anai
06-16 11:47 AM
There's two themes in this thread that are interesting.
1. A couple of members advanced the argument that retrogression is good since it weeds out the supposedly undeserving. Here's a startling quote:
...In summary, this retrogression is good in a way....
2. The question of luck.
I would like to share our story, because it touches on both these themes: I have two US graduate degrees; so does my wife. We've paid over 100K in federal income taxes in each of the past several years and I'm now a partner at my firm; the idea that folks are stuck in retrogression because they are undereducated low-cost workers is not realistic. And there are many cases similar to ours (some of which I read about on IV). We are stuck in retrogression because we have no answer to the country-quota bottleneck.
So, sure, retreogression may provide perverse pleasure to a select few greencard holders, but the inconvenience that retrogression causes most of us does not serve a greater Darwinian good.
What of luck? While luck has put us in retrogression, it has favored us in many ways --- we have a great family, a lovely home, and a bunch of good friends. I am sure all of us have seen similar plus sides of luck. But luck is stubborn when it comes to the greencard: when the window opened up last year, many folks with PD 2006 were approved, while many like us with older PD were left waiting. Luck is a strange animal -- it lets you see the map of the world in your handheld, but won't let you travel freely because of retrogression.
There's this story about luck and how one can get around it in some cases. It is not very relevant here, but here's the story: A wise man came to a village and observed a family living in great poverty. All the family had was a cow and a sack of grain. They would work very hard, but their net worth never rose beyond the "cow + sack of grain" level. The wise man, being wise, figured out what's going on. He asked the family to give away the cow and have a party with whatever grain they had. The family initially thought this advice was daft, but eventually complied out of respect for the wise man. The night after they had squandered everything, Brahma could be seen quietly bringing the family another cow and a sack of grain. What the wise man had figured out was that this level of net worth was preordained for that family -- whether they work hard or party. Not a great story to tell your kids to teach them about hard work; but provides an alternate perspective when you're stuck in line.
1. A couple of members advanced the argument that retrogression is good since it weeds out the supposedly undeserving. Here's a startling quote:
...In summary, this retrogression is good in a way....
2. The question of luck.
I would like to share our story, because it touches on both these themes: I have two US graduate degrees; so does my wife. We've paid over 100K in federal income taxes in each of the past several years and I'm now a partner at my firm; the idea that folks are stuck in retrogression because they are undereducated low-cost workers is not realistic. And there are many cases similar to ours (some of which I read about on IV). We are stuck in retrogression because we have no answer to the country-quota bottleneck.
So, sure, retreogression may provide perverse pleasure to a select few greencard holders, but the inconvenience that retrogression causes most of us does not serve a greater Darwinian good.
What of luck? While luck has put us in retrogression, it has favored us in many ways --- we have a great family, a lovely home, and a bunch of good friends. I am sure all of us have seen similar plus sides of luck. But luck is stubborn when it comes to the greencard: when the window opened up last year, many folks with PD 2006 were approved, while many like us with older PD were left waiting. Luck is a strange animal -- it lets you see the map of the world in your handheld, but won't let you travel freely because of retrogression.
There's this story about luck and how one can get around it in some cases. It is not very relevant here, but here's the story: A wise man came to a village and observed a family living in great poverty. All the family had was a cow and a sack of grain. They would work very hard, but their net worth never rose beyond the "cow + sack of grain" level. The wise man, being wise, figured out what's going on. He asked the family to give away the cow and have a party with whatever grain they had. The family initially thought this advice was daft, but eventually complied out of respect for the wise man. The night after they had squandered everything, Brahma could be seen quietly bringing the family another cow and a sack of grain. What the wise man had figured out was that this level of net worth was preordained for that family -- whether they work hard or party. Not a great story to tell your kids to teach them about hard work; but provides an alternate perspective when you're stuck in line.
wallpaper Mercedes CLS55 AMG Short Term
hopefulgc
02-13 05:27 PM
With that recapture ... how nice would it be to see the PD date for EB3 china in Jan 2008 and that for Eb3 India in Dec 2007
This can all happen if we take the stand.
Otherwise, we can all see our hairs gryaing with PDs in 2001 and 2002.
See extract from Ombudsman's report
http://www.dhs.gov/xlibrary/assets/cisomb_annualrpt07__June_11_2007_section3e_untimel yprocessing.pdf
218,759 visas are available for recapture and those numbers were lost due to systematic agency delays and bad policies (i.e. name check).
This can all happen if we take the stand.
Otherwise, we can all see our hairs gryaing with PDs in 2001 and 2002.
See extract from Ombudsman's report
http://www.dhs.gov/xlibrary/assets/cisomb_annualrpt07__June_11_2007_section3e_untimel yprocessing.pdf
218,759 visas are available for recapture and those numbers were lost due to systematic agency delays and bad policies (i.e. name check).
chintu25
02-12 09:47 PM
i see people making assumptions based on ROW..... Please explain how ROW dates affect India/China Dates ??
:confused:
:confused:
2011 Mercedes CLS55 AMG Lease
NNReddy
06-15 07:52 PM
I am certainly hoping that I will get by EOY 2011. It's more than hope, I feel pretty confident that by that time I should get it. Just mark my words, come back on dec 31, 2011 and check with me. You have to believe before you get it. Have faith guys. Sooner or later the man who wins is the one who thinks he can!!!!
more...
gc28262
06-03 09:53 PM
Giving an interim GC while visa number is unavailable will have the effect of bypassing the entire GC quota system. How do you want the interim card to be different from the final thing? No way that anyone in Congress will allow for their laws to be overridden through USCIS rulemaking.
An easier fix would be to accord a FINAL status for a pre-adjudicated application. USCIS should not/cannot issue an RFE on an application once it has been accorded a FINAL status. The new status FINAL should be visible online and a formal document should be issued to the applicant stating that the application has been accorded a FINAL status.
This is easier to get done rather than an iterim GC. Applicant gets the peace of mind and can go around buying houses, changing jobs etc whereas it is just a procedural change for USCIS.
An easier fix would be to accord a FINAL status for a pre-adjudicated application. USCIS should not/cannot issue an RFE on an application once it has been accorded a FINAL status. The new status FINAL should be visible online and a formal document should be issued to the applicant stating that the application has been accorded a FINAL status.
This is easier to get done rather than an iterim GC. Applicant gets the peace of mind and can go around buying houses, changing jobs etc whereas it is just a procedural change for USCIS.
BharatPremi
12-13 04:27 PM
we, as non citizens, obviously do not have all the rights that the citizens possess. We don't know whether this rule is or is not constitutional (And as someone rightly pointed out that the expertise of a constitutional attorney is required).
However if it can be shown that certain citizens/corporations ( for example microsoft, google etc who also make efforts and lobby congress to change the law ) are unduly disadvantaged by this per country cap, then they can be plaintiff. So in a sense, we have allies in the corporate sector with tons of money (and who want to make more!) So they might be willing to support us,
if it is indeed found that the rule can be challenged.
Let's assume that it can not be fought within US Constitutional framework then do we have a choice to bring this to international court level? Can US prove that keeping per country immigration quota for EB categories is not a discrimination but a policy to protect its citizens or per say to protect its industry/economy?
However if it can be shown that certain citizens/corporations ( for example microsoft, google etc who also make efforts and lobby congress to change the law ) are unduly disadvantaged by this per country cap, then they can be plaintiff. So in a sense, we have allies in the corporate sector with tons of money (and who want to make more!) So they might be willing to support us,
if it is indeed found that the rule can be challenged.
Let's assume that it can not be fought within US Constitutional framework then do we have a choice to bring this to international court level? Can US prove that keeping per country immigration quota for EB categories is not a discrimination but a policy to protect its citizens or per say to protect its industry/economy?
more...
alterego
07-24 03:27 AM
For USCIS, 2007 was "let's reduce some backlog in EB3-category" year.
It looks like 2008 is " let's reduce some backlog in EB2-category" year.
On both occassions they hid their plans in right in front of us, and said "gotcha" to every one- AILA, IV prognosticators and Ron Gotchers of this world.
I doubt USCIS will openly Re-revise the horizontal spill over policy. If they do that they may be challenged again forcing them to Re-Re-revise which will make them look even more stupider than they do now.
There are other means by which USCIS can deliver justice- mafia style- but within the current law. They need additional help from DOS,DOL, etc.
examples- (1) Generally sit on EB-2 adjudications, delay them and say there are unused EB2 numbers and allow them to spill over to EB-3
(2) Clamp down even further on PERM - stretch it from 8 months to 36 months for every applicant including EB2-ROW, make even more unused numbers available to clear backlogs.
p.s
I do not harbor any ill-will towards ROW or any other category. I honestly think above things are possible. :)
Not only is that possible, but they are probably likely to do so. PERM adjudications have already slowed down. 140 PP has been all but squashed and 485 adjudications appear random. So your points are well taken.
It looks like 2008 is " let's reduce some backlog in EB2-category" year.
On both occassions they hid their plans in right in front of us, and said "gotcha" to every one- AILA, IV prognosticators and Ron Gotchers of this world.
I doubt USCIS will openly Re-revise the horizontal spill over policy. If they do that they may be challenged again forcing them to Re-Re-revise which will make them look even more stupider than they do now.
There are other means by which USCIS can deliver justice- mafia style- but within the current law. They need additional help from DOS,DOL, etc.
examples- (1) Generally sit on EB-2 adjudications, delay them and say there are unused EB2 numbers and allow them to spill over to EB-3
(2) Clamp down even further on PERM - stretch it from 8 months to 36 months for every applicant including EB2-ROW, make even more unused numbers available to clear backlogs.
p.s
I do not harbor any ill-will towards ROW or any other category. I honestly think above things are possible. :)
Not only is that possible, but they are probably likely to do so. PERM adjudications have already slowed down. 140 PP has been all but squashed and 485 adjudications appear random. So your points are well taken.
2010 Found in Mercedes CLS55 AMG in
gondalguru
07-17 01:45 PM
Assuming that the spill overs are effected only in the last (JAS) quarter, there wont be any significant movement for EB2. Until and otherwise the supply is more than demand, EB2 will not move forward significantly.
But I wish EB2 becomes current in the near future. Correct me if i am wrong.
I think spill over will happen every quarter and EB2 I/C dates will move forward every month / two months.
http://travel.state.gov/visa/frvi/bu...etin_4252.html
See under section E.
E. EMPLOYMENT SECOND PREFERENCE VISA AVAILABILITY
There have been questions raised regarding the way numbers have been provided to the China and India in the Employment Second preference categories beginning in April. Section 202(a)(5) of the Immigration and Nationality Act states that if total demand for visas in an Employment preference category is insufficient to use all available visa numbers in that category in a calendar quarter, then the unused numbers may be made available without regard to the annual per-country limit (For example: If the second preference annual limit were 40,000, number use by “All Other Countries” were estimated to be only 25,000, and the China/India combined number use based on their per-country limits were 6,000, then there would be 9,000 numbers unused. Those 9,000 numbers could then be made available to China and India applicants without regard to their per-country limits.)
But I wish EB2 becomes current in the near future. Correct me if i am wrong.
I think spill over will happen every quarter and EB2 I/C dates will move forward every month / two months.
http://travel.state.gov/visa/frvi/bu...etin_4252.html
See under section E.
E. EMPLOYMENT SECOND PREFERENCE VISA AVAILABILITY
There have been questions raised regarding the way numbers have been provided to the China and India in the Employment Second preference categories beginning in April. Section 202(a)(5) of the Immigration and Nationality Act states that if total demand for visas in an Employment preference category is insufficient to use all available visa numbers in that category in a calendar quarter, then the unused numbers may be made available without regard to the annual per-country limit (For example: If the second preference annual limit were 40,000, number use by “All Other Countries” were estimated to be only 25,000, and the China/India combined number use based on their per-country limits were 6,000, then there would be 9,000 numbers unused. Those 9,000 numbers could then be made available to China and India applicants without regard to their per-country limits.)
more...
JazzByTheBay
07-11 08:19 PM
Have heard good things about Maple Intl. We filed on our own without any agencies. It's not terribly complicated, and certainly not the nightmare that getting a US permanent residence is with its 3-step process of LCA, I-140 petition for immigrant worker and I-485 AOS (or CP).
At times I wonder why they continue with this terribly complicated process in the U.S. - it clearly isn't working, but as long as it keeps the hordes of DoL and USCIS folks employed, I guess it serves its purpose.
jazz
Maple International is very good if you are in the west
At times I wonder why they continue with this terribly complicated process in the U.S. - it clearly isn't working, but as long as it keeps the hordes of DoL and USCIS folks employed, I guess it serves its purpose.
jazz
Maple International is very good if you are in the west
hair CLS 55 AMG
reddymjm
09-23 04:32 PM
the day this becomes law..it would be better for all of us go home, bcos tht means lawmakers are ready to do anything to get some money and they know this country has gone down beyond repair.
and the day it becomes law..i am sure the situation in this country will be so bad tht most of us wont even have jobs at tht time.
Our Social Security, Taxes, Medicare. USCIS fee. Whole USCIS lives on us.
and the day it becomes law..i am sure the situation in this country will be so bad tht most of us wont even have jobs at tht time.
Our Social Security, Taxes, Medicare. USCIS fee. Whole USCIS lives on us.
more...
unseenguy
06-16 01:09 AM
Outsourcing is bad for not only for US citizens but also for future H1bs and GC aspirants also.
Still all the jobs cannot be outsourced. Also if that would have been the case I would have been out of job. But My salary was increasing steadily and in this tough economy also I was able to get a new job with 20% rise in pay after I lost job . There are many companies in USA who are only hiring USA citizens and discouraging outsourcing. Wherever I was working I discouraged those companies from outsourcing but encouraged them to hire h1bs ,GC holders or US citizens. Many start up companies in California cannot afford to do outsourcing because of tight release schedules.
Correct. So based on your post, skilled people need not worry about outsourcing. You can argue in favour of onshoring and that is a good argument. I support this kind of approach.
Still all the jobs cannot be outsourced. Also if that would have been the case I would have been out of job. But My salary was increasing steadily and in this tough economy also I was able to get a new job with 20% rise in pay after I lost job . There are many companies in USA who are only hiring USA citizens and discouraging outsourcing. Wherever I was working I discouraged those companies from outsourcing but encouraged them to hire h1bs ,GC holders or US citizens. Many start up companies in California cannot afford to do outsourcing because of tight release schedules.
Correct. So based on your post, skilled people need not worry about outsourcing. You can argue in favour of onshoring and that is a good argument. I support this kind of approach.
hot Mercedes CL55 AMG - Front
bitu72
10-23 05:30 PM
what is definition of "canadian business".
can we extrpoltae your suggestion little bit more or is it asking for too much
1. once you have PR ask your wife to open a company A.
2. As a employee of company A you can come over to USA while maintainig your PR status. You should still be considered to be covered under candian business wanting the employee to work on international projects..
can this theory fly...all this assuming no EAD filling in near future
can we extrpoltae your suggestion little bit more or is it asking for too much
1. once you have PR ask your wife to open a company A.
2. As a employee of company A you can come over to USA while maintainig your PR status. You should still be considered to be covered under candian business wanting the employee to work on international projects..
can this theory fly...all this assuming no EAD filling in near future
more...
house 2011 Mercedes CLS 55 AMG and
neocor
01-09 01:33 PM
I just got to this site via from immigration portal.
I have been reading a lot in the other forum and here about the ways to cure retrogression. Lobbying for more Visa's and other things that were part of the S.1932 bill are fine, however these things are not going to solve the retrogression problem even if such a bill gets passed.
No one seems to be talking about the real problem that is Labor Substitution. Abolishing Labor Substitution will itself take care of every retrogression problem.
The INS does not have the right tools to police the misue of this rule. This is resutling in a lot of problems for even those employees whose Labor's get substituted even if they are still working in the same company.
Any effort to reform immigration should start with first reforming the Labor Substitution rule (if not completely abolish).
I know that all the companies/employers and the lawyers community are against removing the Labor substitution, therefore it will never be removed, but atleast it should be reformed so that it can be better policed so that no one is able to misuse it and play with peoples lives. And in turn add to retregression.
Following reforms are needed in Labor Substitution.
- First thing in the Labor Substitution reform is related to the Priority date. The Priority Date for a substituted Labor should the date when the Labor is substituted (or the I-140 filing date). It should not be be the date when the Labor was originally filed. This in itself will solve 90% of the problems related to retrogression.
- When a Labor is substituted it should be verified immediately to find if there is any I-140 or I-485 that is pending based on this Labor. If so then the Labor should be rejected immediately. Currently this is not done at the time the Labor is substituted, therefore the resulting 485 filing just amounts to add up into the backlog of Visa Number requirement, until the priority date becomes current for this 485.
- If an employee invokes the AC21 then that Labor should not be allowed to be substituted.
- There should be a limit to the time until which a Labor can be substituted. This could be debatable and could have other consequences, as the INS could invalidate any GC application that is been pending for more than the this duration.
In short the Labour substitution rule is in a mess and is getting miused a lot. People are getting fooled by the employers, and ultimately its making the retrogression more worse.
neocor
I have been reading a lot in the other forum and here about the ways to cure retrogression. Lobbying for more Visa's and other things that were part of the S.1932 bill are fine, however these things are not going to solve the retrogression problem even if such a bill gets passed.
No one seems to be talking about the real problem that is Labor Substitution. Abolishing Labor Substitution will itself take care of every retrogression problem.
The INS does not have the right tools to police the misue of this rule. This is resutling in a lot of problems for even those employees whose Labor's get substituted even if they are still working in the same company.
Any effort to reform immigration should start with first reforming the Labor Substitution rule (if not completely abolish).
I know that all the companies/employers and the lawyers community are against removing the Labor substitution, therefore it will never be removed, but atleast it should be reformed so that it can be better policed so that no one is able to misuse it and play with peoples lives. And in turn add to retregression.
Following reforms are needed in Labor Substitution.
- First thing in the Labor Substitution reform is related to the Priority date. The Priority Date for a substituted Labor should the date when the Labor is substituted (or the I-140 filing date). It should not be be the date when the Labor was originally filed. This in itself will solve 90% of the problems related to retrogression.
- When a Labor is substituted it should be verified immediately to find if there is any I-140 or I-485 that is pending based on this Labor. If so then the Labor should be rejected immediately. Currently this is not done at the time the Labor is substituted, therefore the resulting 485 filing just amounts to add up into the backlog of Visa Number requirement, until the priority date becomes current for this 485.
- If an employee invokes the AC21 then that Labor should not be allowed to be substituted.
- There should be a limit to the time until which a Labor can be substituted. This could be debatable and could have other consequences, as the INS could invalidate any GC application that is been pending for more than the this duration.
In short the Labour substitution rule is in a mess and is getting miused a lot. People are getting fooled by the employers, and ultimately its making the retrogression more worse.
neocor
tattoo 2003 Mercedes CL 55 AMG,
acecupid
07-16 06:50 PM
This whole thread is speculation, your basic assumption itself is wrong. The horizonal spill over is not a permanent policy or trend which will be practised. You should read the INA law clearly. But if this speculation makes you happy, enjoy! :)
more...
pictures CLS, 55, CLS55, AMG Mercedes
franklin
02-14 10:51 AM
Is there any proof that there are even are unused visas? I find this topic a rather moot point.
With India, China, The Philipinnes and Mexico all being oversubscribed, they appear to be reaching their 7% limit. With all the countries in ROW I doubt if any one country is even vaguelly reaching their 7% limit.
With the obvious retrogression across the board, it just tells me that there isn't anything spare to share around in whatever direction.
Am I just totally missing the point?!
With India, China, The Philipinnes and Mexico all being oversubscribed, they appear to be reaching their 7% limit. With all the countries in ROW I doubt if any one country is even vaguelly reaching their 7% limit.
With the obvious retrogression across the board, it just tells me that there isn't anything spare to share around in whatever direction.
Am I just totally missing the point?!
dresses Mercedes-Benz CL55 AMG
Macaca
06-28 10:52 AM
At the beginning of each month, the Visa Office receives a report from each immigrant visa processing post listing totals of documentarily qualified immigrant visa applicants in categories subject to numerical limitation.
Cases are grouped by foreign state chargeability/preference/priority date. No names are reported. During the first week of each month, this documentarily qualified demand is tabulated.
VO subdivides the annual preference and foreign state limitations which are specified by the Immigration and Nationality Act (INA) into twelve monthly allotments. The totals of documentarily qualified applicants reported to VO, and the expected INS demand for numbers, are compared each month with the numbers available for the next regular allotment. This allows for the determination of the monthly cut-off dates, and the allotment of numbers for reported applicants who have priority dates within the newly established cut-off dates. If there are sufficient numbers in a particular category to satisfy all reported documentarily qualified demand, the category is considered "current."
This is talking about numbers available for next regular allotment. This number could be the number remaining for current year (which is what I think it is).
It is not saying that there is a monthly/quraterly quota. I have not seen monthly/quarterly quota in any USCIS document but then I have not read most of them.
Cases are grouped by foreign state chargeability/preference/priority date. No names are reported. During the first week of each month, this documentarily qualified demand is tabulated.
VO subdivides the annual preference and foreign state limitations which are specified by the Immigration and Nationality Act (INA) into twelve monthly allotments. The totals of documentarily qualified applicants reported to VO, and the expected INS demand for numbers, are compared each month with the numbers available for the next regular allotment. This allows for the determination of the monthly cut-off dates, and the allotment of numbers for reported applicants who have priority dates within the newly established cut-off dates. If there are sufficient numbers in a particular category to satisfy all reported documentarily qualified demand, the category is considered "current."
This is talking about numbers available for next regular allotment. This number could be the number remaining for current year (which is what I think it is).
It is not saying that there is a monthly/quraterly quota. I have not seen monthly/quarterly quota in any USCIS document but then I have not read most of them.
more...
makeup Mercedes-Benz AMG-CLS55 Photos
Desertfox
09-23 04:06 PM
Nixstor,
Thanks for the brilliant idea, but I have a question about the draft. Is it really necessary to mention that 20% downpayment clause in there? I am a non-IT (manufacturing) EB3 applicant making half the salary you mentioned in the draft, and I bought a house with a 3% downpayment on a FHA loan. However, I have an excellent credit and I don't foresee myself in a foreclosure situation in the near future. I dont know if there are many GC applicant with my profile, but aren't we helping the housing market by buying a house?
Anyway, I will support every initiative that has the remotest possibility to remove one person in line ahead of me.
Thanks for the brilliant idea, but I have a question about the draft. Is it really necessary to mention that 20% downpayment clause in there? I am a non-IT (manufacturing) EB3 applicant making half the salary you mentioned in the draft, and I bought a house with a 3% downpayment on a FHA loan. However, I have an excellent credit and I don't foresee myself in a foreclosure situation in the near future. I dont know if there are many GC applicant with my profile, but aren't we helping the housing market by buying a house?
Anyway, I will support every initiative that has the remotest possibility to remove one person in line ahead of me.
girlfriend 2006 Mercedes-Benz CLS 55 AMG
voldemar
03-27 10:22 AM
My Q' was, if it becomes effective on 27th April, will USCIS reject all pending cases ?It depends on wording in final memo. Nobody knows what is there. The only text we know is that was published for comments. There could be changes after comments period. Without changes all pending sub cases (without approved I-140) will be denied.
Edit: It seems that Murthy doesn't agree with me :). Let's see.
Edit: It seems that Murthy doesn't agree with me :). Let's see.
hairstyles Mercedes-Benz AMG-CLS55 Photos
valuablehurdle
07-11 02:08 PM
See
www.canadaimmigrants.com
www.canadaimmigrants.com
qualified_trash
05-17 06:11 PM
Hello Friends and my fellow GC awaiters..
I have my labor pending for the past 3 yrs (my PD is Aug 2003) and have been waiting for ever. Inspite having a Master's I did filee in EB3 just because I work for a large company which does not allow to file in EB2.
Anyways, I came across a company who said that they have a pre approved labor (late 2002) priority date. Is it wise to go for it or wait for something in EB category to move ahead?. I have at least 1 yr 3 months on H1 and will not have any other options except to stay in the company after 3 months.
Is it worth taking the risk and go with the labor substitution?
The second question/advice I'd like from you is:
If I go back to the same company after 6 months because of some issue with the labor can I still preserve my 2003 PD?
Pls let me know your opinion.
Thx a lot guys.
Hope is a good thing, maybe the best of things. And no good thing ever dies
1MoreDesi !
I personally know of 2 friends - live within half a mile of where I do, who got their GCs using labor substitution. If the lawyer and sponsoring company are good, go for it. Keep in mind that this is going to go away soon.........
I have my labor pending for the past 3 yrs (my PD is Aug 2003) and have been waiting for ever. Inspite having a Master's I did filee in EB3 just because I work for a large company which does not allow to file in EB2.
Anyways, I came across a company who said that they have a pre approved labor (late 2002) priority date. Is it wise to go for it or wait for something in EB category to move ahead?. I have at least 1 yr 3 months on H1 and will not have any other options except to stay in the company after 3 months.
Is it worth taking the risk and go with the labor substitution?
The second question/advice I'd like from you is:
If I go back to the same company after 6 months because of some issue with the labor can I still preserve my 2003 PD?
Pls let me know your opinion.
Thx a lot guys.
Hope is a good thing, maybe the best of things. And no good thing ever dies
1MoreDesi !
I personally know of 2 friends - live within half a mile of where I do, who got their GCs using labor substitution. If the lawyer and sponsoring company are good, go for it. Keep in mind that this is going to go away soon.........
tinku01
02-13 11:53 AM
I am also with you guys.
Tinku:rolleyes:
Tinku:rolleyes:
No comments:
Post a Comment