camarasa
07-09 06:51 PM
What happened to the thread on Emilio Gonzalez?
Editted to say: My bad it's under IV Agenda and Legislative Updates
Editted to say: My bad it's under IV Agenda and Legislative Updates
wallpaper 20 excellent HD Wallpapers
anilsal
12-16 09:29 AM
it will be the most fulfilling. If life came to you on a platter, it would not be as enjoyable.
With pain comes learning and experience.
For those folks to whom GC and citizenship comes with low hardship, life will get them in some other way. This is the truth of nature.
With pain comes learning and experience.
For those folks to whom GC and citizenship comes with low hardship, life will get them in some other way. This is the truth of nature.
skd
05-29 07:29 PM
sent the emails to senator/s
2011 Free Windows 7 Wallpapers, HD
simple1
05-05 02:57 AM
Agreed it is the state dept not uscis.
We should not mix the interpretation of eb2/3 visas with other immigrant visas including other eb due to perm.
Could Please ask the lawyer this following question about statedept eb2/3 visa allocation to non-perm derivatives ?
--
* eb 2/3 generally require perm except for very rare cases. right ?
The employer petitions for 1 permanent-employee. With assurance that the 1 person doesn’t displace local workforce (existing citizen and gc). How come state department allocates additional visa (more than approved) to derivative(s) who is not "perm labor certified" from a quota/poll (eb2/3) that mandates labor market test like perm ? (while the actual qualification is fb2a)
* State department also burns the eb2/3 visa allocated for US-businesses to bring in much needed skilled eb2/3 labor ? while most real primaries wait, the visa gets allocated to non-productive derivatives ?
Is state dept making mistake ?
--
I spoke with our attorney
He said
INA Sec 203 talks only about the eligibility to apply the I-485. But the visa number is derived from a relationship to Principal applicant of green card. This is true for all categories Including investor, asylum, Employment categories. Please note that It is Dept of State that is responsible for this allocation not USCIS.
We should not mix the interpretation of eb2/3 visas with other immigrant visas including other eb due to perm.
Could Please ask the lawyer this following question about statedept eb2/3 visa allocation to non-perm derivatives ?
--
* eb 2/3 generally require perm except for very rare cases. right ?
The employer petitions for 1 permanent-employee. With assurance that the 1 person doesn’t displace local workforce (existing citizen and gc). How come state department allocates additional visa (more than approved) to derivative(s) who is not "perm labor certified" from a quota/poll (eb2/3) that mandates labor market test like perm ? (while the actual qualification is fb2a)
* State department also burns the eb2/3 visa allocated for US-businesses to bring in much needed skilled eb2/3 labor ? while most real primaries wait, the visa gets allocated to non-productive derivatives ?
Is state dept making mistake ?
--
I spoke with our attorney
He said
INA Sec 203 talks only about the eligibility to apply the I-485. But the visa number is derived from a relationship to Principal applicant of green card. This is true for all categories Including investor, asylum, Employment categories. Please note that It is Dept of State that is responsible for this allocation not USCIS.
more...
looivy
11-18 11:29 AM
Done
saimrathi
07-02 08:37 AM
Sent by UPS on June 30. UPS website shows recd at Lincoln, NE at 7.30am on 7/2/07 signed by Hindera.
more...
vikasgarg24
07-20 02:33 PM
Freinds
Do not fight we are EB2/EB3/EB1. This is law and instructed by politicians. Divide and rule.
Same thing they did and now and you see the result in IV forum where people fight that create below category
1.Based on educations (US masters/US bachlors/Non US masters/Non US bachleors etc etc)
2. Based on experience - US experioence non us experience
3. EB1/EB/2 EB3
4. L1/H1/b1/b2
5. Family based
6 etc etc
If you count the division you can say based on heights, color, marries and non marries status etc.
So stop fighting based on politicians category and help IV to goahead and fight for all.
I personally feel when you fight you have success for one group and no success for other group. So do not feel that EB2 are getting beenfits. I myself is EB3 and expecting GC by 2026
Do not fight we are EB2/EB3/EB1. This is law and instructed by politicians. Divide and rule.
Same thing they did and now and you see the result in IV forum where people fight that create below category
1.Based on educations (US masters/US bachlors/Non US masters/Non US bachleors etc etc)
2. Based on experience - US experioence non us experience
3. EB1/EB/2 EB3
4. L1/H1/b1/b2
5. Family based
6 etc etc
If you count the division you can say based on heights, color, marries and non marries status etc.
So stop fighting based on politicians category and help IV to goahead and fight for all.
I personally feel when you fight you have success for one group and no success for other group. So do not feel that EB2 are getting beenfits. I myself is EB3 and expecting GC by 2026
2010 windows 7 wallpaper hd black.
vbkris77
05-01 12:56 PM
INA doesn't talk about visa allocation for spouse and children in employment pref. So we need to atleast challenge CIS interpretation on this.
more...
Lasantha
02-07 12:20 PM
Based on my limited knowledge, and what I have read in this forum, it would seem it's always beter to maintain your H1B non-immigrant status as long as possible. That was why I said that.
To clarify - are you suggesting that it is advisable to use AVR if you have both AP and AVR, and you have not used EAD or AC21 so far. Also, my spouse and myself could be returning at different times in to the country from Canada. Does this change the preference of using either AVR or AP. Since I am the primary applicant but of course we plan to land together.
To clarify - are you suggesting that it is advisable to use AVR if you have both AP and AVR, and you have not used EAD or AC21 so far. Also, my spouse and myself could be returning at different times in to the country from Canada. Does this change the preference of using either AVR or AP. Since I am the primary applicant but of course we plan to land together.
hair Hd windows 7 wallpapers
simple1
05-01 03:14 PM
exactly, spouse/derivate doesn�t get affected at all (other than a shorter or longer delay, depending on calculations).
Anyways, regardless EAD/AP or green card the derivate cant leave the country longer time. There will be no diff for her.
They have no strings attached EAD. Look at ours/primary? Can a programmer-EAD take up Project manager Job? Categorically No.
If the primary gets greencard earlier both (primary with GC, spouse with open-ead) can work/move any place they want.
Plus it is fair this way for some primary waiting in the queue and there is no law tying EBdependent with EBquota.
Again, I am waiting to hear a forum-Attorney or IV-core�s interpretation.
I support finding the fact...
Following two concerns were raised but the answers should satisfy....
1) Spouse may not get EAD/AP?
The document clearly states that if the primary's priority date is current then the primary can file I-485 and the spouse can file I-485 as dependent.
Once spouse files his/her I-485 he/she becomes eligible for EAD/AP and there are no restrictions on what and where the spouse can work on EAD/AP.
The document only says that the visa must be used from family quota and not from employment quota.
How does it then matter whether the spouse gets green card even after 10 years if he/she can work anywhere, any occupation and full time/part time?
2) Spouse may get GC long after?
Look at it this way currently we have pool of 140K to share among primary and dependents. What if this pool becomes 200K (if we assume 60K from family quota for illustration purpose)? Which one will be faster. It has to be 200K pool.
In any case let the correct rules be followed.
Anyways, regardless EAD/AP or green card the derivate cant leave the country longer time. There will be no diff for her.
They have no strings attached EAD. Look at ours/primary? Can a programmer-EAD take up Project manager Job? Categorically No.
If the primary gets greencard earlier both (primary with GC, spouse with open-ead) can work/move any place they want.
Plus it is fair this way for some primary waiting in the queue and there is no law tying EBdependent with EBquota.
Again, I am waiting to hear a forum-Attorney or IV-core�s interpretation.
I support finding the fact...
Following two concerns were raised but the answers should satisfy....
1) Spouse may not get EAD/AP?
The document clearly states that if the primary's priority date is current then the primary can file I-485 and the spouse can file I-485 as dependent.
Once spouse files his/her I-485 he/she becomes eligible for EAD/AP and there are no restrictions on what and where the spouse can work on EAD/AP.
The document only says that the visa must be used from family quota and not from employment quota.
How does it then matter whether the spouse gets green card even after 10 years if he/she can work anywhere, any occupation and full time/part time?
2) Spouse may get GC long after?
Look at it this way currently we have pool of 140K to share among primary and dependents. What if this pool becomes 200K (if we assume 60K from family quota for illustration purpose)? Which one will be faster. It has to be 200K pool.
In any case let the correct rules be followed.
more...
dingudi
03-23 05:29 PM
Thanks dingudi. If you know of a solid case where someone was RFE'd because of landing while on 485, then it looks like I might seriously consider abandoning it as well.
One last question: Let's hypothetically say that I do decide to land and somehow manage to get back into the US without any issues using my AP. However, every subsequent time I leave the U.S. and return, I run the risk of getting "caught" at the POE with regards to the 485/Canadian residency conflict. Am I correct in this assessment?
Again, I appreciate your input immensely. Thanks!
Like Dard-E-Disco pointed, that is the link I am aware of regarding someone getting the RFE. Also you will not know what may happen at POE unless you travel and find out yourself.
I had also landed in canada in 2004 and came back to US but at that time my I-140 was also not filed. But as soon as my I-1485 got filed last year I had to take a decision whether I want US GC or canadian GC because my 3 year validity for canada GC was getting over last year. So I decided not to pursue canada GC and just stick to getting a US GC.
Believe me I had also invested so much money and time in trying to canadian GC but because my AOS got filed last year, I made the decision to let go of my canadian GC.
One last question: Let's hypothetically say that I do decide to land and somehow manage to get back into the US without any issues using my AP. However, every subsequent time I leave the U.S. and return, I run the risk of getting "caught" at the POE with regards to the 485/Canadian residency conflict. Am I correct in this assessment?
Again, I appreciate your input immensely. Thanks!
Like Dard-E-Disco pointed, that is the link I am aware of regarding someone getting the RFE. Also you will not know what may happen at POE unless you travel and find out yourself.
I had also landed in canada in 2004 and came back to US but at that time my I-140 was also not filed. But as soon as my I-1485 got filed last year I had to take a decision whether I want US GC or canadian GC because my 3 year validity for canada GC was getting over last year. So I decided not to pursue canada GC and just stick to getting a US GC.
Believe me I had also invested so much money and time in trying to canadian GC but because my AOS got filed last year, I made the decision to let go of my canadian GC.
hot Windows 7 Blue, Green, Pink,
gimme Green!!
09-03 09:43 AM
we got I-140 and I-485 approval email on August 19th; Card production ordered email on August 21st; got the physical approvals and cards in the mail on August 25th - whole thing took a week.
more...
house Black Windows 7 Wallpaper
BharatPremi
03-26 09:15 AM
Just curious
EB2-India with May 2005 PD and before : All will be out before May 2010 with some residuals in NC. One thing I am sure, EB2/3-India with PD 2006 and afterwards should not start working on EAD and will have to hold on to H1.
PDs with 2006 and onwards - both for EB2/3 - Unpredictable and scary assuming no change in current immigration policies.
EB2-India with May 2005 PD and before : All will be out before May 2010 with some residuals in NC. One thing I am sure, EB2/3-India with PD 2006 and afterwards should not start working on EAD and will have to hold on to H1.
PDs with 2006 and onwards - both for EB2/3 - Unpredictable and scary assuming no change in current immigration policies.
tattoo Tags: wallpaper hd windows 7,
mirage
03-08 08:38 PM
This is what puzzles me, on one hand you tell us 'You couldn't even begin to imagine how many cases like this there are'....
Which is exactly I have been saying, unless we do something EB3 India could be waiting for a decade or 2...
But on the other hand if I want to address this issue in a manner which could see least resistance, you tells me I'm living in 'Utopia', administrator threatens to 'Ban' me ????
On other hand
There are still lots of cases in eb3 from back that far.
Many of the eb3 245i cases; there dependents were outside USA. Once; they got greencards; then their dependents went for consular processing or are going for consular processing.
One of the cases I worked on ability to pay; person had adopted her nephew so that he could get greencard as dependent. You couldn't even begin to imagine how many cases like this there are.
Which is exactly I have been saying, unless we do something EB3 India could be waiting for a decade or 2...
But on the other hand if I want to address this issue in a manner which could see least resistance, you tells me I'm living in 'Utopia', administrator threatens to 'Ban' me ????
On other hand
There are still lots of cases in eb3 from back that far.
Many of the eb3 245i cases; there dependents were outside USA. Once; they got greencards; then their dependents went for consular processing or are going for consular processing.
One of the cases I worked on ability to pay; person had adopted her nephew so that he could get greencard as dependent. You couldn't even begin to imagine how many cases like this there are.
more...
pictures wallpaper hd windows 7.
EndlessWait
10-08 03:01 PM
Firstly, no one can shut down thoughts. They are inside your head. What I am saying is that match your thoughts with your actions, not just expression of thoughts. If you want to express your ideas and thoughts, do it in a way that its heard by people that matter. Your ideas and thoughts heard by other people like you is meaningless. If you can match ACTIONS to propogate your thoughts, by hauling your ass to Washington DC, spending some $$ out of pocket on travel to DC and meeting with a few of the 535 offices, then it matters. Otherwise your idea is not worth 2 cents sitting on forums read by people who are not legislators.
Secondly, YOU THINK that asking USCIS to follow the rules is easier than changing rules (thru legislation). That's because , you and many others like you, think of Government function as if its an IT project. Occupational hazard. That is not how the Government works. The reason they dont follow the rules is because they (1) dont care and (2) are not accountable. USCIS and its non-FIFO procedures, FBI namecheck delays, backlogs in receipting and adjudication of 140 (Atlanta PERM) etc is something that congress cannot fix. USCIS, FBI report to DHS and DOJ respectively and they in turn, report to the White House. Congress can rarely make them work better and make them answer for mistakes, as congress can only do "Oversight" hearings on them. Haul an agency or department head in front of a committee and ask questions (pre submitted). And ask them questions. Make some show on CSPAN. At the end of the day, if Administration tell congress - "GET LOST, mind your own business, this is the best we can do and we are doing it", then congress cannot do anything. Other than impeaching someone. No one is going to impeach Mike Chertoff because one of his agencies (USCIS) is not doing FIFO on something called 485 (which no one in DC knows what it is).
Congressional input rarely works. Example: Intervention of Congress during July bulletin. You know why? Because Congress HAD TO DO IT because of the uproar. I dont see any uproar and your issues like "there is no FIFO", "My PERM is stuck in Atlant for 6 months", or "I am stuck in namecheck for 4 years".
These things need lobbying the Administration. Lobbying the administration is MUCH MORE DIFFICULT and EXPENSIVE than lobbying congress. Why? Because each office of Congress has a boss that faces elections very often. Every 2 years in House and every 6 years in the Senate. Plus they have 535 offices (435 in House, 100 in senate). That means easier access. On the other hand, there is only one office heading USCIS, office of Emelio Gonzalez, and only one Michael Chertoff and only one DOJ and its FBI. So the access of more difficult and lobbying is more expensive.
When it comes to administration, you have limited leverage. Other than 2 people in the entire administration, no one is getting job by elections. The only 2 positions in this branch of Government that are elected and directly accountable to people are President and Vice President. Mike Chertoff of DHS or Emelio Gonzalez of USCIS wont lose next election coz those are on appointed positions not elected positions. Which also means that they dont have to worry about making people angry.
So you see, ASKING for good things like FIFO and Faster namecheck is great in theory. But please understand, from a civic lession viewpoint, the 3 branches of government viewpoint and then make suggestions.
Is Immigration Voice an organization that can raise 100,000 a month each month? NO. Not right now. Right now, people are busy checking their mailboxes for EAD cards. Out of 23,000 registered members, if each contribute $5 a month (equivalent to a burger, fries and coke), it is 100,000 a month. But it wont happen.
So until that happens, feel free to express your thoughts and opinions and brilliant ideas and happy forum discussion. If that's what makes you all happy and content.
Lets do that and also have $5 recurring contributions , if $20 is lot for people.
Secondly, YOU THINK that asking USCIS to follow the rules is easier than changing rules (thru legislation). That's because , you and many others like you, think of Government function as if its an IT project. Occupational hazard. That is not how the Government works. The reason they dont follow the rules is because they (1) dont care and (2) are not accountable. USCIS and its non-FIFO procedures, FBI namecheck delays, backlogs in receipting and adjudication of 140 (Atlanta PERM) etc is something that congress cannot fix. USCIS, FBI report to DHS and DOJ respectively and they in turn, report to the White House. Congress can rarely make them work better and make them answer for mistakes, as congress can only do "Oversight" hearings on them. Haul an agency or department head in front of a committee and ask questions (pre submitted). And ask them questions. Make some show on CSPAN. At the end of the day, if Administration tell congress - "GET LOST, mind your own business, this is the best we can do and we are doing it", then congress cannot do anything. Other than impeaching someone. No one is going to impeach Mike Chertoff because one of his agencies (USCIS) is not doing FIFO on something called 485 (which no one in DC knows what it is).
Congressional input rarely works. Example: Intervention of Congress during July bulletin. You know why? Because Congress HAD TO DO IT because of the uproar. I dont see any uproar and your issues like "there is no FIFO", "My PERM is stuck in Atlant for 6 months", or "I am stuck in namecheck for 4 years".
These things need lobbying the Administration. Lobbying the administration is MUCH MORE DIFFICULT and EXPENSIVE than lobbying congress. Why? Because each office of Congress has a boss that faces elections very often. Every 2 years in House and every 6 years in the Senate. Plus they have 535 offices (435 in House, 100 in senate). That means easier access. On the other hand, there is only one office heading USCIS, office of Emelio Gonzalez, and only one Michael Chertoff and only one DOJ and its FBI. So the access of more difficult and lobbying is more expensive.
When it comes to administration, you have limited leverage. Other than 2 people in the entire administration, no one is getting job by elections. The only 2 positions in this branch of Government that are elected and directly accountable to people are President and Vice President. Mike Chertoff of DHS or Emelio Gonzalez of USCIS wont lose next election coz those are on appointed positions not elected positions. Which also means that they dont have to worry about making people angry.
So you see, ASKING for good things like FIFO and Faster namecheck is great in theory. But please understand, from a civic lession viewpoint, the 3 branches of government viewpoint and then make suggestions.
Is Immigration Voice an organization that can raise 100,000 a month each month? NO. Not right now. Right now, people are busy checking their mailboxes for EAD cards. Out of 23,000 registered members, if each contribute $5 a month (equivalent to a burger, fries and coke), it is 100,000 a month. But it wont happen.
So until that happens, feel free to express your thoughts and opinions and brilliant ideas and happy forum discussion. If that's what makes you all happy and content.
Lets do that and also have $5 recurring contributions , if $20 is lot for people.
dresses FREE Download #39;Windows 7#39; - HD
bsnf
07-07 12:02 PM
DC is the right place even on a weekend also just protesting infront of the uscis office will get media attention .....we should plan for this.i know less than 1000 people will be a failure ..can we try to get the mood of the IV for this kind of event ...
I live in Raleigh, NC and am willing to come to DC. I will try and check if any of my friends are interested.
I live in Raleigh, NC and am willing to come to DC. I will try and check if any of my friends are interested.
more...
makeup 2010 windows 7 wallpaper hd
tonyHK12
02-05 04:10 PM
Thanks GoodIntentions, guru76, Naitik for your contributions.
Members please let friends and colleagues know about the event and contribute within their means, for their own cause.
Total Contribution: $1100.00
Amount to be raised: $48,900.00
Members please let friends and colleagues know about the event and contribute within their means, for their own cause.
Total Contribution: $1100.00
Amount to be raised: $48,900.00
girlfriend Halo 3 HD Wallpaper
go_guy123
12-18 06:54 PM
Been in the US since 1998, have an EB-2 PD of 2001, have played by the rules all along. Still no GC... And, the dates are going back to 2000 from the new year.. I've lost hopes...
I'm pretty close to getting clinical depression because of this game played by USCIS, Labor Dept, FBI and my own bad luck.
SKILL bill, OMNIBUS, etc. comes and goes. IV does seem to be doing things to lobby for the community, but let's face one reality. Like a news article said, no one in congress or senate wants to touch immigration even with a long pole until 2009.
The US has been very good to me (other than the GC part), more than my home country (India) which is why I'm still here.
Have invested too much of time in this country to just pack up and go. Just curious if any of you feel this way? How do you handle such depressing feelings?
I also came in 1999. I have lost hope and moved to Canada. Soon it will
10 years since the last EB reform was passed in 2000
I'm pretty close to getting clinical depression because of this game played by USCIS, Labor Dept, FBI and my own bad luck.
SKILL bill, OMNIBUS, etc. comes and goes. IV does seem to be doing things to lobby for the community, but let's face one reality. Like a news article said, no one in congress or senate wants to touch immigration even with a long pole until 2009.
The US has been very good to me (other than the GC part), more than my home country (India) which is why I'm still here.
Have invested too much of time in this country to just pack up and go. Just curious if any of you feel this way? How do you handle such depressing feelings?
I also came in 1999. I have lost hope and moved to Canada. Soon it will
10 years since the last EB reform was passed in 2000
hairstyles Wallpapers For Windows 7
tikka
06-07 01:08 PM
please Contribute $$
Iv Needs Funds For Lobbying Efforts
Iv Needs Funds For Lobbying Efforts
sanjeev
06-22 01:50 PM
A Employment letter is mandatory for I-485, the letter has to state that the job position is still available. Refer the below link from USCIS website
http://www.uscis.gov/propub/DocView/afmid/dat/I_485.PDF
Well, just say that you will bear ALL expenses associated with filing I-485. That way the only expense for the employer will be a few cents to photocopy and give you the approved copy of I-140.
If you can get the employment letter as well, that's awesome. Otherwise, just use two recent pay stubs. And for those who are going to jump in and say, "No, employment letter is absolutely required...", well, it is not. It's good to have one in case USCIS want it, but not mandatory.
Thanks,
Jayant
P.S.: I am guessing the net financials of your company must be $5000/year otherwise I don't see how paying for your I-485 affects the company's bottomline! :-) Of all the BS, this excuse is a winner!!
http://www.uscis.gov/propub/DocView/afmid/dat/I_485.PDF
Well, just say that you will bear ALL expenses associated with filing I-485. That way the only expense for the employer will be a few cents to photocopy and give you the approved copy of I-140.
If you can get the employment letter as well, that's awesome. Otherwise, just use two recent pay stubs. And for those who are going to jump in and say, "No, employment letter is absolutely required...", well, it is not. It's good to have one in case USCIS want it, but not mandatory.
Thanks,
Jayant
P.S.: I am guessing the net financials of your company must be $5000/year otherwise I don't see how paying for your I-485 affects the company's bottomline! :-) Of all the BS, this excuse is a winner!!
aquarianf
04-24 11:18 AM
Guys one more perspective:
1) Employers are not in the business of litigations. Their business is to run the company. If you or the employers are talking lawsuits then one of you have crossed a red line. It is just that. No sensible person goes to the court knowing he has done wrong. I doubt an employer wants lawsuits. Just like you feel threatened by lawsuits, your employer also feels threatened by lawsuits.
2) Surabhi - nothing personal, but your post reflect how the ideal world should be. However world is not your way always.
3) I agree with acquarian, that it is very stressful if employer threatens to sue you. Also attorneys will charge you $200/ per hr. If someone is saying that attorneys recover money later etc, I say chill. Most attorneys would not do that. They like hourly rates. Its very difficuilt to find an attorney for free unless your case is slam dunk.
Why I suggested he apologize? Be humble. I did not say admit your mistake. I just said aplogize for employers grievance. If two simple words "I apologize" can get your job done, why waste time in attorneys court, etc?
Based on my past experience, I am telling you, you never know when you will need a past employer. You will not need your past client, I have been at atleast 10 client sites, I never needed a past client for something, but I always had to go back to my employers for something. They are like ex GFs or ex spouses and leaving a job is like divorce.
Where you will need your employer? When USCIS sends you an RFE to prove employment experience with XXX company. There is nothing in the law that forces employers to give you an experience letter unless he fired you. Now try getting a court order in 90 days to meet your RFE deadline
When you get a job in fortune 500 company or better opportunity after your GC, your future employer will want to talk to all employers in ur history. Ready for that? Want to give the number now or want to let the job go?
Thats why I am saying DO NOT fight with ex employers. You will get hurt more than the employer. Your ex boss is not a bad guy, he knows you are leaving for better opportunity. Since he remembers what you have done for him, a few kind words will solve the matter.
I needed one such reference in my past, I called and apologized to my former boss because if I didnt, he would not cooperate and nor I had time for years worth of lawsuits. It took about a month, but the matter was settled in my favour.
I agree with kshitijnt that you need past employer more than you need client. In my case I had received 485 query to supply some my employment related docs ( whether that I am working with responser or working with someone else, letter from company showing my current position,sal. etc). Since I didn't change my employer, it was very easy and quick to get such documents from current employer. Imagine if I would have switched on EAD then I would have to chase my past employer for letters, paystubs etc and by the I would got them from past employer,I faced the risk of PD moving back.
1) Employers are not in the business of litigations. Their business is to run the company. If you or the employers are talking lawsuits then one of you have crossed a red line. It is just that. No sensible person goes to the court knowing he has done wrong. I doubt an employer wants lawsuits. Just like you feel threatened by lawsuits, your employer also feels threatened by lawsuits.
2) Surabhi - nothing personal, but your post reflect how the ideal world should be. However world is not your way always.
3) I agree with acquarian, that it is very stressful if employer threatens to sue you. Also attorneys will charge you $200/ per hr. If someone is saying that attorneys recover money later etc, I say chill. Most attorneys would not do that. They like hourly rates. Its very difficuilt to find an attorney for free unless your case is slam dunk.
Why I suggested he apologize? Be humble. I did not say admit your mistake. I just said aplogize for employers grievance. If two simple words "I apologize" can get your job done, why waste time in attorneys court, etc?
Based on my past experience, I am telling you, you never know when you will need a past employer. You will not need your past client, I have been at atleast 10 client sites, I never needed a past client for something, but I always had to go back to my employers for something. They are like ex GFs or ex spouses and leaving a job is like divorce.
Where you will need your employer? When USCIS sends you an RFE to prove employment experience with XXX company. There is nothing in the law that forces employers to give you an experience letter unless he fired you. Now try getting a court order in 90 days to meet your RFE deadline
When you get a job in fortune 500 company or better opportunity after your GC, your future employer will want to talk to all employers in ur history. Ready for that? Want to give the number now or want to let the job go?
Thats why I am saying DO NOT fight with ex employers. You will get hurt more than the employer. Your ex boss is not a bad guy, he knows you are leaving for better opportunity. Since he remembers what you have done for him, a few kind words will solve the matter.
I needed one such reference in my past, I called and apologized to my former boss because if I didnt, he would not cooperate and nor I had time for years worth of lawsuits. It took about a month, but the matter was settled in my favour.
I agree with kshitijnt that you need past employer more than you need client. In my case I had received 485 query to supply some my employment related docs ( whether that I am working with responser or working with someone else, letter from company showing my current position,sal. etc). Since I didn't change my employer, it was very easy and quick to get such documents from current employer. Imagine if I would have switched on EAD then I would have to chase my past employer for letters, paystubs etc and by the I would got them from past employer,I faced the risk of PD moving back.
No comments:
Post a Comment