nc14
09-11 02:26 PM
It will be the right thing to do as people will always have a reason for not contributing. I doubt we can ever swing the thick skinned folks to contribute.
I understand that one reason for having the free site is for us to have numbers. But, how do these numbers help when most of them are not good for much.
I think it is about time for IV to think and make $25/month minimum fee for accessing this site. IV needs money to lobby to sort GC mess out. At the same time we need serious people ready to volunteer and donate. That is the only way out. We do not need people discussing SRK and Vonage on this site. We might reduce website hits by doing this but at least we will have ust have serious members who actually want to volunteer and work for IV.
I understand that one reason for having the free site is for us to have numbers. But, how do these numbers help when most of them are not good for much.
I think it is about time for IV to think and make $25/month minimum fee for accessing this site. IV needs money to lobby to sort GC mess out. At the same time we need serious people ready to volunteer and donate. That is the only way out. We do not need people discussing SRK and Vonage on this site. We might reduce website hits by doing this but at least we will have ust have serious members who actually want to volunteer and work for IV.
wallpaper wallpaper i love you heart
franklin
06-05 05:06 PM
Sent May 31st to arrive June 1st - no receipt number yet. My laywer said it will take about 10 days to get receipt...
Vipps
07-20 02:43 AM
$100 ,Please work out the financial-mechanics as well.....Ready to contribute more in coming months if the objective of this thread is not accomplished in this drive.
I will be doing R2I sooner, yet i feel guilty after reading that article.
I will be doing R2I sooner, yet i feel guilty after reading that article.
2011 i love you baby hearts. i love
gapala
05-09 12:30 AM
Guys, when you write to senators/WH/ other officials, Its important to include the reasons for this huge backlog. 1) Wasted visa numbers due to CIS inefficiencies for past decade.
2) Country quota... I believe the visa waste is more of a problem on their side. Also when you highlight a problem, do not just end with problem, quantify with quoting the visa bulletin's memos and other statistics from ombudsman's report.
Important, include a suggested approach to resolution as well.. which is "Recapture the wasted visa numbers and elimination / fixing the dispropotionate of country quota". This will atleast set the precendence to thought process on the fix.
abrupt and emotional emails would not cut it in this protectionist environment created due to job loss and economy. Just a humble suggestion. We have to be a part of solution to housing problem as well.
2) Country quota... I believe the visa waste is more of a problem on their side. Also when you highlight a problem, do not just end with problem, quantify with quoting the visa bulletin's memos and other statistics from ombudsman's report.
Important, include a suggested approach to resolution as well.. which is "Recapture the wasted visa numbers and elimination / fixing the dispropotionate of country quota". This will atleast set the precendence to thought process on the fix.
abrupt and emotional emails would not cut it in this protectionist environment created due to job loss and economy. Just a humble suggestion. We have to be a part of solution to housing problem as well.
more...
TheOmbudsman
10-30 09:46 AM
Good morning.
Yes, I am. That would be a very smart thing to do.
Honestly, I don't see why NumbersUSA would use our information to develop a counter attack. What we want is straightforward and should be straightforward. Everyone knows who are the senators who listen to our lobbysts. Don't worry with that. Trying to fight against the desire of the American people and sneak in provisions on our behalf is not working. If NumbersUSA is comprised of 200,000+ very active members, chances are they will demolish us every time if we try to go against their desire. This is not like passing the 80's amnesty anymore. The Internet out there has proven to be a very powerful democratic tool on this. If you add provisions there such as temporary increase in visa numbers (enough to take the GC applicants veterans out of this mess) and similar modest proposals which do not increase the number of greencard significantly and coordinate with NumbersUSA, then we may succeed. Believe me I called IV members when this organization was created to explain this, but no one gets it. Persuading certain lawmakers to come up with the proposals on our behalf is the easy part. AILA has been doing this for a long time anyway. As long as you have the money and connections to do so. I am not taking the IV merit away. I do give them credit for organizing the structure and collecting the resources. However, this is not about credits or discredits. Think about it and figure out who actually blocked S.2611/1934 last year. Hint:It was not lawmakers. Note that we should try to come up with provisions enough to minimize the greencard waiting times, not making the priority current for everyone, although that would be obviously ideal.
It is a reality that you don't like to hear:The American people, in a way represented by NumbersUSA, are the bosses on this. Trying to fight against is really hard. You need to gain their sympathy instead.
Regards,
The Ombudsman
"Your dose of daily reality"
Are folks on this thread suggesting we contact (communicate our plans to !!!) numbersusa? They are not going to listen to us, I can guarantee you that --- even if we tone down our demands! They might use our plans to develop a more effective strategy for themselves; they hate us from the bottom of their hearts. This is the most ridiculous and impractical thing I've heard in a while.
Yes, I am. That would be a very smart thing to do.
Honestly, I don't see why NumbersUSA would use our information to develop a counter attack. What we want is straightforward and should be straightforward. Everyone knows who are the senators who listen to our lobbysts. Don't worry with that. Trying to fight against the desire of the American people and sneak in provisions on our behalf is not working. If NumbersUSA is comprised of 200,000+ very active members, chances are they will demolish us every time if we try to go against their desire. This is not like passing the 80's amnesty anymore. The Internet out there has proven to be a very powerful democratic tool on this. If you add provisions there such as temporary increase in visa numbers (enough to take the GC applicants veterans out of this mess) and similar modest proposals which do not increase the number of greencard significantly and coordinate with NumbersUSA, then we may succeed. Believe me I called IV members when this organization was created to explain this, but no one gets it. Persuading certain lawmakers to come up with the proposals on our behalf is the easy part. AILA has been doing this for a long time anyway. As long as you have the money and connections to do so. I am not taking the IV merit away. I do give them credit for organizing the structure and collecting the resources. However, this is not about credits or discredits. Think about it and figure out who actually blocked S.2611/1934 last year. Hint:It was not lawmakers. Note that we should try to come up with provisions enough to minimize the greencard waiting times, not making the priority current for everyone, although that would be obviously ideal.
It is a reality that you don't like to hear:The American people, in a way represented by NumbersUSA, are the bosses on this. Trying to fight against is really hard. You need to gain their sympathy instead.
Regards,
The Ombudsman
"Your dose of daily reality"
Are folks on this thread suggesting we contact (communicate our plans to !!!) numbersusa? They are not going to listen to us, I can guarantee you that --- even if we tone down our demands! They might use our plans to develop a more effective strategy for themselves; they hate us from the bottom of their hearts. This is the most ridiculous and impractical thing I've heard in a while.
GCStatus
09-15 01:20 PM
hi,
Please let me know the process to pledge the $100. I am not a member of any state chapter but just a registered member on this site.
Will let you know once we accumulate details. For now, please provide your name,ph# and e-mail to man-woman-gc
Please let me know the process to pledge the $100. I am not a member of any state chapter but just a registered member on this site.
Will let you know once we accumulate details. For now, please provide your name,ph# and e-mail to man-woman-gc
more...
garybanz
11-21 01:34 PM
Lets us all Pray and hope for the best for Mehul
May God give strength to your family and you to deal with this situation. I don't think any of us can do any thing to ease your family and your pain, but we will pray for you. You have all our wishes and support.
Regards
May God give strength to your family and you to deal with this situation. I don't think any of us can do any thing to ease your family and your pain, but we will pray for you. You have all our wishes and support.
Regards
2010 Two Hearts To Love
sanprabhu
02-15 03:25 PM
ID - 4GJ15926BN616724N
$50 donation.
From a longtime sustaining member
$50 donation.
From a longtime sustaining member
more...
gc28262
06-26 01:42 PM
Discriminating based on Immigration status is not considered violation of EEO laws.
EEO protects from discrimination on the basis of race, sex, creed, religion, color, or national origin.
EEO does not protect immigration status based discrimination. However Immigration Reform and Control Act of 1986 does protect against discrimination based on immigration status.
https://www.oig.lsc.gov/legis/irca86.htm
SEC. 102. UNFAIR IMMIGRATION-RELATED EMPLOYMENT PRACTICES.
EEO protects from discrimination on the basis of race, sex, creed, religion, color, or national origin.
EEO does not protect immigration status based discrimination. However Immigration Reform and Control Act of 1986 does protect against discrimination based on immigration status.
https://www.oig.lsc.gov/legis/irca86.htm
SEC. 102. UNFAIR IMMIGRATION-RELATED EMPLOYMENT PRACTICES.
hair love heart for valentine.
desi3933
07-10 07:49 AM
Please post URL of this and others. Thanks!
Sec. 245.1 Eligibility
http://www.uscis.gov/propub/ProPubVAP.jsp?dockey=cb694c827d9948014308614d0f546 dca
Sec. 245.2 Application
http://www.uscis.gov/propub/ProPubVAP.jsp?dockey=b6eb96a99e4c335717a65793ed573 a56
Sec. 245.1 Eligibility
http://www.uscis.gov/propub/ProPubVAP.jsp?dockey=cb694c827d9948014308614d0f546 dca
Sec. 245.2 Application
http://www.uscis.gov/propub/ProPubVAP.jsp?dockey=b6eb96a99e4c335717a65793ed573 a56
more...
anzerraja
07-20 02:53 AM
Thanks Vipps !!!
It is members like you who keep up the spirit going.
$100 ,Please work out the financial-mechanics as well.....Ready to contribute more in coming months if the objective of this thread is not accomplished in this drive.
I will be doing R2I sooner, yet i feel guilty after reading that article.
It is members like you who keep up the spirit going.
$100 ,Please work out the financial-mechanics as well.....Ready to contribute more in coming months if the objective of this thread is not accomplished in this drive.
I will be doing R2I sooner, yet i feel guilty after reading that article.
hot heart images love.
JazzByTheBay
09-28 04:36 PM
Given the number of questions and concerns IV members have about AC21 in general and "what after EAD/AP", it makes sense to coordinate with USCIS (and lawmakers if required) on this and get some favorable responses that allay everyone's concerns.
If EAD+AP are like a "provisional GC", USCIS should perhaps not delve too much into the job description of work done after the 180 days past AOS filing, imo. Just as in the case of GCs, the bar of intent to be employed in that job is met by working for that employer for 90-180 days (the latter to be on the safe side). The only reason this is such a huge issue is because of the unreasonable waiting time induced on the GC process due to retrogression.
As a result, folks from retrogression-affected countries suffer from these anxities, whereas those from unaffected countries get their GCs, and are free birds after the 90-180 day period.
It's unreasonable to expect folks from retrogressed countries to be employed in the same position, or to otherwise limit their options by imposing restrictions of new job being the same job description as the one on the approved labor cert.
jazz
First there is not enough AC21 cases to give feed back how their 485s were handled (approved/detail of RFE/denied) due to job change. Becase, almost all guys who used ac21 still in waiting game due to retrogression.
The main thing what I see here is, USCIS has not yet published the final regulation to interpret AC21 act, even after 7 years of passing AC21 act. They are issuing internal field office memo. These memos are non-binding. In other words, one cannot firmly relay on memos or challange the USCIS decision on AC21 portability according to these memos.
However, sofar, these memos are very favorable to workers, including allowing self-employment, one can port even before 140 approval ect...However, USCIS were cautioning in each memos, that the final regulation may be restrictive than memos. If they took restrictive position in final regulation, it will be a huge problem for most peoples, as they might have violated the final regulation.
Another issue is, definition of "same or similar occupational classification". This is going to be very subjective based on how uscis adjudicator going to compare old and new jobs. The memo says by comparing job duties both old and new jobs and based on SOC or ONET code of old and new job they have to decide both jobs are same or similar. As there is no clear regulation it is big issue to go howmuch level of similarity between jobs. For example one guy may think "database administrator" and "network administrator" are similar job to port. The USCIS may think it may not. It is not quantified.
I feel IV should advocate on liberal/quantifyable defintion for similar jobs in AC21 interpretation. For example, all computer professional jobs should be considered as similar jobs as well as all engineering jobs should be considered similar to port. For example mining engineer can port to chemical engineer job etc...
Also, if any one port to self employment in similar job, there is no much information available wheter one should open a company in his/her name or not (by just working in 1099 etc.. for multiple positions). This needs to have a flexible option for workers, like one can work in 1099 w/o opening a bussiness.
Also, IV should advocate on not to have any restrictive interpretation in final regulation.
If EAD+AP are like a "provisional GC", USCIS should perhaps not delve too much into the job description of work done after the 180 days past AOS filing, imo. Just as in the case of GCs, the bar of intent to be employed in that job is met by working for that employer for 90-180 days (the latter to be on the safe side). The only reason this is such a huge issue is because of the unreasonable waiting time induced on the GC process due to retrogression.
As a result, folks from retrogression-affected countries suffer from these anxities, whereas those from unaffected countries get their GCs, and are free birds after the 90-180 day period.
It's unreasonable to expect folks from retrogressed countries to be employed in the same position, or to otherwise limit their options by imposing restrictions of new job being the same job description as the one on the approved labor cert.
jazz
First there is not enough AC21 cases to give feed back how their 485s were handled (approved/detail of RFE/denied) due to job change. Becase, almost all guys who used ac21 still in waiting game due to retrogression.
The main thing what I see here is, USCIS has not yet published the final regulation to interpret AC21 act, even after 7 years of passing AC21 act. They are issuing internal field office memo. These memos are non-binding. In other words, one cannot firmly relay on memos or challange the USCIS decision on AC21 portability according to these memos.
However, sofar, these memos are very favorable to workers, including allowing self-employment, one can port even before 140 approval ect...However, USCIS were cautioning in each memos, that the final regulation may be restrictive than memos. If they took restrictive position in final regulation, it will be a huge problem for most peoples, as they might have violated the final regulation.
Another issue is, definition of "same or similar occupational classification". This is going to be very subjective based on how uscis adjudicator going to compare old and new jobs. The memo says by comparing job duties both old and new jobs and based on SOC or ONET code of old and new job they have to decide both jobs are same or similar. As there is no clear regulation it is big issue to go howmuch level of similarity between jobs. For example one guy may think "database administrator" and "network administrator" are similar job to port. The USCIS may think it may not. It is not quantified.
I feel IV should advocate on liberal/quantifyable defintion for similar jobs in AC21 interpretation. For example, all computer professional jobs should be considered as similar jobs as well as all engineering jobs should be considered similar to port. For example mining engineer can port to chemical engineer job etc...
Also, if any one port to self employment in similar job, there is no much information available wheter one should open a company in his/her name or not (by just working in 1099 etc.. for multiple positions). This needs to have a flexible option for workers, like one can work in 1099 w/o opening a bussiness.
Also, IV should advocate on not to have any restrictive interpretation in final regulation.
more...
house i love you heart images.
Prashant
07-07 11:24 PM
ONLY TEAM EFFORT CAN BRING US JUSTICE..
Majority of us would just like to make a point but do nothing about it.
If dtekkedil wouldnt have pushed the way he had .. gandhigiri would have been buried by now.
Krishnam70 thanx for letting the ball roll...
IV core, I can't thank you much for all the selfless effort u guys put in.
Thank you
Majority of us would just like to make a point but do nothing about it.
If dtekkedil wouldnt have pushed the way he had .. gandhigiri would have been buried by now.
Krishnam70 thanx for letting the ball roll...
IV core, I can't thank you much for all the selfless effort u guys put in.
Thank you
tattoo Heart (LOVE YOU A BUNCH!
rvurady14
02-09 02:44 PM
I will mail my $50 Contribution Today.
GO IV GO-
GO IV GO-
more...
pictures love heart
drirshad
09-03 06:13 AM
I am one of the July 2 filer and calling the level 2 does not help should I check the TSC than NSC with them for my 485 app or it does not matter, my 140 was approved from NSC with April 2005 priority ....
dresses love heart drawings. heart
msp1976
03-08 02:52 PM
Think of it this way..We are foreigners 12K miles from Home...We are here and trying to change the laws of this country...They are listening to us a bit...That in itself is a big achivement.....It is not gonna happen overnight...It is gonna be a long haul and more...Even after the law changes we would need to look out for actual implementation..So you better harden yourself for a long protracted fight...No one promised that this is gonna be easy...You and I have invested so much time ...you and I have no option but to fight it out...
more...
makeup tattoo wallpaper heart love.
apahilaj
08-01 02:01 PM
I just called national customer service center for my 485 receipts and the lady told that nebraska filers should still wait for 30 more days before they call for receipt updates...she said she was answering the same question since this morning and mentioned that it could still take atleast 30 days for nebraska center to register the applications...
when I asked her if she knew whether my case has been transferred to TSC already (since my 140 got approved from TSC), she said she wouldn't know that answer...her bottom line was to wait...
what a mess!!!!!
if any one has called the customer service today regarding the receipts, I would appreciate if you could please post the responses here.
when I asked her if she knew whether my case has been transferred to TSC already (since my 140 got approved from TSC), she said she wouldn't know that answer...her bottom line was to wait...
what a mess!!!!!
if any one has called the customer service today regarding the receipts, I would appreciate if you could please post the responses here.
girlfriend quotes on broken heart in love
maverick_joe
05-02 11:41 AM
I just gave you one! can you please return the favor? :)
talking abt red and green my friend reddymjm got totally pissed by my previous post and gave me red..loser!
Why arent you tempted to give me green though :)
talking abt red and green my friend reddymjm got totally pissed by my previous post and gave me red..loser!
Why arent you tempted to give me green though :)
hairstyles heart images love.
bheemi
06-21 02:02 PM
I would request as whole us know that CIR will not comeup this yeat..I would request if there is any plan IV is mkaing in this regard. I dont think waiting until end of July and then proceed for new bill is good way...
I would request to look for some alternatives from now itself..atleast filing 485 under retrogression and 3 year ead/ap..
any thoughts about this?
I would request to look for some alternatives from now itself..atleast filing 485 under retrogression and 3 year ead/ap..
any thoughts about this?
bindoke
08-23 02:45 PM
Hi team,
Just wondering usually how long does it take to get approval notice of I -485 once PD become current ? Any idea or any comments will be really helpful.
Thank you.
no one can predict that. It could be days or months.
Just wondering usually how long does it take to get approval notice of I -485 once PD become current ? Any idea or any comments will be really helpful.
Thank you.
no one can predict that. It could be days or months.
chalamcharla
10-16 02:40 PM
Finally all my checks have been cashed today. Reached application to NSC on July5th but as per checks back side the receipt no's allotted from Texas (Recepit no started SRC xxxxxxxxxxxx ) . Verified those receipt no's in online status and looks like they haven't entered yet in automatic system.
No comments:
Post a Comment