FINAL DRAFTS for backlog Petition

D

dsatish

Registered Users (C)
Hi All,
OK, now we have two final drafts. One by Edison and one by me. These drafts are a result of combined ideas of several people and they may have some common points. I want this thread dedicated to Final drafts so that people can read them and leave their feedback. I have created this thread because not many people read the other thread where we have been discussing about the draft.
I am posting version 3.1(prepared by me) below.
I request Edison to post version 2.2 here. Then let every one comment on both the drafts and let's see what changes we need and what points should carry to the ALL FINAL draft. Hopefully, by end of today, let's push it to Rajiv (ofcourse, it's my suggestion only) .
 
Version 3.1

To,
Mr Prakash Khatri
Citizenship and Immigration Ombudsman
Dept of Homeland Security.

Subject : Request for reducing the huge backlog for Employment based I485 applications (Application to Register Permanent Residence / Greencard)

First, we would like to congratulate you on your appointment as the Citizenship and Immigration Ombudsman at Department of Homeland security. For the past one year, we have been a voiceless group and we were passing through very difficult times because of the slow progress of our applications at California, Nebraska, Texas and Vermont Service centers. In your appointment, we see the only hope of our voice to be heard at BCIS.

The Processing Delays
Till last year, in most of the service centers (except Texas) Employment based I485 applications used to take less than 1 year for approval. But with the introduction of additional security checks and shortage of staff at BCIS, the I485 application process time has now increased to more than 19 months at all the service centers, with Texas Service Center already taking more than 2 years. Worse, this processing time is increasing from each passing month with BCIS officially changing it (increasing it) every month.

Our Hardships
The severe processing delay is affecting our lives enormously. We are not sure of our future, we can not take some important decisions in our lives and our career advancement is hampered because the applicant has to remain with the same employer (or) similar job. The employers are taking advantage of the above restrictions and the severe processing delays have only helped in extending this forced bondage. A general feeling of frustration over these ever-swelling waiting periods is very negatively affecting all of us.

Our Contribution to America
We all came to this country when it was in desperate need of speciality skilled workers. The people behind this petition includes Sceintists, highly skilled computer experts, System Analysts, Innovators, Doctors, Teachers etc. We played an important role in making the American companies establish and maintain their lead in global markets. We are now an integral part of almost every major American company. Our presence is critically important for the growth of American business and American Economy. While pursuing our American dream, we will continue to contribute towards making this country lead the world technologically and economically.

President Bush's promise
President Bush made a pledge to reduce the Immigration and Citizenship processing times for all types of applications to less than 180 days. While we understand the practical difficulties being faced by BCIS, we feel that no serious effort was made by BCIS to reduce the processing time of Employment based I485 applications, to less than 1 year. If BCIS does not take bold and decisive steps now, soon the processing times will reach 36 months or more.

Our Expectations
We request you to understand our pathetic situation and help us make our voice heard at BCIS. Some of our main suggestions are listed below :

1. Give higher priority to Employment Based I485 applications
2. Automate / improve the Name check and Security check.
3. Automate the overall approval process
4. Increase the validity period of Finger Printing
5. Eliminate need for EAD and Advance Parole renewal
6. Better Customer Service over phone. We should be able to know the exact status
of our applications.
7. Initiation of a special backlog reduction drive for Employment based I485
applications. It should be taken as a project.
8. Allott some adjudicators to exclusively work on old cases (which have Receipt
date prior to the current processing month, but not yet approved).
9. Conditional approval for cases where BCIS did not get final results of Name or
Secuity check.
10. Finally, please get back to us with what BCIS is going to do on these suggestions.


We request you to discuss all the above issues with senior BCIS officials and inform us of the decisions taken. We see in you, a bright opportunity for us to communicate with BCIS about the issues facing us.


Regards,
Employment based I485 Applicants









Attachments
Appendix A : Hardships faced by EB I485 applicants due to processing delays
Appendix B : Explanation of Suggested Solutions
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Appendix B (version 3.1)

Appendix B
---------------

Explanation of Suggested Solutions

1. Give higher priority to Employment Based I485 applications :
Each time some task is given priority, it is being taken up at the expense of Employment Based I485 applications. Some of these tasks include TPS, Religious workers cases, Asylee cases etc. While we appreciate the urgency attached to these tasks, BCIS should not do this at the expense of EB – I485 applications. On an average each of us are living in this country for more than 6 years, paying our Taxes and there by making contribution to public coffers which enables the government to pay wages to all the government employees including BCIS employees, Defence, State and other local bodies. So it should be understood that we are as important, if not, more important, to this country than any one who has recently entered this country as a Asylee or Religiuos worker. The way we are treated, we feel that BCIS is treating us as irrelevant or less important immigrant group.

2. Automate the Name check and Security check :
Name check and security and check processes should be fully automated. If BCIS Currently has automated systems, then improvements should be made to these processes so that they work more efficiently. Also the applicants should have a phone number where they can check the status of Name check and Security check results.

3. Automating the overall approval process :
After an applicant is finger printed, the application simply sits in the queue for its turn to be picked up by an officer. The application remains in this idle state for more than an year. This is mainly due to high application volume, shortage of staff, delays in security check etc. We understand these practical constraints and hence we feel that the only solution, without involving new legislation, is to automate the process. The I485 application approval process should be automated so that all the applicants who passed the Name check, Security Check and Medical Check, will automatically get approved. This will reduce the processing time to less than 1 year. The medical exam results should also be automated. BCIS should modify the Medical examination form so that the Doctor will check one of the following options : Pass (or) fail. All the applications with the pass option should be eligible for automatic approval. Only those applications which failed in either name check, Medical check or Security check, should be handled manually.

4. Increase the validity period of Finger Printing :
Refinger printing after 15 months, is causing a main delay to the main process. Changes should be made so that Finger printing results can be stored for more than 15 months. Till that is done, BCIS should allow pending applicants to goto the BCIS local office on their own and submit second finger prints, if their first Finger Printing is done more than 15 months back. This step will avoid additional paper / clerical work at the BCIS main offices.

5. Eliminate need for EAD and AP renewal :
The EAD renewal is severely affecting the I485 processing because this is of higher priority. BCIS should think of suitable strategies so that there would not be any need for EAD renewal. One of the suggestions is to automate the approval process. Determine the priority of the EAD application when it is received. If it is a first time EAD, then work on it only if the H1B visa expires very soon. Otherwise, it should be set for automatic approval after 5 or 6 months. If it is a renewal application, then it should be set for automatic approval 45 days before the expiration of the current EAD.

6. Improved Customer Service :
The current customer service over phone is not satisfactory. We are not getting any information about what happened to our applications. They are only noting down our questions and saying that they will send us a written notification within 4 weeks. Most of the time these written notices contain the same matter as published on the online status web page. They do not give any details about what is causing the delay in approval and they do not tell us when we can expect the approval. The cover of uncertainty and mystery should be removed from the process and BCIS should provide more transparent and more efficient customer service, both online and over the phone. BCIS should assign some officers who can look into cases that are in pending status for more than 2 months due to the same reason (name check or security check reports etc). Customer Service pesrson should direct all those calls to these officers.

7. Initiate Backlog reduction drive :
BCIS should make an action plan to reduce the backlog of Employment based I485 cases. The action plan should have defined milestones, it should be transparent and it should be effective. BCIS should dedicate one or two months in near future, for Employment based I485 cases (Example : BCIS declares December’2003 as a month dedicated to reducing the backlogs of EB I485 applications).
This is especially required because BCIS has never given top priority to our cases in the recent past, where every other type of cases (Religious, TPS, Asylee) was given higher priority and processed in a timely manner.

8. Clearing the Long Delayed cases :
Currently there are many instances where BCIS is processing the applications received in a particular month, where as thousands of applicants of previous months are not approved. BCIS should seriously address this issue. We suggest that BCIS should allocate some adjudicators to exclusively work on the old cases.
Also BCIS should improve their systems so that they can get to know when they receive some update on an old (pending) case. Currently it appears that the concerned adjudicators are not getting any signals when a particular pending case( pending due to name or security check ) receives the required information from other systems or applicants.

9. Conditional Approval of I485 :
If for a given application, BCIS could not get any reply from FBI or CIA within a reasonable time (say 2 months), then BCIS should approve that application with a condition that if they receive any negative report on the candidate, he will be called for interview and the Greencard can be revoked. This will put an end to endless waiting suffered by some applicants due to resource problems at other security agencies. Alternately if BCIS thinks that this is not feasible due to strict security guidelines, than they should atleast introduce some procedure where they conditionally approve a candidate and update the website saying that “this case is conditionally approved, pending security check. The approval letter will be sent after getting the security report”. This idea can have multiple benefits. It frees the applicants from employment bondage, which is their main problem. Secondly, it improves the processing time and helps in reducing the backlog.

10. Feedback on this petition and above requests :
We request BCIS to get back to us through a public statement about what actions they are planning to take to reduce the backlog for Employment based I485 applications.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Version 2.2


To Citizenship and Immigration Ombudsman
BCIS

Subject: Employment based Immigration backlog reduction request from employment based Immigration applicants

Dear Mr. Prakash Khatri,
We would like to congratulate you on your appointment as the Citizenship and Immigration Ombudsman at Department of Homeland security. We, the immigrant community, have long awaited for someone with deep experience and liaisons with the industry like you to be appointed by Bureau of Citizenship and Immigration Services(BCIS) so that we could communicate effectively with BCIS.

We are writing this letter to request you to devise proper measures to reduce the processing time for employment based immigration applications and to convey the hardships caused to the applicants due to the perpetual delay in processing these applications.

Benefits of Employment based immigration
Immigration has been an integral part of America since its inception. Immigrants stimulate the United States economy in general, enrich American culture and enhance the United States influence in the world. Contrary to the popular myth that immigrants may take American's jobs, they have created employment opportunities for millions of Americans by developing new products and establishing business ventures. The continued success of the United States largely rests upon its successful pro-immigration policy.

Factors influenced backlogs of Employment based immigration applications
The radical change in the United States immigration policy has adversely affected the employment based immigration application processing. The process was further delayed due to
1. Temporary freeze of all immigration application processing for auditing and the enforcement of FBI security check in late 2002;
2. Incorporation of legacy INS into the newly created the Homeland Security Department as Bureau of Citizenship and Immigration Service (BCIS);
3. Shifting priority, by some service centers, to expedite processing of religious worker's immigration applications and to meet deadlines related to Temporary Protected Status (TPS) programs.
4. Lack of resources and efficiency. The limited number of adjudicators working on employment based immigration applications. Standard operating procedures have not been improved.

Common Problems of Employment based immigration applicants
The processing delay has caused immense hardships for the employment based immigration applicants. Some of the problems encountered by the immigration applicants due to the processing delay are
1. Difficult to obtain the case specific information after termination of customer service at all service centers and establishment of the National Customer Service Center (NCSC);
2. Employers discriminate their employees due to their ambiguous legal status;
3. Career advancement is hampered since the applicant has to maintain same or similar job as mentioned in the underlying labor certification;
4. Additional expenditure to renew the Employment Authorization Document (EAD) and the Advanced Parole for travel every year;
5. Innumerable obstacles to renew the driver license.


Proposed Solutions to reduce backlogs of Employment based immigration applications
Recently, Mr. Eduardo Aguirre, director of the Bureau of Citizenship and Immigration Services explained the reason for backlog of immigration applications. We are glad that he would give priority to reach the goal set by the President of the United states of America, Mr. George W. Bush to reduce wait times on immigration benefit applications to no more than 6 months by the end of 2006. However, we would welcome some imminent and intermediate actions to reduce the backlog of employment based immigration applications.
We would like to suggest few measures that would advocate backlog reduction of employment based immigration applications at BCIS.
1. We request BCIS to consider employment based immigration applications affected by the interminable delays as high priority and expedite their processing;
2. BCIS should consider the adversity of the employment based immigration applicants due to the perpetual delay in processing their immigration applications and it should recommend the interim Permanent residence for them
or
BCIS should consider issuing the Employment Authorization Document (EAD) and the Advanced Parole for travel with multiple year validity to stimulate the backlog reduction of immigration applications at BCIS;
3. Also, improve the overall procedure by
3.1 extending validity period of Finger printing report or automatically schedule finger printing in timely manner before the expiry of the report;
3.2 adjudicating all the applications ready to be adjudicated immediately after submitting the additional requested evidence;
3.3 scheduling interview in timely manner for employment based immigration applications transferred to local BCIS office;
3.4 enhancing the online case status by providing the detailed information about the present status of the applications such as security check results, finger print request notice date, case assignment date and additional requested evidence details; and
3.5 accelerating the security check process and providing status of security check results similar to finger print status service.

Immigrants have been crucial to America's dominance and dynamism in the global economy. Immigration policy must focus on the admission of individuals with high skills that will benefit American society. Legal immigration process has to be reformed and steps implemented to reduce massive backlog of employment based immigration applications, so that we could continue America's tradition of welcoming immigrants in to the United states while also providing proper comfort and security for all American citizens.

Sincerely,
Immigration applicants and their well wishers

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Thanks Edison for posting version 2.2
To every one,
There is a dedicated effort of a lot of people behind these two drafts. Myself and Edison happened to gather different points from all these sources and we are more of a chief editors than authors. So from now on while giving comments, please refer to these documents as version 2.2 vs version 3.1, NOT as dsatish letter and Edison's letter.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
How about one version?

We are creating multiple threads. This really confuses people. We also created two versions of the petition. People don't know which one to comment on. Why can't we work on one?

Edison (or dsatish), if you could consolidate version 2.2 + 3.1 + appendices into one document we may be able to knock out a real final draft quickly.

Guys, please DON't create any more threads. Please remain with this one or the one atop the list.

Thanks.
 
Re: How about one version?

Originally posted by YJay
We are creating multiple threads. This really confuses people. We also created two versions of the petition. People don't know which one to comment on. Why can't we work on one?

Edison (or dsatish), if you could consolidate version 2.2 + 3.1 + appendices into one document we may be able to knock out a real final draft quickly.

Guys, please DON't create any more threads. Please remain with this one or the one atop the list.

Thanks.
Click to expand...

YJay,
I accept you are right. You are very well aware that I've been consolidating everyone's suggestion and incorporating them in our letter.
Anyway, I'll redo the letter to consolidate as per your suggestion again.
 
Re: How about one version?

Originally posted by YJay
We are creating multiple threads. This really confuses people. We also created two versions of the petition. People don't know which one to comment on. Why can't we work on one?

Edison (or dsatish), if you could consolidate version 2.2 + 3.1 + appendices into one document we may be able to knock out a real final draft quickly.

Guys, please DON't create any more threads. Please remain with this one or the one atop the list.

Thanks.
Click to expand...

YJay,
I fully disagree with you.
1. A new thread is created because most of the people do not visit those top constant threads. I hate that idea of fixed threads
2. We can't have one final draft unless one person prepares it. This is a voluntary forum and we have not assigned the task of finalising the draft to any one. These two are the final drafts. They vary greatly in style and content . Let people comment which letter is good . Let them take a complete look at both the letters and give feedback. We should select the final letter by either voting or by majority opinion as expressed in the posts here.
 
when can you finally give Rajiv a version? Don't wait and wait, just give to Rajiv. Both are well written, don't wait for others input for a long time.
 
Voting?

dsatish,
1. My purpose is to get the petition out quickly. If "a new thread" was created and we kept the thread alive, it would be fine. However, we had 4 or 5 threads on this topic and people bring them up once a while. Let's try keep this thread and the one on top of the list.
2. Yes, many people contributed to the effort. Edison has been incorporating everyone's comments including yours. Why do we create a separate version? United, we are strong. I am suggesting the two versions being merged into one.

Asking people to vote sounds like we are initiating a political agenda. I hate the process being dragged tooooo long. Let's see if we'll get the needed commnets or votes.

Remember, Mr Rajiv S. Khanna, said that the petition does not need not to be long. It does not need to be perfect either. It can never be perfect anyway. Everyone will have different tastes. It's the number of signature that matters a lot.

Dengdeng, sai, topaz, cina and all spectators. Please comment /vote ASAP. I like to see it finalized. I nominate Edison to take the lead in consolidating the final version. If there is more than one version, I'll go with the one Edison comes up with.

Thanks.


Originally posted by dsatish
YJay,
I fully disagree with you.
1. A new thread is created because most of the people do not visit those top constant threads. I hate that idea of fixed threads
2. We can't have one final draft unless one person prepares it. This is a voluntary forum and we have not assigned the task of finalising the draft to any one. These two are the final drafts. They vary greatly in style and content . Let people comment which letter is good . Let them take a complete look at both the letters and give feedback. We should select the final letter by either voting or by majority opinion as expressed in the posts here.
Click to expand...
 
Re: Voting?

YJay, I fully agree with you .
I think we should get it out ASAP. There was a slight change in my story that I have corrected and posted.

Let us get it out for signature .

-sai


Originally posted by YJay
dsatish,
1. My purpose is to get the petition out quickly. If "a new thread" was created and we kept the thread alive, it would be fine. However, we had 4 or 5 threads on this topic and people bring them up once a while. Let's try keep this thread and the one on top of the list.
2. Yes, many people contributed to the effort. Edison has been incorporating everyone's comments including yours. Why do we create a separate version? United, we are strong. I am suggesting the two versions being merged into one.

Asking people to vote sounds like we are initiating a political agenda. I hate the process being dragged tooooo long. Let's see if we'll get the needed commnets or votes.

Remember, Mr Rajiv S. Khanna, said that the petition does not need not to be long. It does not need to be perfect either. It can never be perfect anyway. Everyone will have different tastes. It's the number of signature that matters a lot.

Dengdeng, sai, topaz, cina and all spectators. Please comment /vote ASAP. I like to see it finalized. I nominate Edison to take the lead in consolidating the final version. If there is more than one version, I'll go with the one Edison comes up with.

Thanks.
Click to expand...
 
My View:

Edison, dsathis...great job.

I am not for voting though I may be having my own liking. My suggestion is to send both the petition to Rajiv for him to decide which would be more effective. We need to convey to Rajiv that he has the executive power to change / amend, as he may feel necessary. At least he can suggest which one to be sent.

I also believe there is no point waiting any longer. Everyone got chance to put in their views and we need to a draw line at some point.
 
GUYS,
PLEASE GIVE YOUR INPUTS. It's unfortunate that not many people are posting their comments. This makes the job of finalising the Letter difficult. Only YJay has clearly spoken about his choice. Dengdeng and Topaz said that both are good. What about other active people like Cinta, mogli, frantic, Mavishka, kjkool etc ?

YJay,
It's not true that i have not incorporated other's suggestions. It is also not true that more people have favoured version 2.0.
When version 2.0 and 3.0 were published almost at the same time, a lot of people commented(including me) about the flaws in version2.0 where as there were virtually no comments on version 3.0. I take it as a complement for my version where as you seem to take it as disinterest. Now that we have the two final drafts, let people clearly give their preference. I know that you and perhaps sai prefers version 2.2 . I think that Topaz prefers version 3.1 (It is an improvement of his 3.0). Where as earlier Dengdeng preferred version 2.0, now he says that both v2.2 and v3.1 are good. Please rememember that version 3.1 is a vast improvement over version 3.0 for its emotional tone and presentation of our solutions.

To All, let me explain why i am pushing version 3.1
Advantages of version 3.1 (compared to version 2.2)
----------------------------------
1. stronger emotional tone
2. The main letter is shorter and simpler
3. Our demands are covered more clearly and comprehensively .
4. Though the structure of both the letters are same, i feel the
flow is better in my version. I don't like 'Benefits of Immigration'
appearing at such an early stage in the letter.
5. My version offers the solutions in detail in ther appendix.

I once again request every one to say which version they like more. Thanks for those who have already given their preference.
We will go with whiich ever version more people prefer. If we get clear answer , then we will select that. If we don't get any responses from people (other than Dengdeng, Sai, Topaz and YJay) then let us ask Rajeev to pick one from both. I am actually ready, if we want to send both the letters to Rajiv right away. That may be best idea if we don't want to cause any more delays and any more futile discussions.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
my two cents

Edison, dsatish,

Good work. Comparing the two versions, version 2.2 is a better document. Both versions however are rated poorly as petitions. Both are timid, not frank. There is not a good enough explanation as to who we are, I mean an inclusive one, like NIW, EB1, EB2, EB3, etc. The contribution of all these people is not well explained, namely. Our contribution besides the Economy in other areas like social, taxes, etc is not well explained. There is fear to mention things that matter. For example "our contribution is in the financial, high-tech, etc contributing to the economy as well as the SECURITY of this great nation."
The things/suggestions are not professional. I think they should be omitted. It is their job to find solutions not OURS.
We should also highlight the discrimination in society, the workplace, and how cheap the EAD is in the American society today.

Suggestion: Both versions should be given to Mr Rajiv as well as the Appendices with any possible finances involved. Also the overall language lacks key words that make an impression.
see for example an interesting article in "www.ailf.org" and compare the wording only.

This is just my comment.
 
Edison, datish, you don't need wait others for opinions. You're wasting precious time. Just give the versions to Rajiv. and let him decide what to take what not. I think both are good petitions.
You can't always get an unanimous agreement. Just give Rajiv.
We really need get this thing going. It takes at least two weeks to sign, one week to prepare, then it's Oct.

Please, just pass the petition to Rajiv.

Rajiv, if you're on this thread, can you give some suggestions to Edison and datish's petitions and tell us what to keep what to
omit?

Thanks!
 
I agree with dengdeng. Let's put the ball in Rajiv's court and cool our heels. From tomorrow (8/19), let's moveto phase 2. Let's start discussing about the next steps. I will ask Rajiv (through the Main thread to which he is subscribed) to look at both the versions.
 
Edison and dsatish, you both should mention the processing time doubled since the merge of INS to BCIS. before 2003, it was 11 months processing time, now it's 20 - 24 months at VSC. We need point out FBI testified before congress in June that the offical maximum time of a name check is 3 months, then why case processing time doubled, minue three, where is the 6 months extra time. BCIS needs to explain where is the bottleneck, I don't think name check is always the issue. Since 85% of cases will be cleared in 3 days.
 
Let’s get the ball rolling guys.

Let’s not start a discussion, which one is better. Both are good. At least both are made with lots of sincerity.

This is the quote from my earlier posting “My suggestion is to send both the petition to Rajiv for him to decide which would be more effective. We need to convey to Rajiv that he has the executive power to change / amend, as he may feel necessary. At least he can suggest which one to be sent. “

I just want to draw your attention to the word "effective" and let an expert decide it.
 
Request to Mr Rajiv Khanna

I agree with Cinta,
I humbly request Rajiv arrange to sharpen the contents in the petition so that it will appear as professional one.
 
Cinta,
I agree that our version of petition lacks key words like articles posted on www.ailf.org but those articles are from professional journalists or from professional legal writers. I guess we don't have professional legal writer waiting for employment based immigration. I would have been really happy if some professional handled the petition framing process. But as I always say just the hardships faced by us due to slow AOS process is good for the petition.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top