cooler
07-01 01:29 PM
My friend joined new company from Project Manager he got a job on Associate Director. When GC was filed he was developer :-)
You can do anything as long as you don't get caught. In this case. If he moved from a developer to a PM. That in itself is a significant change in job description.
I have heard one of the lawyers say that a developer to a PM is a natural job progression. That does not make sense at all. You go from debugging your code to debugging MS-Project. The associate Director post involves something entirely different.
IF the company is willing to go along and provide the letter with the same designation as in LC, then there is nothing to worry else you would have a sword hanging till the case is adjucated.
You can do anything as long as you don't get caught. In this case. If he moved from a developer to a PM. That in itself is a significant change in job description.
I have heard one of the lawyers say that a developer to a PM is a natural job progression. That does not make sense at all. You go from debugging your code to debugging MS-Project. The associate Director post involves something entirely different.
IF the company is willing to go along and provide the letter with the same designation as in LC, then there is nothing to worry else you would have a sword hanging till the case is adjucated.
sammyb
11-19 12:21 PM
https://egov.uscis.gov/cris/jsps/Processtimes.jsp?SeviceCenter=TSC
because of page cache or they posted it today ... just wondering ... anyway thanks for the info ...
because of page cache or they posted it today ... just wondering ... anyway thanks for the info ...
Tshelar
07-23 09:03 AM
I would always recommend choosing Career over GC. I am guessing you'll are a young couple. Most of us take risk of jumping jobs and carriers before we are married or before one starts a family. Believe me once you start a family and are raising kids all your drive to look for better prospect will start diminishing. You will be happy with you a 9 to 5 job.
So my 2 cents go for a better career now.
I understand it is a tough call but I am sure you will make a right one and whatever happens in future do not repent on your decision as future is unpredictable and one can only make decisions based on the current facts.
So my 2 cents go for a better career now.
I understand it is a tough call but I am sure you will make a right one and whatever happens in future do not repent on your decision as future is unpredictable and one can only make decisions based on the current facts.
pappu
12-19 03:15 PM
Thank you paskal.
more...
niklshah
01-30 12:49 PM
Sent email to detroit free press and detroit news
pappu
04-16 10:46 AM
Admins,
Now a days I am seeing lots of questions asked by new members. If you have some mechanisms to show whether they have registered with valid data or fake data would help the other members who spend time in answering those questions.
I would request all the new members to contribute to our cause. Join monthly contribution of $20 and help yourselves. Thanks.
We get a lot of people with Alabama as the state. This is because it is the first state in the dropdown. People do not even bother to put their correct state when they create a free membership account. If we do not get correct email address we cannot communicate with you via emails. We also need your name and phone number so that we can call you. There have been times, when core team has called members to tell them about something important. We will sometimes point out on the forum if any poster has not given us full information. It may cause embarresment to some members who are frequently posting on the forums annonymously.
Now a days I am seeing lots of questions asked by new members. If you have some mechanisms to show whether they have registered with valid data or fake data would help the other members who spend time in answering those questions.
I would request all the new members to contribute to our cause. Join monthly contribution of $20 and help yourselves. Thanks.
We get a lot of people with Alabama as the state. This is because it is the first state in the dropdown. People do not even bother to put their correct state when they create a free membership account. If we do not get correct email address we cannot communicate with you via emails. We also need your name and phone number so that we can call you. There have been times, when core team has called members to tell them about something important. We will sometimes point out on the forum if any poster has not given us full information. It may cause embarresment to some members who are frequently posting on the forums annonymously.
more...
rheoretro
09-25 04:37 PM
I think we can get some financial support from Housing Market !
Facts:
------
The housing market is slowing down significantly and there are millions of unsold homes out there.
More than 1/2 million people are stuck in the green card process. I am sure
most are waiting for green card before they buy their house and make longtime commitment.
I think we are a "Frozen" pool of customers for the Housing Market.
500000 H1B X 200000 (average house price) = 100 billion dollar market is just
inaccessible just because of retrogression.
I think we should convince them to help us FINANCIALY.
Please IV Core members take this idea seriously and at least
SEND A LETTER TO National Association of Home Builders (NAHB) president.
Thanks for the suggestion. You're kidding, right? And if you are serious, please draft the letter yourself, and good luck getting a response from NAHB!
Facts:
------
The housing market is slowing down significantly and there are millions of unsold homes out there.
More than 1/2 million people are stuck in the green card process. I am sure
most are waiting for green card before they buy their house and make longtime commitment.
I think we are a "Frozen" pool of customers for the Housing Market.
500000 H1B X 200000 (average house price) = 100 billion dollar market is just
inaccessible just because of retrogression.
I think we should convince them to help us FINANCIALY.
Please IV Core members take this idea seriously and at least
SEND A LETTER TO National Association of Home Builders (NAHB) president.
Thanks for the suggestion. You're kidding, right? And if you are serious, please draft the letter yourself, and good luck getting a response from NAHB!
GCwaitforever
11-06 11:58 AM
I would suggest you to switch jobs and complain to USCIS right away instead of waiting for company A to take some action against you. This will keep the company under scrutiny of USCIS and they can unearth more mud on this company. Never put up with injustice as this encourages company A to do more of this to other employees.
more...
coopheal
11-10 05:13 PM
All,
IV has put in significant effort in creating this survey to map the strength of our community.
http://immigrationvoice.org/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=95&Itemid=36
Answered the the survey.
IV has put in significant effort in creating this survey to map the strength of our community.
http://immigrationvoice.org/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=95&Itemid=36
Answered the the survey.
nozerd
01-15 09:52 PM
Looks like the best bet for you would be to give the exam in either Houston or Dallas.
I am in Denver, Colorado...there is els center here...but that is nt mentioned on the ielts.org website.
I am in Denver, Colorado...there is els center here...but that is nt mentioned on the ielts.org website.
more...
dbevis
March 14th, 2004, 08:32 PM
Nope. I do have email in it, but found that useless. I"m sort of a bipolar technogeek, I guess. Deep excess in some areas, total disdain in others.
Sandeep
03-15 11:54 AM
hi Super_Moderator,
Why cant we try to add now..instead of waiting for later time..to add this ammendment thru some senator or somebody for filing 485 during retrogression...
just to know whey we need to wait for later to add this...
There is no question of waiting and watching here - please be assured that IV is doing everything possible to address this issue. This bill is not very straight forward due to the fact that it is entangled in too many complexities which we are not even a part of. So we have to tread very carefully here. IV is getting professional advice in this regard and it would make sense to follow that advice and not jump the gun.
Why cant we try to add now..instead of waiting for later time..to add this ammendment thru some senator or somebody for filing 485 during retrogression...
just to know whey we need to wait for later to add this...
There is no question of waiting and watching here - please be assured that IV is doing everything possible to address this issue. This bill is not very straight forward due to the fact that it is entangled in too many complexities which we are not even a part of. So we have to tread very carefully here. IV is getting professional advice in this regard and it would make sense to follow that advice and not jump the gun.
more...
pappu
02-18 10:20 AM
The flyer created by NJ chapter has been uploaded in the resources section
Flyer_2007 version (word file)
http://immigrationvoice.org/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=22&Itemid=36&mosmsg=Item+succesfully+saved.
Flyer_2007 version (word file)
http://immigrationvoice.org/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=22&Itemid=36&mosmsg=Item+succesfully+saved.
nozerd
11-15 12:02 PM
Have you tried to get an appointment in Calgary, Halifax or Quebec City. These 3 places are normally the easiest to get visa appt.
Also answer depends on number of questions.
1) What is your current nationality
2) Do you have expired H1 B stamp in your passport ?
Also answer depends on number of questions.
1) What is your current nationality
2) Do you have expired H1 B stamp in your passport ?
more...
chi_shark
09-09 03:45 PM
This issue must have been beaten to death already... I do not think that you have to be a permanent resident or Citizen in USCIS terms for doing S-Corp. The requirement is stated in a negative fashion in the code. I mean that the code lists what cannot be instead of what should be. And I think it means that a s-corp shareholder cannot be a non-resident alien. Thats it. I am on EAD and I have an S-Corp (i dont do IT with that company). I have a full time IT job and run the company part time...
I would have liked to do LLC except that it is more expensive to set it up compared to corp. there are record keeping requirements on corp... but if you are a good CEO, you will keep records for any company... no matter what legal style of organization.
The only operational benefit of S-corp or llc is the pass through taxation... i.e. income is taxed only once... c-corp has to be taxed on profits... on the flip side, however, you may potentially have a company that does very little business in the first year and hence very little profits or taxes... you could give yourself a handsome (but reasonable) salary and hence declare loss or zero profits... there are ways..
finally, I recommend spending the extra time, money, effort to read a few books (like "Inc yourself") and subscribe to inc magazine, entrepreneur magazine to do all legal and accounting stuff yourself in the first 1 2 years... you will learn a lot! on the other hand if you are starting with large capital base, then you can probably hire everyone right off the bat! (you probably would not have come here if you had plenty of money to hire everyone)
Please don't give incorrect answers.
All three corporation types (C-Corp, S-Corp, and LLC) have limited liability to its shareholders.
The main difference in these corp types are
1. How much record keeping is done
2. The way taxes are computed and filed with IRS
3. The kind of expenses allowed to deduct
4. C-Corp and LLC can carryover profits to next year(s), but S-Corp has to pass on profit (or loss) to the shareholders at the end of every calendar year.
For S-Corp, the shareholders must be Permanent Resident or US Citizen.
I have corporation of my own and this is C-Corp (due to kind of expenses I can deduct and/or write-off). I did all the incorporation work myself without any help from CPA. Incorporation is pretty straight forward and very easy. There are good books in Nolo Press on Corporate Incorporation.
____________________________________
Proud Indian American and Legal Immigrant
I would have liked to do LLC except that it is more expensive to set it up compared to corp. there are record keeping requirements on corp... but if you are a good CEO, you will keep records for any company... no matter what legal style of organization.
The only operational benefit of S-corp or llc is the pass through taxation... i.e. income is taxed only once... c-corp has to be taxed on profits... on the flip side, however, you may potentially have a company that does very little business in the first year and hence very little profits or taxes... you could give yourself a handsome (but reasonable) salary and hence declare loss or zero profits... there are ways..
finally, I recommend spending the extra time, money, effort to read a few books (like "Inc yourself") and subscribe to inc magazine, entrepreneur magazine to do all legal and accounting stuff yourself in the first 1 2 years... you will learn a lot! on the other hand if you are starting with large capital base, then you can probably hire everyone right off the bat! (you probably would not have come here if you had plenty of money to hire everyone)
Please don't give incorrect answers.
All three corporation types (C-Corp, S-Corp, and LLC) have limited liability to its shareholders.
The main difference in these corp types are
1. How much record keeping is done
2. The way taxes are computed and filed with IRS
3. The kind of expenses allowed to deduct
4. C-Corp and LLC can carryover profits to next year(s), but S-Corp has to pass on profit (or loss) to the shareholders at the end of every calendar year.
For S-Corp, the shareholders must be Permanent Resident or US Citizen.
I have corporation of my own and this is C-Corp (due to kind of expenses I can deduct and/or write-off). I did all the incorporation work myself without any help from CPA. Incorporation is pretty straight forward and very easy. There are good books in Nolo Press on Corporate Incorporation.
____________________________________
Proud Indian American and Legal Immigrant
mirage
06-11 11:55 AM
You look very angry. Take a shower. Do you think Core team is there to answer every question that is asked here ? Did you hire them as a full time employee ? How did you reach the conclusion that they are working for their benifit ? Look in to the mirror, ask yourself a question what you have done until now to help yourself to bail out of the mess you are in, I mean what efforts have you made to meet the senators and congressmen of your area, how many people you have influenced to join IV, how much you have contributed to help IV stay afloat. Only if you have satifactory answers to these questions, come back and ask questions.
I asked IV core on what version of immigration bill they support because I and other people wanted to know since there are so many ....
:mad:
I asked IV core on what version of immigration bill they support because I and other people wanted to know since there are so many ....
:mad:
more...
chanduv23
03-03 11:18 AM
thanks for the response. can you please post the result of the transfer
also any one in the forum who had experience with the ac21 transfer +ve or negative can you please advise about your experiences. it is really a stressful situation with every thing being this way.
I did AC21 from a Consulting company into a big financial company and moved using EAD. My old employer requested USCIS to revoke my 140 and as a result I got a NOID from USCIS asking details of new employment. I gave the details and my case processing resumed.
AC21 issues can be resolved. So don't worry about it.
also any one in the forum who had experience with the ac21 transfer +ve or negative can you please advise about your experiences. it is really a stressful situation with every thing being this way.
I did AC21 from a Consulting company into a big financial company and moved using EAD. My old employer requested USCIS to revoke my 140 and as a result I got a NOID from USCIS asking details of new employment. I gave the details and my case processing resumed.
AC21 issues can be resolved. So don't worry about it.
seahawks
07-02 12:07 AM
Guys,
Can some read the SOP in the above quote and figure out what they are trying to say?
I read it and it does mention that if you came prior to an year from filing, your G-325A does not count. I wonder why that is because Finger printing is triggered by G-325A was what I thought and its a form with 3 copies so to speak so I thought it goes to 3 different offices, who knows how it works.. anyways here is what I am doing for now..
Wait until my attorney gets back to me
Go for the FP and probably explain to them and see if anything can be done.
Wrote to my district congressman's immigration specialist who I had met before while campaigning for IV goals on CIR. Well I won't sweat it out, will see what happens I guess.
Can some read the SOP in the above quote and figure out what they are trying to say?
I read it and it does mention that if you came prior to an year from filing, your G-325A does not count. I wonder why that is because Finger printing is triggered by G-325A was what I thought and its a form with 3 copies so to speak so I thought it goes to 3 different offices, who knows how it works.. anyways here is what I am doing for now..
Wait until my attorney gets back to me
Go for the FP and probably explain to them and see if anything can be done.
Wrote to my district congressman's immigration specialist who I had met before while campaigning for IV goals on CIR. Well I won't sweat it out, will see what happens I guess.
stuckinmuck
05-30 01:27 PM
Have written to my Immigration Coordinator who will confirm with the company lawyer if this rule applies to 'pending' I-140 approvals or will 'filed' and 'approved' I-140 (prior to May-15-07) be safe.
Will let you know his response.
__________________________________________
Contribution so far: $1000
Webfaxes sent to all Senators
Emails sent to Senators, Representatives, Reporters
Will let you know his response.
__________________________________________
Contribution so far: $1000
Webfaxes sent to all Senators
Emails sent to Senators, Representatives, Reporters
wildcat1313
03-26 02:08 AM
Yesterday, I went for my H1b stamping but was issued a 221G. I had all documents that the VO asked for.
1. Client Letter with detailed job descriptions.
2. Vendor Letter with detailed job requirements and skillsets required
3. Contract between my company & Vendor.
4. Work-Order from client to vendor.
5. All W2/pay Slips
6. Company Tax return for last 2 years.
7. Unemployment wage report
8. Notarized copy of all employees with location, salary, start date , end date.
9. Copy of filing with USCIS.
10. All timesheets esablishing employee/employer relationship as well as billing timesheets
VO refused the visa saying he wants to see the contract between employer & end client. Vendor is saying they cannot provide it because of legal issues but are willing to provide a detailed letter stating the same.
I have been with the same employer for last 7 years and never been on bench with I-140 approved. Have worked for same client earlier for 4 years, took a break as I was bored, worked for another client for a year, came back and have been working there for last 2 years now. Client is very co-operative and is willing to help in anyway they can as they need my services.
What are my chances of getting tbe visa without the original contract?
I had to travel to India because of a family emergency. My family is in US as kids are in school. I would really appreciate if you can answer.
1. Client Letter with detailed job descriptions.
2. Vendor Letter with detailed job requirements and skillsets required
3. Contract between my company & Vendor.
4. Work-Order from client to vendor.
5. All W2/pay Slips
6. Company Tax return for last 2 years.
7. Unemployment wage report
8. Notarized copy of all employees with location, salary, start date , end date.
9. Copy of filing with USCIS.
10. All timesheets esablishing employee/employer relationship as well as billing timesheets
VO refused the visa saying he wants to see the contract between employer & end client. Vendor is saying they cannot provide it because of legal issues but are willing to provide a detailed letter stating the same.
I have been with the same employer for last 7 years and never been on bench with I-140 approved. Have worked for same client earlier for 4 years, took a break as I was bored, worked for another client for a year, came back and have been working there for last 2 years now. Client is very co-operative and is willing to help in anyway they can as they need my services.
What are my chances of getting tbe visa without the original contract?
I had to travel to India because of a family emergency. My family is in US as kids are in school. I would really appreciate if you can answer.
Blog Feeds
01-26 08:40 AM
Summary
(LINK TO FULL REPORT BELOW)
Congress created the H-1B program in 1990 to enable U.S. employers to hire temporary, foreign workers in specialty occupations. The law capped the number of H-1B visas issued per fiscal year at 65,000. Since then, the cap has fluctuated with legislative changes. Congress asked GAO to assess the impact of the cap on the ability of domestic companies to innovate, while ensuring that U.S. workers are not disadvantaged. In response, GAO examined what is known about (1) employer demand for H-1B workers; (2) how the cap affects employer costs and decisions to move operations overseas; (3) H-1B worker characteristics and the potential impact of raising the cap; and (4) how well requirements of the H-1B program protect U.S. workers. GAO analyzed data from 4 federal agencies; interviewed agency officials, experts, and H-1B employers; and reviewed agency documents and literature.
In most years, demand for new H-1B workers exceeded the cap: From 2000 to 2009, demand for new H-1B workers tended to exceed the cap, as measured by the numbers of initial petitions submitted by employers who are subject to the cap. There is no way to precisely determine the level of any unmet demand among employers, since they tend to stop submitting (and the Department of Homeland Security stops tracking) petitions once the cap is reached each year. When we consider all initial petitions, including those from universities and research institutions that are not subject to the cap, we find that demand for new H-1B workers is largely driven by a small number of employers. Over the decade, over 14 percent of all initial petitions were submitted by cap-exempt employers, and only a few employers (fewer than 1 percent) garnered over one-quarter of all H-1B approvals. Most interviewed companies said the H-1B cap and program created costs, but were not factors in their decisions to move R&D overseas: The 34 H-1B employers GAO interviewed reported that the cap has created some additional costs, though the cap's impact depended on the size and maturity of the company. For example, in years when visas were denied by the cap, most large firms reported finding other (sometimes more costly) ways to hire their preferred job candidates. On the other hand, small firms were more likely to fill their positions with different candidates, which they said resulted in delays and sometimes economic losses, particularly for firms in rapidly changing technology fields. Limitations in agency data and systems hinder tracking the cap and H-1B workers over time: The total number of H-1B workers in the U.S. at any one time--and information about the length of their stay--is unknown, because (1) data systems among the various agencies that process such individuals are not linked so individuals cannot be readily tracked, and (2) H-1B workers are not assigned a unique identifier that would allow for tracking them over time--particularly if and when their visa status changes. Restricted agency oversight and statutory changes weaken protections for U.S. workers: Elements of the H-1B program that could serve as worker protections--such as the requirement to pay prevailing wages, the visa's temporary status, and the cap itself--are weakened by several factors. First, program oversight is fragmented and restricted. Second, the H-1B program lacks a legal provision for holding employers accountable to program requirements when they obtain H-1B workers through a staffing company. Third, statutory changes made to the H-1B program have, in combination and in effect, increased the pool of H-1B workers beyond the cap and lowered the bar for eligibility. Taken together, the multifaceted challenges identified in this report show that the H-1B program, as currently structured, may not be used to its full potential and may be detrimental in some cases. This report offers several matters for congressional consideration, including that Congress re-examine key H-1B program provisions and make appropriate changes as needed. GAO also recommends that the Departments of Homeland Security and Labor take steps to improve efficiency, flexibility, and monitoring of the H-1B program. Homeland Security disagreed with two recommendations and one matter, citing logistical and other challenges; however, we believe such challenges can be overcome. Labor did not respond to our recommendations.
Recommendations
Our recommendations from this work are listed below with a Contact for more information. Status will change from "In process" to "Open," "Closed - implemented," or "Closed - not implemented" based on our follow up work.
Director:Andrew SherrillTeam:Government Accountability Office: Education, Workforce, and Income SecurityPhone:(202) 512-7252
Matters for Congressional Consideration
Recommendation: To ensure that the H-1B program continues to meet the needs of businesses in a global economy while maintaining a balance of protections for U.S. workers, Congress may wish to consider reviewing the merits and shortcomings of key program provisions and making appropriate changes as needed. Such a review may include, but would not necessarily be limited to (1) the qualifications required for workers eligible under the H-1B program, (2) exemptions from the cap, (3) the appropriateness of H-1B hiring by staffing companies, (4) the level of the cap, and (5) the role the program should play in the U.S. immigration system in relationship to permanent residency.
Status: In process
Comments: When we determine what steps the Congress has taken, we will provide updated information.
Recommendation: To reduce duplication and fragmentation in the administration and oversight of the H-1B application process, consistent with past GAO matters for congressional consideration, Congress may wish to consider eliminating the requirement that employers first submit a Labor Condition Application (LCA) to the Department of Labor for certification, and require instead that employers submit this application along with the I-129 application to the Department of Homeland Security's U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services for review.
Status: In process
Comments: When we determine what steps the Congress has taken, we will provide updated information.
Recommendation: To improve the Department of Labor's ability to investigate and enforce employer compliance with H-1B program requirements, Congress may wish to consider granting the department subpoena power to obtain employer records during investigations under the H-1B program.
Status: In process
Comments: When we determine what steps the Congress has taken, we will provide updated information.
Recommendation: To help ensure the full protection of H-1B workers employed through staffing companies, Congress may wish to consider holding the employer where an H-1B visa holder performs work accountable for meeting program requirements to the same extent as the employer that submitted the LCA form.
Status: In process
Comments: When we determine what steps the Congress has taken, we will provide updated information.
Recommendations for Executive Action
Recommendation: To help ensure that the number of new H-1B workers who are subject to the cap--both entering the United States and changing to H-1B status within the United States--does not exceed the cap each year, U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services should take steps to improve its tracking of the number of approved H-1B applications and the number of issued visas under the cap by fully leveraging the transformation effort currently under way, which involves the adoption of an electronic petition processing system that will be linked to the Department of State's tracking system. Such steps should ensure that linkages to the Department of State's tracking system will provide Homeland Security with timely access to data on visa issuances, and that mechanisms for tracking petitions and visas against the cap are incorporated into U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services' business rules to be developed for the new electronic petition system.
Agency Affected: Department of Homeland Security
Status: In process
Comments: When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.
Recommendation: To address business concerns without undermining program integrity, U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services should, to the extent permitted by its existing statutory authority, explore options for increasing the flexibility of the application process for H-1B employers, such as (1) allowing employers to rank their applications for visa candidates so that they can hire the best qualified worker for the jobs in highest need; (2) distributing the applications granted under the annual cap in allotments throughout the year (e.g. quarterly); and (3) establishing a system whereby businesses with a strong track-record of compliance with H-1B regulations may use a streamlined application process.
Agency Affected: Department of Homeland Security
Status: In process
Comments: When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.
Recommendation: To improve the transparency and oversight of the posting requirement on the Labor Condition Application (LCA), as part of its current oversight role, the Employment and Training Administration should develop and maintain a centralized Web site, accessible to the public, where businesses must post notice of the intent to hire H-1B workers. Such notices should continue to specify the job category and worksite location noted on the LCA and required by statute on current noncentralized postings.
Agency Affected: Department of Labor
Status: In process
Comments: When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.
Recommendation: To improve the efficiency and effectiveness of its investigations of employer compliance with H-1B requirements, the Employment and Training Administration should provide Labor's Wage and Hour Division searchable access to the LCA database.
Agency Affected: Department of Labor
Status: In process
Comments: When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.
VIEW FULL REPORT (http://www.gao.gov/new.items/d1126.pdf)
More... (http://ashwinsharma.com/2011/01/25/h-1b-visa-program-reforms-are-needed-to-minimize-the-risks-and-costs-of-current-program.aspx?ref=rss)
(LINK TO FULL REPORT BELOW)
Congress created the H-1B program in 1990 to enable U.S. employers to hire temporary, foreign workers in specialty occupations. The law capped the number of H-1B visas issued per fiscal year at 65,000. Since then, the cap has fluctuated with legislative changes. Congress asked GAO to assess the impact of the cap on the ability of domestic companies to innovate, while ensuring that U.S. workers are not disadvantaged. In response, GAO examined what is known about (1) employer demand for H-1B workers; (2) how the cap affects employer costs and decisions to move operations overseas; (3) H-1B worker characteristics and the potential impact of raising the cap; and (4) how well requirements of the H-1B program protect U.S. workers. GAO analyzed data from 4 federal agencies; interviewed agency officials, experts, and H-1B employers; and reviewed agency documents and literature.
In most years, demand for new H-1B workers exceeded the cap: From 2000 to 2009, demand for new H-1B workers tended to exceed the cap, as measured by the numbers of initial petitions submitted by employers who are subject to the cap. There is no way to precisely determine the level of any unmet demand among employers, since they tend to stop submitting (and the Department of Homeland Security stops tracking) petitions once the cap is reached each year. When we consider all initial petitions, including those from universities and research institutions that are not subject to the cap, we find that demand for new H-1B workers is largely driven by a small number of employers. Over the decade, over 14 percent of all initial petitions were submitted by cap-exempt employers, and only a few employers (fewer than 1 percent) garnered over one-quarter of all H-1B approvals. Most interviewed companies said the H-1B cap and program created costs, but were not factors in their decisions to move R&D overseas: The 34 H-1B employers GAO interviewed reported that the cap has created some additional costs, though the cap's impact depended on the size and maturity of the company. For example, in years when visas were denied by the cap, most large firms reported finding other (sometimes more costly) ways to hire their preferred job candidates. On the other hand, small firms were more likely to fill their positions with different candidates, which they said resulted in delays and sometimes economic losses, particularly for firms in rapidly changing technology fields. Limitations in agency data and systems hinder tracking the cap and H-1B workers over time: The total number of H-1B workers in the U.S. at any one time--and information about the length of their stay--is unknown, because (1) data systems among the various agencies that process such individuals are not linked so individuals cannot be readily tracked, and (2) H-1B workers are not assigned a unique identifier that would allow for tracking them over time--particularly if and when their visa status changes. Restricted agency oversight and statutory changes weaken protections for U.S. workers: Elements of the H-1B program that could serve as worker protections--such as the requirement to pay prevailing wages, the visa's temporary status, and the cap itself--are weakened by several factors. First, program oversight is fragmented and restricted. Second, the H-1B program lacks a legal provision for holding employers accountable to program requirements when they obtain H-1B workers through a staffing company. Third, statutory changes made to the H-1B program have, in combination and in effect, increased the pool of H-1B workers beyond the cap and lowered the bar for eligibility. Taken together, the multifaceted challenges identified in this report show that the H-1B program, as currently structured, may not be used to its full potential and may be detrimental in some cases. This report offers several matters for congressional consideration, including that Congress re-examine key H-1B program provisions and make appropriate changes as needed. GAO also recommends that the Departments of Homeland Security and Labor take steps to improve efficiency, flexibility, and monitoring of the H-1B program. Homeland Security disagreed with two recommendations and one matter, citing logistical and other challenges; however, we believe such challenges can be overcome. Labor did not respond to our recommendations.
Recommendations
Our recommendations from this work are listed below with a Contact for more information. Status will change from "In process" to "Open," "Closed - implemented," or "Closed - not implemented" based on our follow up work.
Director:Andrew SherrillTeam:Government Accountability Office: Education, Workforce, and Income SecurityPhone:(202) 512-7252
Matters for Congressional Consideration
Recommendation: To ensure that the H-1B program continues to meet the needs of businesses in a global economy while maintaining a balance of protections for U.S. workers, Congress may wish to consider reviewing the merits and shortcomings of key program provisions and making appropriate changes as needed. Such a review may include, but would not necessarily be limited to (1) the qualifications required for workers eligible under the H-1B program, (2) exemptions from the cap, (3) the appropriateness of H-1B hiring by staffing companies, (4) the level of the cap, and (5) the role the program should play in the U.S. immigration system in relationship to permanent residency.
Status: In process
Comments: When we determine what steps the Congress has taken, we will provide updated information.
Recommendation: To reduce duplication and fragmentation in the administration and oversight of the H-1B application process, consistent with past GAO matters for congressional consideration, Congress may wish to consider eliminating the requirement that employers first submit a Labor Condition Application (LCA) to the Department of Labor for certification, and require instead that employers submit this application along with the I-129 application to the Department of Homeland Security's U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services for review.
Status: In process
Comments: When we determine what steps the Congress has taken, we will provide updated information.
Recommendation: To improve the Department of Labor's ability to investigate and enforce employer compliance with H-1B program requirements, Congress may wish to consider granting the department subpoena power to obtain employer records during investigations under the H-1B program.
Status: In process
Comments: When we determine what steps the Congress has taken, we will provide updated information.
Recommendation: To help ensure the full protection of H-1B workers employed through staffing companies, Congress may wish to consider holding the employer where an H-1B visa holder performs work accountable for meeting program requirements to the same extent as the employer that submitted the LCA form.
Status: In process
Comments: When we determine what steps the Congress has taken, we will provide updated information.
Recommendations for Executive Action
Recommendation: To help ensure that the number of new H-1B workers who are subject to the cap--both entering the United States and changing to H-1B status within the United States--does not exceed the cap each year, U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services should take steps to improve its tracking of the number of approved H-1B applications and the number of issued visas under the cap by fully leveraging the transformation effort currently under way, which involves the adoption of an electronic petition processing system that will be linked to the Department of State's tracking system. Such steps should ensure that linkages to the Department of State's tracking system will provide Homeland Security with timely access to data on visa issuances, and that mechanisms for tracking petitions and visas against the cap are incorporated into U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services' business rules to be developed for the new electronic petition system.
Agency Affected: Department of Homeland Security
Status: In process
Comments: When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.
Recommendation: To address business concerns without undermining program integrity, U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services should, to the extent permitted by its existing statutory authority, explore options for increasing the flexibility of the application process for H-1B employers, such as (1) allowing employers to rank their applications for visa candidates so that they can hire the best qualified worker for the jobs in highest need; (2) distributing the applications granted under the annual cap in allotments throughout the year (e.g. quarterly); and (3) establishing a system whereby businesses with a strong track-record of compliance with H-1B regulations may use a streamlined application process.
Agency Affected: Department of Homeland Security
Status: In process
Comments: When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.
Recommendation: To improve the transparency and oversight of the posting requirement on the Labor Condition Application (LCA), as part of its current oversight role, the Employment and Training Administration should develop and maintain a centralized Web site, accessible to the public, where businesses must post notice of the intent to hire H-1B workers. Such notices should continue to specify the job category and worksite location noted on the LCA and required by statute on current noncentralized postings.
Agency Affected: Department of Labor
Status: In process
Comments: When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.
Recommendation: To improve the efficiency and effectiveness of its investigations of employer compliance with H-1B requirements, the Employment and Training Administration should provide Labor's Wage and Hour Division searchable access to the LCA database.
Agency Affected: Department of Labor
Status: In process
Comments: When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.
VIEW FULL REPORT (http://www.gao.gov/new.items/d1126.pdf)
More... (http://ashwinsharma.com/2011/01/25/h-1b-visa-program-reforms-are-needed-to-minimize-the-risks-and-costs-of-current-program.aspx?ref=rss)
No comments:
Post a Comment