Green.Tech
08-05 06:09 PM
I am not sure this will count as an illegal behavior. Of course, I am not a lawyer. But companies typically ask for relocation reimburesement and lawyer expenses, etc. to be paid back pro-rated, in case the employee leaves within a year or so.
Again, this is not really asking for money for labor, but just making sure that the company gets their expenses back in case employee leaves within an year.
Btw, I do not have any such agreement with my company. But I think this is standard. Unfair, maybe. Illegal? I dont know....
Good point!
For one, my employer contract (which I haven't signed yet) says that I will need to reimburse for ALL GC related fee that they have incurred on my behalf if I leave ANYTIME during my GC application is pending. I know such contracts are common (or are they?) but I am not sure if they can ask me to reimburse them for labor cert fee (which as per DOL is employers responsibility) or even for that matter any other application fee (which I understand are employers responsibility as well?). So, basically they can contract me for all the legal fee (attorney fee) but not ALL fee.
More thoughts?
Again, this is not really asking for money for labor, but just making sure that the company gets their expenses back in case employee leaves within an year.
Btw, I do not have any such agreement with my company. But I think this is standard. Unfair, maybe. Illegal? I dont know....
Good point!
For one, my employer contract (which I haven't signed yet) says that I will need to reimburse for ALL GC related fee that they have incurred on my behalf if I leave ANYTIME during my GC application is pending. I know such contracts are common (or are they?) but I am not sure if they can ask me to reimburse them for labor cert fee (which as per DOL is employers responsibility) or even for that matter any other application fee (which I understand are employers responsibility as well?). So, basically they can contract me for all the legal fee (attorney fee) but not ALL fee.
More thoughts?
wallpaper Father Jack insists he
chanduv23
07-27 03:03 PM
Thank you attorney Sauer and all other IV members for replying to my question.
I am little confused at the reply I received from USCIS. They are saying that my application cannot be adjudicated till visa numbers are available.
Do they mean they will not pre adjudicate my case till visa number is available ?
or
Do they mean that pre adjudication is done, but the visa number assignment process (adjudication) will be done once visa number is avalable?
The processing dates are passed my received date and notice date in the processing center where my application is processed.
Please let me know your thoughts.
In very rare ocassions people get to know that their 485 is preadjudicated.
Check out this case
http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/344724-post54.html
Now, once preadjudicated does not mean that your case may not be reviewed again (My thoughts)
I am little confused at the reply I received from USCIS. They are saying that my application cannot be adjudicated till visa numbers are available.
Do they mean they will not pre adjudicate my case till visa number is available ?
or
Do they mean that pre adjudication is done, but the visa number assignment process (adjudication) will be done once visa number is avalable?
The processing dates are passed my received date and notice date in the processing center where my application is processed.
Please let me know your thoughts.
In very rare ocassions people get to know that their 485 is preadjudicated.
Check out this case
http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/344724-post54.html
Now, once preadjudicated does not mean that your case may not be reviewed again (My thoughts)
munnu77
04-15 03:21 PM
Continue with the GC..The wmployer has to pay the salry on the GC only after your I 485 is approved. Wht i think, wht you are getting now has no connection with GC,
if they are decresing your salry, inform the DOL , you will be alright if ur decreased salry is more thn wht is required by the DOL.
Contact an attorney, i am sure there is a way out.
if they are decresing your salry, inform the DOL , you will be alright if ur decreased salry is more thn wht is required by the DOL.
Contact an attorney, i am sure there is a way out.
2011 his father Jack and his
GotFreedom?
07-23 10:48 AM
Thank you for all the responses.
One question remains though that what does it mean when the I-94 says paroled till 3rd March 2009?
How does one prove the legal status in the country?
One question remains though that what does it mean when the I-94 says paroled till 3rd March 2009?
How does one prove the legal status in the country?
more...
jayleno
03-11 11:26 AM
Its 100% fraud and abuse. I'm suprised you even thought of asking about this. The answer is in your question.
I worked for an employer in WY 2004 as a physician and since then i resigned and moved onto another job with a new labor and I-140. However last year at the time of July isa bulletin fiasco, I asked my employer from WY in 2004 to file for an I-140 based on the previous approved labor condition in 2004 to retain that priority date under EB -2.
Employer knows I have no intent of joining them after the green card and I have my own practice , so i donot intend to join the practice.
In this scenario, if this considered a misuse of retaining priority date and how do i prove the intent and will the USCIS allow a situation like this?
I worked for an employer in WY 2004 as a physician and since then i resigned and moved onto another job with a new labor and I-140. However last year at the time of July isa bulletin fiasco, I asked my employer from WY in 2004 to file for an I-140 based on the previous approved labor condition in 2004 to retain that priority date under EB -2.
Employer knows I have no intent of joining them after the green card and I have my own practice , so i donot intend to join the practice.
In this scenario, if this considered a misuse of retaining priority date and how do i prove the intent and will the USCIS allow a situation like this?
BMS1
08-21 07:07 PM
You are saying ur PD was Sec 2005? Mine is Dec 2005. Should I also expect it sometime soon :)?
If it is Dec 2005 you must be from non-retro and going by the many approvals for non-retro, you should certainly expect it soon (especially if other checks are complete)
If it is Dec 2005 you must be from non-retro and going by the many approvals for non-retro, you should certainly expect it soon (especially if other checks are complete)
more...
Mo-Ti
06-15 02:44 PM
a very/too late appointment, but I just made this for another kidding "project" (with a few stolen things of fester, trying to make it worse) and thought you guys have to see it :x
http://scu.cutegirl.at
http://scu.cutegirl.at
2010 Jack Kerouac Quote
ramus
06-11 12:16 PM
Seems to me you joined IV for then a year now..
Can I ask you simple question.
What is your contribution towards IV.
Contribution could be in any form-- fund/invite friends/send email to reporters/ and so on..
Please answer here to we all will know.
Mr. Sanju,
We are all aware of what going on at the Senate floor and also about the ammendments that put forth on the floor. So my question is clear anc simple what ammendment is supported by CORE IV and what are we looking for.
Because the passing of the current version of the bill will effect all the old cases which many people are in and I wont allow that to happen. I will try my best to avoid this situation to happen. Even though i have a MAster in engineering I will not support SKIL progran that will void the previously pending cases. Good try core IV yto make member to work towards the betterment of few people You know what such people are called" SELFFISH". Guys beware on whaT ACTIONS YOU ARE DOING SO THAT YOU WONT REPENT.
Can I ask you simple question.
What is your contribution towards IV.
Contribution could be in any form-- fund/invite friends/send email to reporters/ and so on..
Please answer here to we all will know.
Mr. Sanju,
We are all aware of what going on at the Senate floor and also about the ammendments that put forth on the floor. So my question is clear anc simple what ammendment is supported by CORE IV and what are we looking for.
Because the passing of the current version of the bill will effect all the old cases which many people are in and I wont allow that to happen. I will try my best to avoid this situation to happen. Even though i have a MAster in engineering I will not support SKIL progran that will void the previously pending cases. Good try core IV yto make member to work towards the betterment of few people You know what such people are called" SELFFISH". Guys beware on whaT ACTIONS YOU ARE DOING SO THAT YOU WONT REPENT.
more...
pappu
10-18 10:16 AM
I received a letter from BEC and it says
This Notice of Findings is the Department’s statement of its intent to deny the application.
The following reasons were attached in the document:
1. - The job opportunity has been and is clearly open to any qualified U.S worker.
The case file indicates that telephone calls were placed made to U.S. applicants but the calls failed to reach the following applicants: A,B,C (name of the applicants)
Although telephone calls were unsuccessfully places to the three U.S. applicants, no certified mailing or other attempts were made to contact the applicants. An employer must prove that its overall recruitment efforts were in good faith.
The employer may rebut this finding by:
Providing documentation that certified mail was sent to the four applicants which demonstrates the employer made the minimally acceptable effort to recruit U.S. applicants.
2. The department of labor requires that when submitting an Application for Alien Employment Certification the case file must contain two sets of original ETA 750’s Parts A and B. your case file contains only one set of original ETA750’s. The other set of 750’s in the case file are photocopies. ETA 750’s with photocopied signatures are not acceptable for processing. In order to continue processing the Application for Alien Employment Certification you must send an additional set of original ETA 750’s.
A copy of the Form ETA 750, parts A and B, have been returned in the event that any changes are necessary. The amended copies must be returned with your resubmission. Any amendments made to the ETA 750, Part A, must be initialed and dated by the employer: and any amendments made to the ETA 750, Part B, must be initialed by the alien, as appropriate.
It is the employer’s responsibility to submit the rebuttal in a timely manner directly to the certifying officer.
I got already my 7th year extension and it valid till Nov 2007. I spoke with my attorney and he seems to be positive, but he could only able to find two of the three candidates email correspondence.
Please let me know if you have faced similar situation or any suggestions. What is the possibility of my case gets approved?
sorry to hear this. There are several instances where employers have been callous or did not take adequate interest in filing the application. My experience with lawyers is also the same, especially if the lawyer is hired by the company. I would suggest members who are yet to hire an attorney to hire their own attorney instead of going with the company attorney. a company attorney will only work in the interest of the company. if you dont have a choice in this matter, then also hire your own attorney as a consultant and run each and every document by him before it is submitted to the authorities. It will keep you safe from such irregularities. Some extra money spent on having your own lawyer as a consultant is always helpful.
In your case i recommended seeking advice from multiple lawyers. submit your question to our attorney- sonal verma for the confrence call. legal advice for IV members is free in these conference calls. In future try to be on top of things wth HR with your application and be aware of all documents and proccedures instead of depending on HR and lawyers. I am sure there must be a way your situation can be sorted out. good luck.
This Notice of Findings is the Department’s statement of its intent to deny the application.
The following reasons were attached in the document:
1. - The job opportunity has been and is clearly open to any qualified U.S worker.
The case file indicates that telephone calls were placed made to U.S. applicants but the calls failed to reach the following applicants: A,B,C (name of the applicants)
Although telephone calls were unsuccessfully places to the three U.S. applicants, no certified mailing or other attempts were made to contact the applicants. An employer must prove that its overall recruitment efforts were in good faith.
The employer may rebut this finding by:
Providing documentation that certified mail was sent to the four applicants which demonstrates the employer made the minimally acceptable effort to recruit U.S. applicants.
2. The department of labor requires that when submitting an Application for Alien Employment Certification the case file must contain two sets of original ETA 750’s Parts A and B. your case file contains only one set of original ETA750’s. The other set of 750’s in the case file are photocopies. ETA 750’s with photocopied signatures are not acceptable for processing. In order to continue processing the Application for Alien Employment Certification you must send an additional set of original ETA 750’s.
A copy of the Form ETA 750, parts A and B, have been returned in the event that any changes are necessary. The amended copies must be returned with your resubmission. Any amendments made to the ETA 750, Part A, must be initialed and dated by the employer: and any amendments made to the ETA 750, Part B, must be initialed by the alien, as appropriate.
It is the employer’s responsibility to submit the rebuttal in a timely manner directly to the certifying officer.
I got already my 7th year extension and it valid till Nov 2007. I spoke with my attorney and he seems to be positive, but he could only able to find two of the three candidates email correspondence.
Please let me know if you have faced similar situation or any suggestions. What is the possibility of my case gets approved?
sorry to hear this. There are several instances where employers have been callous or did not take adequate interest in filing the application. My experience with lawyers is also the same, especially if the lawyer is hired by the company. I would suggest members who are yet to hire an attorney to hire their own attorney instead of going with the company attorney. a company attorney will only work in the interest of the company. if you dont have a choice in this matter, then also hire your own attorney as a consultant and run each and every document by him before it is submitted to the authorities. It will keep you safe from such irregularities. Some extra money spent on having your own lawyer as a consultant is always helpful.
In your case i recommended seeking advice from multiple lawyers. submit your question to our attorney- sonal verma for the confrence call. legal advice for IV members is free in these conference calls. In future try to be on top of things wth HR with your application and be aware of all documents and proccedures instead of depending on HR and lawyers. I am sure there must be a way your situation can be sorted out. good luck.
hair Father Jack O#39;Neill (center),
extra_mint
02-06 11:41 AM
Congratulations Ivar.
Hi EveryOne,
I got my Green card in mail yesterday. I want to thank IV and everyone for all the support during this GC journey. I wish everyone all the best for their green card process. I wish everyone gets to file 485 irrespective of priority dates and ultimately get their green cards. This is a question to Admin, i have a recursive donation going on, I would like to make a one time donation and stop the recursive donation.
Thanks.
Hi EveryOne,
I got my Green card in mail yesterday. I want to thank IV and everyone for all the support during this GC journey. I wish everyone all the best for their green card process. I wish everyone gets to file 485 irrespective of priority dates and ultimately get their green cards. This is a question to Admin, i have a recursive donation going on, I would like to make a one time donation and stop the recursive donation.
Thanks.
more...
DDash
11-10 03:51 PM
http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/showthread.php?t=3779
WOW...its amazing to see how a simple thing (in my opinion) like volunteering can be such a big deal.
While it is legal to work on a L-4 why are H-4s not allowed to work? Beats me!
WOW...its amazing to see how a simple thing (in my opinion) like volunteering can be such a big deal.
While it is legal to work on a L-4 why are H-4s not allowed to work? Beats me!
hot with his father. Jack
newbie2020
08-17 04:13 AM
PA DMV requires atleast one document which has a later expiry to issue license, Take a letter from her employer stating she will be working in PA until a later date (Say 12/31/2011 eg). Show it to them and they will issue license.
more...
house Father Travis: Establishing
delax
11-08 01:43 PM
sury,
What that means is "All applications received before August 25, 2006 AND whose PD is current , are being processed"
If your PD is 2003 but you filed your I-485 after Aug'2006 your app will not be adjudicated.
If you filed before Aug'2006 but your PD is after Apr'2004, your app will not be adjudicated.
If your PD is before Apr'2004 and you filed your app before August 25, 2006, your app will be adjudicated..
This is to make sure people don't start expecting approvals and calling them left and right one day after filing if their PD is current. they need some time for every application, so they put in this 'processing date' which works in conjunction with 'priority date' to check if a case is approvable at any given time. They normally won't entertain calls enquiring about a case if the filing date does not fall within this processing date.
I beg to differ - while your general premise is accurate, I know of at least half a dozen people who filed 485 in June 2007 and got appproved over the last two weeks from TX Service Center - I dont think Aug 2006 is a hard date - like many other things with USCIS - they have an irrational passion for NOT applying the FIFO principle and we are expected to digest this irrational passion of theirs with dispassionate rationality.
What that means is "All applications received before August 25, 2006 AND whose PD is current , are being processed"
If your PD is 2003 but you filed your I-485 after Aug'2006 your app will not be adjudicated.
If you filed before Aug'2006 but your PD is after Apr'2004, your app will not be adjudicated.
If your PD is before Apr'2004 and you filed your app before August 25, 2006, your app will be adjudicated..
This is to make sure people don't start expecting approvals and calling them left and right one day after filing if their PD is current. they need some time for every application, so they put in this 'processing date' which works in conjunction with 'priority date' to check if a case is approvable at any given time. They normally won't entertain calls enquiring about a case if the filing date does not fall within this processing date.
I beg to differ - while your general premise is accurate, I know of at least half a dozen people who filed 485 in June 2007 and got appproved over the last two weeks from TX Service Center - I dont think Aug 2006 is a hard date - like many other things with USCIS - they have an irrational passion for NOT applying the FIFO principle and we are expected to digest this irrational passion of theirs with dispassionate rationality.
tattoo Oh no, Father Jack not the
vbkris77
09-22 10:38 PM
Corporations save more than 10K.. It doesn't work..
Average cost of employment in US for high tech is around 90$ per hour and social security
percentage is 6%, So the max is less than 10K per year or less than 0.5 USD per hour.
These companies actually pay far less than 90$ for offshore resources..
Since it really doesn't work, it has high chances of passage into bill :rolleyes: and president will promptly sign it before this session recesses.. :cool:
It will also be passed in an unanimous consent by both parties..
Title: Creating American Jobs and Ending Offshoring Act
Sponsor: Sen Durbin, Richard [IL] (introduced 9/21/2010)
Cosponsors Sen Dorgan, Byron L. [ND] -
Sen Reid, Harry [NV] -
Sen Schumer, Charles E. [NY] -
Introduced in the Senate.
This bill will give companies a two-year holiday from their share of Social Security payroll withholding taxes for each employee they hire to replace a worker at a foreign-based facility. The Creating American Jobs and Ending Offshoring Act would bar companies from taking tax credits or deductions for the cost of closing a U.S.-based facility to move the operation overseas.Companies could still take deductions for severance and job placement services for employees who lose their jobs as a result of a U.S. plant closing. Under the legislation, companies that close a U.S.-based business and expand it overseas would no longer be allowed to defer U.S. income taxes on foreign subsidiaries.
Reid has the option to set up a procedural vote next week
Average cost of employment in US for high tech is around 90$ per hour and social security
percentage is 6%, So the max is less than 10K per year or less than 0.5 USD per hour.
These companies actually pay far less than 90$ for offshore resources..
Since it really doesn't work, it has high chances of passage into bill :rolleyes: and president will promptly sign it before this session recesses.. :cool:
It will also be passed in an unanimous consent by both parties..
Title: Creating American Jobs and Ending Offshoring Act
Sponsor: Sen Durbin, Richard [IL] (introduced 9/21/2010)
Cosponsors Sen Dorgan, Byron L. [ND] -
Sen Reid, Harry [NV] -
Sen Schumer, Charles E. [NY] -
Introduced in the Senate.
This bill will give companies a two-year holiday from their share of Social Security payroll withholding taxes for each employee they hire to replace a worker at a foreign-based facility. The Creating American Jobs and Ending Offshoring Act would bar companies from taking tax credits or deductions for the cost of closing a U.S.-based facility to move the operation overseas.Companies could still take deductions for severance and job placement services for employees who lose their jobs as a result of a U.S. plant closing. Under the legislation, companies that close a U.S.-based business and expand it overseas would no longer be allowed to defer U.S. income taxes on foreign subsidiaries.
Reid has the option to set up a procedural vote next week
more...
pictures Pilot Quotes
gchopes
08-04 04:04 PM
my2cents - Agreed and Understood. But what if you are not on H1/H4 and just on EAD/AP aka AOS status. In that case you cannot mail the second AP and return on that. You need to return on the first AP.
Not True
All dual intention like H1b/H4 are treated differently. For those AOS applicants where they also have H1b/H4 status ( Not necessarily VISA stamped) ..they need to be here when filed and if they leave after filing then neither I-485 or I-131 will get cancelled.
After approval, you can mail them.
I have known 2 person whose spouses came without problem.
Now , If you are F1 or B1 pure non immigrant VISA and you leave without it being approved then you are in problem.
Not True
All dual intention like H1b/H4 are treated differently. For those AOS applicants where they also have H1b/H4 status ( Not necessarily VISA stamped) ..they need to be here when filed and if they leave after filing then neither I-485 or I-131 will get cancelled.
After approval, you can mail them.
I have known 2 person whose spouses came without problem.
Now , If you are F1 or B1 pure non immigrant VISA and you leave without it being approved then you are in problem.
dresses Father: Jack Faris
gc_bulgaria
02-12 02:47 PM
I would think Cross-Charegeability is automatic. I mean if one spouse is birth country India/China and one is ROW, I would think cross charegeability is automatic but then again not a 100% sure.
Oh no - Its not automatic. You would think there would be a better way than write on cover sheet in BOLD but even though its in their own law, it is not easy to get it applied (especially with TSC).
Oh no - Its not automatic. You would think there would be a better way than write on cover sheet in BOLD but even though its in their own law, it is not easy to get it applied (especially with TSC).
more...
makeup of Stuart#39;s father, Jack
ItsLife
05-06 09:17 PM
Why are u putting unrelated stuff here. You can always consult a lawyer for lawsuit
if u feel. Ofcourse nothing is free. U will need to pay a lawyer for that.
We can post IPL matches here, we can post people working on two jobs and all the advise for every thing and not for this poor guy who seeks advise.
This is a form for immigration issues and not only to get your Green card. Incase you forget that.
This is a very sad state then some seniors think they can talk trash or anything to other members. This needs to stop asap.
if u feel. Ofcourse nothing is free. U will need to pay a lawyer for that.
We can post IPL matches here, we can post people working on two jobs and all the advise for every thing and not for this poor guy who seeks advise.
This is a form for immigration issues and not only to get your Green card. Incase you forget that.
This is a very sad state then some seniors think they can talk trash or anything to other members. This needs to stop asap.
girlfriend Father Jack. Jan 12, 04:27 AM
gc_check
04-08 04:22 PM
Visa Bulletin For May 2011 (http://www.travel.state.gov/visa/bulletin/bulletin_5424.html)
Employment- Based All Chargeability Areas Except Those Listed
CHINA- mainland born INDIA MEXICO PHILIPPINES
1st C C C C C
2nd C 01AUG06 01JUL06 C C
3rd 22AUG05 15APR04 15APR02 08SEP04 22AUG05
Other Workers 08SEP03 22APR03 15APR02 08SEP03 08SEP03
.
Well, this shows the reality of demand for visa and a dire need for a solution.
Well, Congress will stills get paid even if the Govt. is shutdown and they do something!!! about this along with the tons of other items on their to do list :mad:
Employment- Based All Chargeability Areas Except Those Listed
CHINA- mainland born INDIA MEXICO PHILIPPINES
1st C C C C C
2nd C 01AUG06 01JUL06 C C
3rd 22AUG05 15APR04 15APR02 08SEP04 22AUG05
Other Workers 08SEP03 22APR03 15APR02 08SEP03 08SEP03
.
Well, this shows the reality of demand for visa and a dire need for a solution.
Well, Congress will stills get paid even if the Govt. is shutdown and they do something!!! about this along with the tons of other items on their to do list :mad:
hairstyles My father , Jack,
fromnaija
07-11 06:31 PM
I am not sure if my previous employer will support, even i am not sure if they have sent a I-140 cancellation request to USCIS.
Can i file 485 through my current employer based on previously approved I-140 as my current I-140 has priority date recapture request.
If your former employer will not support your GC application and you are not even sure if they already cancelled your 140, then you CANNOT file 485 based on that 140.
As chennai already advised you may have your 140 premium processed.
However, reading back your origiinal post I don't think you can file 485 until your new 140 is approved since you are porting PD. So your PD must be ported to the new 140 successfully and the PD current before you can submit 485. Sorry for the initial confusion.
Can i file 485 through my current employer based on previously approved I-140 as my current I-140 has priority date recapture request.
If your former employer will not support your GC application and you are not even sure if they already cancelled your 140, then you CANNOT file 485 based on that 140.
As chennai already advised you may have your 140 premium processed.
However, reading back your origiinal post I don't think you can file 485 until your new 140 is approved since you are porting PD. So your PD must be ported to the new 140 successfully and the PD current before you can submit 485. Sorry for the initial confusion.
maxy
10-16 01:19 PM
sounds good...thanks
look at your labor app... it states your proffered wage, job description etc. those are the terms and conditions... you can still get an EVL from your employer and have your lawyer (or have yourself) write a letter explaining how the EVL covers terms and conditions on the labor cert. in any case, this is a really stupid and unenforceable rfe... i mean how can the new employer even know whats in the labor and i-140? and without knowing that how can an employer "indicate" any compliance with t&c of labor and 140? i think you should be fine with just a plain evl that matches your job description and salary... at most, you can write a letter saying that "yeah the t&c continues to be valid".
my 2 cents.
look at your labor app... it states your proffered wage, job description etc. those are the terms and conditions... you can still get an EVL from your employer and have your lawyer (or have yourself) write a letter explaining how the EVL covers terms and conditions on the labor cert. in any case, this is a really stupid and unenforceable rfe... i mean how can the new employer even know whats in the labor and i-140? and without knowing that how can an employer "indicate" any compliance with t&c of labor and 140? i think you should be fine with just a plain evl that matches your job description and salary... at most, you can write a letter saying that "yeah the t&c continues to be valid".
my 2 cents.
santb1975
02-16 10:04 PM
^^^
No comments:
Post a Comment