Future course of action by retrogression hit EB3

[Rose101]

Guys

It is hard to digest the fact that EB3 (Beyond Apr'01) is going to be stalled for long (Years along) with fears of further retrogression in near future. I share the pain expressed by Saras and understand wise ness in frank / rational opinions by United Nations. Now it is the time of some form of action that is required to change the law or pursuing other alternatives expressed in this forum.

The options discussed to retrogressed EB3 as expressed in this forum are:

1. Just be Optimistic and be beaten by other's rules to share and suffer
2. Unified efforts such as IV or some other groups
3. Industry lobbying through firms and organizations
4. Alternative nearby country (Such as Canada) adaptation for immigrations
for countries those are having fairer laws than here.
(For most, this is a bitter option in vague)
5. Return back (For most, this is not an option at all)
6. AC21 usage with considerable risk
7. Non AC 21 usage of EAD usage with more risk
8. Widespread campaign and finding creative ways to make law makers understand the loss of skilled and efficient labor those are kept in continuous restriction and are treated unfairly due to so called 245 illegal amnesty invasions of legal immigration system.
9. Influencing media to get a better understanding of the sufferings.

I do not know but interested in finding the way to get out of this thoughtless injustice done to EB3 community. Most of them are in despair and hopeless that includes me.

Is there fairer situation to be achieved by any effort? If so, which is the best way now ?

 

[Rose101]

In my opinion, a unified effort should be directed on 2 primary concessions.

1. I-140 & I-485 concurrent application capability even though PD is not available.

2. AC-21 rule change that, employees can go for a different job after 180 days or more (If permanent intent is to be protected it can be 1 year from date of 485 application after I-140 approval) with out any restrictions. Since existing AC-21 rules are so ambiguous, it is contributing to Chaos than benefiting. Permanent intent to work for an employer is not clearly defined in the system with respect to a period to make it more controlling point. After certain period there should be freedom to choose. Currently this permanent intent is dependent on uncertain variables such as till GC and/or some period after getting GC.

These two above changes can give some consolation for for most of legal immigrants.

 

[RAYDHAN]

Immigration Voice

Rose,
Most of these concerns are being handled by Immigration Voice (IV). Kindly visit www.immigrationvoice.org and make a difference by contributing.

Good luck.

 

[marlon2006]

Is immigration Voice now taking action to introduce a request for a relief bill separetely from the illegal aliens ? A number of bills included visa numbers increase to EB applicants even before the October 2005 visa bulletin.


2. AC-21 rule change that, employees can go for a different job after 180 days or more (If permanent intent is to be protected it can be 1 year from date of 485 application after I-140 approval) with out any restrictions. Since existing AC-21 rules are so ambiguous, it is contributing to Chaos than benefiting. Permanent intent to work for an employer is not clearly defined in the system with respect to a period to make it more controlling point. After certain period there should be freedom to choose. Currently this permanent intent is dependent on uncertain variables such as till GC and/or some period after getting GC.

These two above changes can give some consolation for for most of legal immigrants.[/QUOTE]

 

[marlon2006]

Since the idea is that the employment base GC is intended to be applicable to 'a permanent job offer from sponsoring employer', I would say that doing:
For people with PD > 3 years and I-140+I-485, let the poor soul change jobs on EAD, no restrictions.

In my opinion, a unified effort should be directed on 2 primary concessions.

1. I-140 & I-485 concurrent application capability even though PD is not available.

2. AC-21 rule change that, employees can go for a different job after 180 days or more (If permanent intent is to be protected it can be 1 year from date of 485 application after I-140 approval) with out any restrictions. Since existing AC-21 rules are so ambiguous, it is contributing to Chaos than benefiting. Permanent intent to work for an employer is not clearly defined in the system with respect to a period to make it more controlling point. After certain period there should be freedom to choose. Currently this permanent intent is dependent on uncertain variables such as till GC and/or some period after getting GC.

These two above changes can give some consolation for for most of legal immigrants.

 

[RAYDHAN]

Iv

Is immigration Voice now taking action to introduce a request for a relief bill separetely from the illegal aliens ? A number of bills included visa numbers increase to EB applicants even before the October 2005 visa bulletin.


2. AC-21 rule change that, employees can go for a different job after 180 days or more (If permanent intent is to be protected it can be 1 year from date of 485 application after I-140 approval) with out any restrictions. Since existing AC-21 rules are so ambiguous, it is contributing to Chaos than benefiting. Permanent intent to work for an employer is not clearly defined in the system with respect to a period to make it more controlling point. After certain period there should be freedom to choose. Currently this permanent intent is dependent on uncertain variables such as till GC and/or some period after getting GC.

These two above changes can give some consolation for for most of legal immigrants.

Marlon,
Believe me, if it was that easy to introduce a "legal immigrants only" bill in Congress, IV would've already pursued that avenue by now. IV has to work with limited funds and other scarce resources. It is simply phenomenal what they have achieved in 3.5 months. Because of IV we are seeing some favorable amendments being introduced in the current bills on the senate floor. Before the Oct 2005 visa bulletin, we did not have a unified and structured approach for our battles. IV has given us exactly that. If anyone has any better way to deal with this problem, we're all ears!!!

Good luck to us all.

 

[baby_mde]

I ask congress to introduce a law for leagal immigrants First, then illegal if they want.

Please do not waste time by fighting.

 

[ufo2002]

We should never ever have our problems solved by amendments made to a bill meant for illegals. That would only compound the problem of distinguishing legal and illegal people, and would hurt more than help us. I agree that a separate bill dealing with legal applicants is much more preferable.

 

[marlon2006]

Raydhan, I do appreciate all IV efforts so far. Don't get me wrong.

So that means the lobbyst IV hired tried to sit down with bigwigs such Sen. Specter, Sen. Frist immigration staff who could introduce a bill very specific, kind of relief bill which could very clearly state "recapture of visa numbers". At least something like that ?
If so, can you tell us what was the outcome of such conversation ?

Raydhan, my feeling is that if such relief bill is introduced for such legitimate cause, very few senators would turn that down. Am I wrong ? If Senators explain what the recapture is about during the light of the day, I would like to know why senators or immigration reduction groups would have a problem with it. It is likely that Numbersusa and other immigration reduction groups would be OK with that as well. There are many things that can go wrong while we wait for such immigration reform bill attached to the illegal alien cause. God Forbidden, the long it takes to pass a bill, chances are another terrorist strike can hit the US and delay things to us even further.

Marlon,
Believe me, if it was that easy to introduce a "legal immigrants only" bill in Congress, IV would've already pursued that avenue by now. IV has to work with limited funds and other scarce resources. It is simply phenomenal what they have achieved in 3.5 months. Because of IV we are seeing some favorable amendments being introduced in the current bills on the senate floor. Before the Oct 2005 visa bulletin, we did not have a unified and structured approach for our battles. IV has given us exactly that. If anyone has any better way to deal with this problem, we're all ears!!!

Good luck to us all.

 

[saras76]

They don't care ..

Raydhan, I do appreciate all IV efforts so far. Don't get me wrong.

So that means the lobbyst IV hired tried to sit down with bigwigs such Sen. Specter, Sen. Frist immigration staff who could introduce a bill very specific, kind of relief bill which could very clearly state "recapture of visa numbers". At least something like that ?
If so, can you tell us what was the outcome of such conversation ?

Raydhan, my feeling is that if such relief bill is introduced for such legitimate cause, very few senators would turn that down. Am I wrong ? If Senators explain what the recapture is about during the light of the day, I would like to know why senators or immigration reduction groups would have a problem with it. It is likely that Numbersusa and other immigration reduction groups would be OK with that as well. There are many things that can go wrong while we wait for such immigration reform bill attached to the illegal alien cause. God Forbidden, the long it takes to pass a bill, chances are another terrorist strike can hit the US and delay things to us even further.

marlon,

Although our demand for a separate legal immigration bill is very valid, politicians are not interested in raising this issue. As much as they like to make statements in support of legal immigrants, they don't care about our backlogs so long as we continue working and paying taxes. Bills are introducted only when there is political gain or tremendous pressure from constituents. A legal immigration bill provides none of these for politicans. Infact I can see significant opposition to a legal immigration bill this year as well. That bill will be opposed on the basis of jobs being taken away from qualified Americans etc ...

Like it or not, our fate is tied with the comprehensive immigration bill and the comprehensive immigration bill holds no wait without issues such as border control, guest worker program and illegal immigrants. Legal immigrants are inconsequetial in this mix and hence we will never get enough traction to push a bill specifically for us. Its best that we understand this now.

regards,

saras76

 

[Rose101]

Saras

Thanks for finer point. You are right. We need to consider immigration bill as a long term goal and is poised to get lot of opposition and inadvertenetly tied up with illegal border issues. What we should note is the opposition for all kinds of immigration changes.

So as an alternative strategy, instead of trying to get rid of retrogression, IV or any other group should put efforts primarily on some low profile concessions such as loosening of AC21 restrictions and Concurrent filing capability even when PD is not available etc. By achieving something alternative to GC gives most GC benefits for older PD applicats and these efforts need not necessarily mixed with long term immigration bills. And since this effort is different, I believe there are less chances that these amemndaments catch lot of opposition.

As a short term solution, what more we need if we are in right direction to get most of GC benefits?

marlon,

Although our demand for a separate legal immigration bill is very valid, politicians are not interested in raising this issue. As much as they like to make statements in support of legal immigrants, they don't care about our backlogs so long as we continue working and paying taxes. Bills are introducted only when there is political gain or tremendous pressure from constituents. A legal immigration bill provides none of these for politicans. Infact I can see significant opposition to a legal immigration bill this year as well. That bill will be opposed on the basis of jobs being taken away from qualified Americans etc ...

Like it or not, our fate is tied with the comprehensive immigration bill and the comprehensive immigration bill holds no wait without issues such as border control, guest worker program and illegal immigrants. Legal immigrants are inconsequetial in this mix and hence we will never get enough traction to push a bill specifically for us. Its best that we understand this now.

regards,

saras76

 

[marlon2006]

I think we need to keep pushing. I know we are not visible, but we need to try a relief.

marlon,

Although our demand for a separate legal immigration bill is very valid, politicians are not interested in raising this issue. As much as they like to make statements in support of legal immigrants, they don't care about our backlogs so long as we continue working and paying taxes. Bills are introducted only when there is political gain or tremendous pressure from constituents. A legal immigration bill provides none of these for politicans. Infact I can see significant opposition to a legal immigration bill this year as well. That bill will be opposed on the basis of jobs being taken away from qualified Americans etc ...

Like it or not, our fate is tied with the comprehensive immigration bill and the comprehensive immigration bill holds no wait without issues such as border control, guest worker program and illegal immigrants. Legal immigrants are inconsequetial in this mix and hence we will never get enough traction to push a bill specifically for us. Its best that we understand this now.

regards,

saras76

 

[saras76]

Agreed ..

Saras

Thanks for finer point. You are right. We need to consider immigration bill as a long term goal and is poised to get lot of opposition and inadvertenetly tied up with illegal border issues. What we should note is the opposition for all kinds of immigration changes.

So as an alternative strategy, instead of trying to get rid of retrogression, IV or any other group should put efforts primarily on some low profile concessions such as loosening of AC21 restrictions and Concurrent filing capability even when PD is not available etc. By achieving something alternative to GC gives most GC benefits for older PD applicats and these efforts need not necessarily mixed with long term immigration bills. And since this effort is different, I believe there are less chances that these amemndaments catch lot of opposition.

As a short term solution, what more we need if we are in right direction to get most of GC benefits?

Rose101,

I totally agree with you. Smaller steps towards retro relief might get us somewhere. An all out demand for legal immigration relief has very little chance of succeeding.

regards,

saras

 

[techy2468]

guys let me add something:

NOTE: I am not a part of IV, i have not even contributed.

i will put this bluntly........its very much impossible to get a seperate bill for us LEGALS(since hardly 2k participate in any activity)........so please stop dreaming about it...

our best options are what IV is currently trying to do, get amendments added to existing/new bills......and hope for the best...

no matter how we present.....numberusa or other anti-immigrants will oppose any bill....even legal ones....because they all demand more visas.......and hence we will have a tough time finding a supporter for legal immigration...since there is not added benefit like the illegals(millions of votes)

 

[saras76]

We do need to keep trying ..

I think we need to keep pushing. I know we are not visible, but we need to try a relief.

Marlon,

We should keep trying, there is no doubt about that. At the same time we have to be very cautious of not wasting to much time and energy towards a goal that is headed for failure right from the get go.

regards,

saras

 

[marlon2006]

I don't want to discredit work IV or other independent members have done - including myself - to have EB provisions including in the current bills. We have to admit though, that EB increase in visa numbers were suggested by policymakeres well before IV existence. That said, we need to be careful to waste our resources in something that is no longer a priority. I know you can put some amendments here and there and IV apparently got the amendment for country quotas and other OK, but what else is left to be included in those bills to make us happy ?

God willing this comprenhensive immigration bill may pass this year, but it will be tough. If congress at this time acts based on sanity and reasoning, you won't see anything passing this year. If just myself calls lawmakers to ask the indepedent bill request, obviously that won't help though.

Marlon,

We should keep trying, there is no doubt about that. At the same time we have to be very cautious of not wasting to much time and energy towards a goal that is headed for failure right from the get go.

regards,

saras

 

[Rose101]

Strike where it is weak

Well. We have seen other regimes / groups even before IV. IV's work is commendable. Undoubtedly we need such a long term effort defiitely. Adding long term goals into existing bills is a very good achieved thing and surely it helps us in the long run. But along with many, I am looking for a short term concession rather than a long term law change for this situation.

Since the mood in US is upbeat against immigration weather Legal or illegal, mass faxing techniques backfired. Any immi bills doom to fail. Even massive illegal immigrant rallies backfired to some extent.

We need to have some introspection on lessons learned so far or else we will be washed away in the flow of tidal waves of uncertainity and chaos.

We have some laws those are very unclear and unjust. Why not try cleaning them up front. If all efforts are directed towards a covert target such as correcting AC21 to its true spirit and to applicant's advantage, I do not claim for VISA numbers or GC immediately. We have to note that all current immigration laws pinch workers in a clandestine way (It is a form of mockery slavery - of course voluntary). And more to it, they are unfairly interpreted in such a way by USCIS to inflict a hung-up environment / undue suffering to long waited GC seekers. AC21 is an example of such breed. It needs to be revised in terms of periods and broad definition of work areas. Like wise if one can file 485 on 140 approval without any link to PD, EAD saves many from uncertainity. Priority date should be verified only once.

Based on various cases of AC21, it allows some scot-free but it is like a speeding ticket and may or may not happen until get caught. And unlike a traffic violation, changing job is for freedom and for efficient work. So streamlining AC21 should bring cheers to employers (Barring a minority sponsoring employers) and to GC final stage workers. For example, I am working currently for employer (GC sponsored consultancy) with some reduced capabilities due to my hesitation to use AC21 or EAD freely. But I have much potential and can put much efficient work on a job change where I will get more job satisfaction that increases rapid productivity for new direct employer. If much of the potential of high skilled IT workers are drained like this, how much growth US corporate world will stand against Euro Asian competition in future and how much can be outsourced?

 

[techy2468]

Rose101......we have done this talks before...........i would suggest try getting in touch with IV.......you will come to know how difficult it is to push for something which we want......and how easy it is to keep talking to lawmakers and hope they listen....and then they introduce some amendments.....

afterall you have to understand that lawmakers dont gain anything by pushing our cause.........and since immigration is such a hot topic.....why should they risk their neck??

 

[marlon2006]

Just my humble thought.

Earlier I also noted that if the AC21/change jobs on EAD rule could be streamlined to let earlier PD holders change jobs without restrictions, that would be a major relief. However, passing that specific provision seems to be even more complex than introducing a bill to recapture unused visas numbers. since one may argue that we came here to work on a specific occupation. That's my feeling. If there is a way to try, that would be ideal though.

Regarding faxing senators, I think if one is requesting a reasonable fix for a legitimate problem (i.e., reasonable increase of visa numbers for EB applicants) my feeling is that it doesn't hurt us a lot. I am not sure how much that helps either since lawmakers would know we are not voters. Based on comments I have seen so far, the illegal alien march backfired big time. Americans are way more aware of the issue now.

Well. We have seen other regimes / groups even before IV. IV's work is commendable. Undoubtedly we need such a long term effort defiitely. Adding long term goals into existing bills is a very good achieved thing and surely it helps us in the long run. But along with many, I am looking for a short term concession rather than a long term law change for this situation.

Since the mood in US is upbeat against immigration weather Legal or illegal, mass faxing techniques backfired. Any immi bills doom to fail. Even massive illegal immigrant rallies backfired to some extent.

We need to have some introspection on lessons learned so far or else we will be washed away in the flow of tidal waves of uncertainity and chaos.

We have some laws those are very unclear and unjust. Why not try cleaning them up front. If all efforts are directed towards a covert target such as correcting AC21 to its true spirit and to applicant's advantage, I do not claim for VISA numbers or GC immediately. We have to note that all current immigration laws pinch workers in a clandestine way (It is a form of mockery slavery - of course voluntary). And more to it, they are unfairly interpreted in such a way by USCIS to inflict a hung-up environment / undue suffering to long waited GC seekers. AC21 is an example of such breed. It needs to be revised in terms of periods and broad definition of work areas. Like wise if one can file 485 on 140 approval without any link to PD, EAD saves many from uncertainity. Priority date should be verified only once.

Based on various cases of AC21, it allows some scot-free but it is like a speeding ticket and may or may not happen until get caught. And unlike a traffic violation, changing job is for freedom and for efficient work. So streamlining AC21 should bring cheers to employers (Barring a minority sponsoring employers) and to GC final stage workers. For example, I am working currently for employer (GC sponsored consultancy) with some reduced capabilities due to my hesitation to use AC21 or EAD freely. But I have much potential and can put much efficient work on a job change where I will get more job satisfaction that increases rapid productivity for new direct employer. If much of the potential of high skilled IT workers are drained like this, how much growth US corporate world will stand against Euro Asian competition in future and how much can be outsourced?

 

[techy2468]

marlon..........lawmakers do not know that we are not voters..........infact they do not even read 95% of faxes.....and they assume that everyone is a genuine voter.....hence they usually try keep good terms with all people who write to them.....by sending a general reply to all of them....( i have got 2-3 replies so far in response to faxes i have sent.....and they were pretty meaningless to what we had faxed)