California DOL (Regional) Tracking

Status
Not open for further replies.
Re: Re: bbi

Hi bbi,
My employer says that although they applied for an LC 3+ years after they first hired me, they cannot count the 2+ years as experience in the LC. Does the SESA & or the Regional Office consider at the time that they review the Labor application, that I have had (2+ time from RD to current) years of experience?

Its seems rather unfair that they would'nt, if they would'nt, since this is the only company that I have worked for after getting out of school!!

Thanks

Originally posted by bbi
Hi eb2august01

I keep a copy of the AEC draft (used to fill out
the LC application forms). You can find job descriptions there.
Click to expand...
 
Logicators: Thanks for the reply

Logicators:

Thanks for the reply. The REGIONAL in "REGIONAL non-RIR queue" makes me think that they are talking about the DOL non-RIR queue and not the State Level. Because I know friends who clearly got letters with "Remanded to State" or "readvertise with SESA or State Workforce Agency".

Have you seen this same letter that anyone received?

Thanks
Winner
 
Certified?

Sorry if this is a stupid question.

I've been checking the AVM daily (415 975 4617) for the past two weeks since we had to retest the market.

Today the status changed from 'Received in the Regional Office. Updated May 2002' to 'Certified. Updated June 17 2003'.

I'd really like to hear someone tell me that this means its been approved!

Douglas.
 
Re: Re: Re: bbi

Hi navdod,

What your employer said is probably correct, all though I
never confirmed this with a lawyer.
This is obviously unfair, but what can we do about it?
Jump ship to another company seems to be the only way
to get the 2+ year counted.

bbi

Originally posted by navdod
Hi bbi,
My employer says that although they applied for an LC 3+ years after they first hired me, they cannot count the 2+ years as experience in the LC. Does the SESA & or the Regional Office consider at the time that they review the Labor application, that I have had (2+ time from RD to current) years of experience?

Its seems rather unfair that they would'nt, if they would'nt, since this is the only company that I have worked for after getting out of school!!

Thanks
Click to expand...
 
Re: Re: Re: Re: bbi

Originally posted by bbi
Hi navdod,

What your employer said is probably correct, all though I
never confirmed this with a lawyer.
This is obviously unfair, but what can we do about it?
Jump ship to another company seems to be the only way
to get the 2+ year counted.

bbi
Click to expand...

I have asked the lawyer the same question and the answer is
that the employer can't use the number of yrs worked for them towards the green card filing. The only experience that can be counted is work for other employer or even work for same employer if they weren't your Sponsor like H-1 (OPT or some other form)

So if you have worked under OPT for the employer then they can use that experienced which was gained as a Student Trainee.
 
Re: Certified?

Hi Dgarstang:

Your Labor, we are all sure, is approved!! Congratulations!! We will hopefully catch up wtih you soon in the 140stage.

regard,
udi75

Originally posted by dgarstang
Sorry if this is a stupid question.

I've been checking the AVM daily (415 975 4617) for the past two weeks since we had to retest the market.

Today the status changed from 'Received in the Regional Office. Updated May 2002' to 'Certified. Updated June 17 2003'.

I'd really like to hear someone tell me that this means its been approved!

Douglas.
Click to expand...
 
Re: Re: San Francisco DOL Letter

Originally posted by logicators
It means that its remanded to state. Clearly written in "Your petition has been placed with its contemporaries in the Regional non-RIR queue."

AVM may take some time to update, which is normal.

logicators
Click to expand...


I think if they mentioned that it is placed in Regional office queue along with its contemporaries, my guess is it is in DOL in NON-RIR. I do not think that it is sent back to SESA.
 
Remanded to State ?

I was just wondering.....On what to expect once the case
is being "Remanded to state".

I mean is it just a waiting game or do I need to coordinate
with my HR dept & Attorney or so...


If anyone can give an input that would be very helpful.


Thanks,
Vjy
 
no action

Hi! There

In this forum everybody is talking about the cases received at DOL in April’02 thru August’02, but my case is with Mar’21st 2002 receipt date and there is no change in the status since then. So, I was just wondering, whom should I contact to know why it’s still pending without any action? Your input is highly appreciated…

Case details:
Case # : 095XXXXX
DOT Code: 999.151-031
Received Regional Office: 03/21/2002
Current Status : Received Regional Office On 03/21/2002.


Thanks in advance.
.
Varma
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Varma,

U should contact your HR people at your employer place. I had similar experience. my application RD is Jan 11 2002 and there is no update on AVM. few weeks back i incidentally checked with HR guys and they said they got a letter with 3 options and they submitted results in last week of may.

check with your HR or attorney, may be u are is same boat.


VCB
 
Varma,

U should contact your HR people at your employer place. I had similar experience. my application RD is Jan 11 2002 and there is no update on AVM. few weeks back i incidentally checked with HR guys and they said they got a letter with 3 options and they submitted results in last week of may.

check with your HR or attorney, may be u are is same boat.


VCB
 
Anybody has RIR case transmitted to DOL with salary lower than the prevailing requirement? Is there additional processing time (at Wage Determination Dept as told by my lawyer) for such case other than the normal RIR queue which now processing Aug 2002?

I have no clue of how things work in DOL. Any information is appreciated.

Thanks!

xqg:confused:
 
I dont think there is separate dept to process lower wage cases. I dont have clear idea but i have some info which may usefull to u. orginally when my application is submitd to labor dept in 2001 june my salary is lesser then previlaed wage and our attorny got rebutal for wage from soem other dept.

what i heard was, based on rebutal employer has to meet prevaled wage requirement at the time of I485 approval. u can cehck with yout attornry for more info.

vcb.
 
question about prevailing wage

Hi all,

I too have a question about prevailing wage. Back at the beginning of times:) so when my LC was submitted to CA DOL (almost 2 yrs ago), my attorney told me that my annual salary at that time was a couple K lower than the prevailing wage and that my employer will raise it after the I140. But as you all know, a recession came and I got a paycut so my salary now is well bellow the prevailing wage that shows on the LC application. My question is: given then downward spiraling wages in the Bay area- what is the prevailing wage my employer will have to meet granted my LC gets approved? If the prevailing wage for my occupational category at this point of time is lower, my employer will still have to pay me my the salary on the LC application for the 6 mos after the I485 submission?
My second questions is: should I expect a rebuttal based on prevailing wage at this point? (my case is currently with CA DOL, passed SWA)

thanks a lot in advance,
Ana
 
Good News and Bad News About PERM Labor Certification Program

The DOL officials here in the conference are tight-lipped about the dates of final rule release and starting of this program. They just confirm that the rule will be released in the "late Fall" with the 45-day window. Does any one know when the Fall starts and when it ends? One thing which is obvious is that the release date of the regulation and the actual launch date appear to be further pushed off. Everybody here is guessing that the earliest date could be December 2003 or January 2004 or soon after that. Accordingly, their previous prediction of July or September 2003 release of the final rule with the 30-day window (meaning October 2003) turns out to be a history at this point. In fact, the DOL officials warns people out there that they should not waste their money to initiate any expensive recruitment campaign with fixed prediction date of release of the rule and starting date of the program as the released final rule can also be challenged by some politically powerful employers and the effective date can be delayed. This is a bad news if any of you are waiting for the PERM program.

Now good news is that there is a hint that the final rule will be different from the Proposed PERM rule which contained many poisonous elements. Obviously they softened the requirements reflecting the comments which they had received after they had released the Proposed Rule. No details are known at this time, but all information indicates that the final regulation will look really different from the Proposed Rule. This is a good news. Just hold your breath for a while.

By the way, we now have a new Chief of Foreign Labor Certification Division in the DOL, who is well informed and an expert when it comes to a foreign labor certification. His name is William Carlson. We welcome his boarding as the captain of this ship and encourage everyone out there to join this reporter to extend contratulations to the Chief. He seems to be a perfect choice for the job. Wonderful!
 
http://murthyforum.atinfopop.com/4/OpenTopic?a=tpc&s=1024039761&f=8674093861&m=8324058972&inc=-1


When a petition is denied RIR it automatically defaults to the traditional or regular labor certification process. The case is than remanded from Region with instructions to the local SWA to issue advertisement instructions for supervised recruitment.

In most cases the case is put back into the regular LC queue at the spot it would have been if the case were originally filed in the regular process. Denial of RIR can happen for many reasons including layoffs, insufficient recruitment or failure to have key text (like must be willing to travel and relocate in CA). An RIR denial is not necessarily an indicator that s/e are not being approved but maybe related to a specific default one particular case.

:)
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top