, May 18, 2007, it will terminate Premium Processing Service for Form I-140 petitions that request labor certification substitution. USCIS anticipates a substantial increase in the number of petitioning employers that will file Form I-140 petitions requesting Premium Processing Service and seeking labor certification substitution prior to July 16, 2007. The volume of such petitions filed requesting Premium Process Service is expected to exceed USCIS� capacity to provide the Premium Process Service according to the program guidelines. For the announcement, please click here.
http://www.uscis.gov/files/pressrelease/PPSPermRule051707.pdf
Well, bad news for those looking for labor substitution. But I believe you can still file I-140 with premium processing if you have your own labor.
----------------------------------------
EB 3 India PD : 21 July 2003
I-140 (Premium) Approved : 15 May 2007
I-485/AP/EAD : Waiting for dates to become current :rolleyes:
----------------------------------------
hot [PHOTO: The Chicago White Sox
CADude
10-10 05:54 PM
I send my Employment based I-485/I-765/I-131 application on June 29th 2007 and received at NSC on July 2nd 2007 (USPS Express mail tracking no. XXXX). It�s more than 100 days and I didn�t even received the Receipt Number for all the applications.
I have following question for CIS Ombudsman�s office:
1) Per US Law, I have to get the EAD in 90 days of filling of my application? How I can get the EAD in 90 days where I didn�t even get the Receipt Number after 100 days?
2) Why �First In First Out (FIFO)� process is not followed by USCIS for receipting? It�s unfair to applicant like me when application filed on August 17th 2007 enjoying the EAD card and able to work.
3) What action you can will take to force USCIS follow their own operational manual guidelines and follow FIFO in future?
I have following question for CIS Ombudsman�s office:
1) Per US Law, I have to get the EAD in 90 days of filling of my application? How I can get the EAD in 90 days where I didn�t even get the Receipt Number after 100 days?
2) Why �First In First Out (FIFO)� process is not followed by USCIS for receipting? It�s unfair to applicant like me when application filed on August 17th 2007 enjoying the EAD card and able to work.
3) What action you can will take to force USCIS follow their own operational manual guidelines and follow FIFO in future?
more...
house Chicago White Sox
kaisersose
03-24 09:45 AM
As already answered in the previous post, it is all clearly laid out in the I-9.
tattoo steven alter surgeon red sox
whitecollarslave
03-25 03:24 PM
Here is the text that is in the I-9 Form:
"Anti-Discrimination Notice. It is illegal to discriminate against any individual (other than an alien not authorized to work in the U.S.) in hiring, discharging, or recruiting or referring for a fee because of that individual's national origin or citizenship status. It is illegal to discriminate against work eligible individuals. Employers CANNOT specify which document(s) they will accept from an employee. The refusal to hire an individual because the documents presented have a future expiration date may also constitute illegal discrimination."
"Anti-Discrimination Notice. It is illegal to discriminate against any individual (other than an alien not authorized to work in the U.S.) in hiring, discharging, or recruiting or referring for a fee because of that individual's national origin or citizenship status. It is illegal to discriminate against work eligible individuals. Employers CANNOT specify which document(s) they will accept from an employee. The refusal to hire an individual because the documents presented have a future expiration date may also constitute illegal discrimination."
more...
pictures Since then, white socks have
santb1975
01-11 10:35 AM
^^^
dresses The Chicago White Sox are
makemygc
01-24 10:30 PM
Patience :). Air India, Jet and Kingfisher have plenty of long range airliners on order with Boeing (http://active.boeing.com/commercial/orders/index.cfm?content=timeperiodselection.cfm&pageid=m15523) and Airbus (http://www.airbus.com/en/corporate/orders_and_deliveries/).
Air India flying direct to India starting from feb 08, at least that's what I was told when I went through that horryifing experience in UK (see my post above)
Air India flying direct to India starting from feb 08, at least that's what I was told when I went through that horryifing experience in UK (see my post above)
more...
makeup Magglio Ordonez 8x10 White Sox
senthil1
07-09 11:22 PM
There is nothing wrong in fighting. At least it will be used to prevent the same mistake in future. But it is not a bad idea to analyse the outcome so that everyone can prepare for that. My view is this campaign will be used for preventing future mistakes. I will be pleasantly surprised if we get more benefit than that. Even lawsuit also will serve the purpose and will give strong warning to USCIS.
I can tell many examples. Due to one persons misjudgment so many American and Iraq people were killed. Do you think they can get relief? Whatever relief people got it cannot bring back peoples lives. But still lot of people are thinking that Iraq could have been handled differently and many people are fighting against War. Most people realize mistakes after someone is impacted.
In the name of thinking differently we have smitha, senthil1 , asdqwe..and these guys confusing this struggle / fight for us trying to get ahead of the line or as senthil1 keeps saying uscis/dos made an honest mistake and asdqwe..keeps saying we need to fight for legislation rather than wasting time with these efforts. What all these guys and their ilk fail to understand is most of us are pissed off about the way it was implemented and handled rather than the ability to file AOS itself. If we sit and do nothing is like asking uscis / dos to walk all over us again and again. Besides in US law whenever there is a gray area, the decisions are based on precedents. This means if they have done this now means they can do this in any bulletin hence issued. They can issue a bulletin in Oct 2007 and on Nov 2 say "oops sorry my bad wrong bulletin" . Please come out of the basement and face the sun.
I can tell many examples. Due to one persons misjudgment so many American and Iraq people were killed. Do you think they can get relief? Whatever relief people got it cannot bring back peoples lives. But still lot of people are thinking that Iraq could have been handled differently and many people are fighting against War. Most people realize mistakes after someone is impacted.
In the name of thinking differently we have smitha, senthil1 , asdqwe..and these guys confusing this struggle / fight for us trying to get ahead of the line or as senthil1 keeps saying uscis/dos made an honest mistake and asdqwe..keeps saying we need to fight for legislation rather than wasting time with these efforts. What all these guys and their ilk fail to understand is most of us are pissed off about the way it was implemented and handled rather than the ability to file AOS itself. If we sit and do nothing is like asking uscis / dos to walk all over us again and again. Besides in US law whenever there is a gray area, the decisions are based on precedents. This means if they have done this now means they can do this in any bulletin hence issued. They can issue a bulletin in Oct 2007 and on Nov 2 say "oops sorry my bad wrong bulletin" . Please come out of the basement and face the sun.
girlfriend Chicago White Sox
chanduv23
03-24 04:08 PM
Got a reply back just now
My mail to Capital One after getting the initial response:
Craig,
Thank you for the reply.
I am surprised by the disqualification since the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) had issued the EAD. DHS has set clear guidelines not to discriminate based on any of the authorized work documents issued by them, EAD being one of them. The I-9 form required to be filled in by every employee (citizen or otherwise) clearly mentions this.
Are you sure CapitalOne does not allow candidates who are on EAD specially when it does not require sponsorship from the employer ?
Response that I received for the above email:
Thanks for your message. The information regarding Capital One's policy on pursuing EAD card holders is correct. We are only able to pursue US Citizens or Green Card holders for these roles. I'm sorry, but we won't be able to consider your candidacy at this time.
Best Regards,
Craig
HRs generally "quote" the policy word in every sentence they speak or write. It is a matter of interpretation. The HR may not have a decision making power and is just following what he/she is asked to do. No company has a policy that says GC or citizen, but policy can says "Authorized to work for any em ployer in the United States. I guess it is a matter of interpretation.
The HR seems to be ill informed. Many companies do accept EAD and they are quite aware of the delays in EAD renewal - and that has rarely been the basis to reject a petition.
If this is a trend then it is an issue to all, but if this is an isolated case then definitely you can look into places other than Capital One.
If you want to spend time and resources you can go to a lawyer, but you have no guarantee that you will get the job there too.
My mail to Capital One after getting the initial response:
Craig,
Thank you for the reply.
I am surprised by the disqualification since the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) had issued the EAD. DHS has set clear guidelines not to discriminate based on any of the authorized work documents issued by them, EAD being one of them. The I-9 form required to be filled in by every employee (citizen or otherwise) clearly mentions this.
Are you sure CapitalOne does not allow candidates who are on EAD specially when it does not require sponsorship from the employer ?
Response that I received for the above email:
Thanks for your message. The information regarding Capital One's policy on pursuing EAD card holders is correct. We are only able to pursue US Citizens or Green Card holders for these roles. I'm sorry, but we won't be able to consider your candidacy at this time.
Best Regards,
Craig
HRs generally "quote" the policy word in every sentence they speak or write. It is a matter of interpretation. The HR may not have a decision making power and is just following what he/she is asked to do. No company has a policy that says GC or citizen, but policy can says "Authorized to work for any em ployer in the United States. I guess it is a matter of interpretation.
The HR seems to be ill informed. Many companies do accept EAD and they are quite aware of the delays in EAD renewal - and that has rarely been the basis to reject a petition.
If this is a trend then it is an issue to all, but if this is an isolated case then definitely you can look into places other than Capital One.
If you want to spend time and resources you can go to a lawyer, but you have no guarantee that you will get the job there too.
hairstyles Brandon Mccarthy Chicago White
sri1309
03-12 01:16 PM
Dear Sri1309,
Good morning!! Thanks a lot for your message about the letter to Ms Zoe. I think your letter is very fine. Good luck to everyone on immigration issue!!
I have a question on your solution#4) "granting citizenship to people who have stayed in US for 10 years by rules to pay taxes". The 10 years ----are you talking about several years of study plus several years of working in US in H-1B visa ONLY or for any people who have legally stayed in US for 10 years??? I raise this question because I am curious to know whether I will fit this category. I was a foreign student in US for 10 years and pay foreign student tuition fee in full for 10 years. The first 6 years in several degrees and then back home and then come to US again for professional doctorate degree in 4 years. Originally I find employer to file me the H-1B visa but the quota for Master degree or above is full and then I back home until now. I am sure someone has similar situations to me!!
From other forum, someone said that it is extremely difficult to legalize the illegal aliens due to recent huge economic recession. But if each illegal aliens give non-refundable $5000 immigration entry fee to the country, the country will have about $60 billion fixed income. Then I immediately have thought about if our international students who have stayed in US for 5 years or above give more immigration entry fee to the country, the country will have tremendous cash flow into the economy and may help the economic crisis. I have previously replied to somebody and the link is as below:
This thread is located at:
http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/showthread.php?t=23955&goto=newpost
Do you think my thought is stupid and unreasonable??? If someone thinks a better idea/thought, please correct my idea. Anyway, good luck to everyone on the immigration issue because this topic is very tough due to recent economic recession!!
Have a nice day!! Thanks a lot!!
I will come to your quesiton, but let me ask the other guys who just responded, a question.
Sunx_2004, Sarala, and ALL
Thanks for the compliments, I'm happy but we will be thrilled if apart from compliments, if you've said that you have just written to change.gov or to atleast one or two reps. Just spend a $10 on postage stamps. Dont think the reps dont read our letters.
If you want a green from me, in your reply, please reply with atleast that you have posted this on change.gov, under Agenda--> Immigration--> Submit your ideas. OK? after really doing it.
when two of you do, it will make 4 others do.. then 16.., read my other thread by searching "Chain reaction".. that too went down the drain..
Now to this post.. Ofcors how can I not include you in this.One of the last points clearly says to give a greencard to anyone who graduates here. Now its upto them to let in quality students., I support filters at entry level into schools or jobs, not to those who have spent 5-10 years here..
My point is 5 years in US legally and 10 years in US legally. No matter if you went to school, or were on H1 from day one.
Also I am sure you have good # of friends in situation like you are in. Pass this message to them also to write and also about IV.
But dont wait for anyone to come and help you out. Create a snowball affect which gathers mass as it rolls.
Good morning!! Thanks a lot for your message about the letter to Ms Zoe. I think your letter is very fine. Good luck to everyone on immigration issue!!
I have a question on your solution#4) "granting citizenship to people who have stayed in US for 10 years by rules to pay taxes". The 10 years ----are you talking about several years of study plus several years of working in US in H-1B visa ONLY or for any people who have legally stayed in US for 10 years??? I raise this question because I am curious to know whether I will fit this category. I was a foreign student in US for 10 years and pay foreign student tuition fee in full for 10 years. The first 6 years in several degrees and then back home and then come to US again for professional doctorate degree in 4 years. Originally I find employer to file me the H-1B visa but the quota for Master degree or above is full and then I back home until now. I am sure someone has similar situations to me!!
From other forum, someone said that it is extremely difficult to legalize the illegal aliens due to recent huge economic recession. But if each illegal aliens give non-refundable $5000 immigration entry fee to the country, the country will have about $60 billion fixed income. Then I immediately have thought about if our international students who have stayed in US for 5 years or above give more immigration entry fee to the country, the country will have tremendous cash flow into the economy and may help the economic crisis. I have previously replied to somebody and the link is as below:
This thread is located at:
http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/showthread.php?t=23955&goto=newpost
Do you think my thought is stupid and unreasonable??? If someone thinks a better idea/thought, please correct my idea. Anyway, good luck to everyone on the immigration issue because this topic is very tough due to recent economic recession!!
Have a nice day!! Thanks a lot!!
I will come to your quesiton, but let me ask the other guys who just responded, a question.
Sunx_2004, Sarala, and ALL
Thanks for the compliments, I'm happy but we will be thrilled if apart from compliments, if you've said that you have just written to change.gov or to atleast one or two reps. Just spend a $10 on postage stamps. Dont think the reps dont read our letters.
If you want a green from me, in your reply, please reply with atleast that you have posted this on change.gov, under Agenda--> Immigration--> Submit your ideas. OK? after really doing it.
when two of you do, it will make 4 others do.. then 16.., read my other thread by searching "Chain reaction".. that too went down the drain..
Now to this post.. Ofcors how can I not include you in this.One of the last points clearly says to give a greencard to anyone who graduates here. Now its upto them to let in quality students., I support filters at entry level into schools or jobs, not to those who have spent 5-10 years here..
My point is 5 years in US legally and 10 years in US legally. No matter if you went to school, or were on H1 from day one.
Also I am sure you have good # of friends in situation like you are in. Pass this message to them also to write and also about IV.
But dont wait for anyone to come and help you out. Create a snowball affect which gathers mass as it rolls.
gc_on_demand
09-09 04:39 PM
bump
vdlrao
03-31 02:58 PM
Very well said.
1. DOS has to move fast in May to test if there are hidden demand (ppl who missed 07/2007 filing, porting, dependent filing). Those new filing cannot get be approved before October 2011. So they can move up to Nov/Dec 2006 safely in May. Also DOS/CIS, who communicate with each other for sure, will know they should process those pre-adjudicated cased first to clear the inventory.
2. In June, July, August, they could be cautious but still move ahead up to March 2007.
3. September is critical, as that time, if DOS doesn't want to waste any quota, (100% CIS cannot approve any cased filed in that month), they have to move to a point to get all quota used. Based on 12K/half year, or 12K/year from EB1, say 20K be safe this year from EB1. 7K from EB2 ROW as last year, 8K from EB3, 0 from FB (EB2 get only 10k/4 last year as 10K FB is divided by Eb1/2/3/4), and normal 2.8K for EB2 I/C each (6K total), there are total 41K possibly for EB2 I/C.
4. Porting (6K this year), New filing (ppl who missed 07/07 with PD before 07/07), could have a negative efffect
5. The inventory for EB2 I/C is about 34K before 07/2007 (based on DOS October/2010 and CIS inventory)
6. This is very close. Will DOS move beyond 07/2007 a little to allow new filings (those won't get approved in Sept) and also make CIS easier to clear all 07/2007? This will be a judgement call. I am 50/50 on that.
7. There are many factors that will play in the scenario.. But I am sure EB2 I/C 09/2011 PD will be pass
May 2007 100%
June 2007 80%
July 2007 60%
Sept 2007 30%
Nov 2007 10%
Dec 2007 or Current 0% (DOS/CIS learned the lesson)
Explantion is Very rationale rodnyb. Thanks.
1. DOS has to move fast in May to test if there are hidden demand (ppl who missed 07/2007 filing, porting, dependent filing). Those new filing cannot get be approved before October 2011. So they can move up to Nov/Dec 2006 safely in May. Also DOS/CIS, who communicate with each other for sure, will know they should process those pre-adjudicated cased first to clear the inventory.
2. In June, July, August, they could be cautious but still move ahead up to March 2007.
3. September is critical, as that time, if DOS doesn't want to waste any quota, (100% CIS cannot approve any cased filed in that month), they have to move to a point to get all quota used. Based on 12K/half year, or 12K/year from EB1, say 20K be safe this year from EB1. 7K from EB2 ROW as last year, 8K from EB3, 0 from FB (EB2 get only 10k/4 last year as 10K FB is divided by Eb1/2/3/4), and normal 2.8K for EB2 I/C each (6K total), there are total 41K possibly for EB2 I/C.
4. Porting (6K this year), New filing (ppl who missed 07/07 with PD before 07/07), could have a negative efffect
5. The inventory for EB2 I/C is about 34K before 07/2007 (based on DOS October/2010 and CIS inventory)
6. This is very close. Will DOS move beyond 07/2007 a little to allow new filings (those won't get approved in Sept) and also make CIS easier to clear all 07/2007? This will be a judgement call. I am 50/50 on that.
7. There are many factors that will play in the scenario.. But I am sure EB2 I/C 09/2011 PD will be pass
May 2007 100%
June 2007 80%
July 2007 60%
Sept 2007 30%
Nov 2007 10%
Dec 2007 or Current 0% (DOS/CIS learned the lesson)
Explantion is Very rationale rodnyb. Thanks.
No comments:
Post a Comment