GC for future employment and AC-21 and its affect

Q

qwertyisback

Registered Users (C)
Now everybody learned that AC-21 don't change "sponsor" but just changes employer. See following link

http://boards.immigrationportal.com/showthread.php?t=159623
OR Rajiv's supporting comments.
http://boards.immigrationportal.com/showpost.php?p=1036470&postcount=109

Now lets evaluate how it affects GC for future employment case....

Consider GC application for future job scenerio.(Applicant is not working for sponsor employer) In such case, I beleive applicant can still use AC-21... RIGHT. That is,he can change job after 180 days after filing 485. Now some people claim that after using AC-21, applicant still has to work with "new employer" after getting GC. Then in above case, does applicant has to work for sponsorer or new employer??
 
qwertyisback said:
Now everybody learned that AC-21 don't change "sponsor" but just changes employer. See following link

http://boards.immigrationportal.com/showthread.php?t=159623
OR Rajiv's supporting comments.
http://boards.immigrationportal.com/showpost.php?p=1036470&postcount=109

Now lets evaluate how it affects GC for future employment case....

Consider GC application for future job scenerio.(Applicant is not working for sponsor employer) In such case, I beleive applicant can still use AC-21... RIGHT. That is,he can change job after 180 days after filing 485. Now some people claim that after using AC-21, applicant still has to work with "new employer" after getting GC. Then in above case, does applicant has to work for sponsorer or new employer??
Click to expand...

Not answer to scenerio stated above...

So for above case, does applicant work with sponsor or new employer??
 
JoeF said:
Can't get enough of fighting, do you???
Once and for all:
The law has that rules what happens after I-485 approval has not changed with AC21.
The applicant has to have the good faith intent to work for the (new, sponsoring, whatever-you-call-it) employer when the I-485 is approved. That's it. That has always been the case and still is the case. THe law has not changed.
Now, stop your fighting!
Geez, I am sick of you trying to discredit me! It won't work, because the law is what counts!!!
Click to expand...
Man you can't stop picking up fights with him, huh ? Look at his post...was he talking about you ? No then why you want to reply ?

You enjoy taking names and fighting with others ....your list of "troll" now has TheRealCanadian, dsatish, mrz,......and counting......
 
Americanwannbe, You like to discuss such exploratory situations... RIGHT, Whats your take on scenerio I just posted on this thread.
 
Forget everything, can anyone please explain me the rationale WHY, the USCIS should, in JoeF's words, "tie the employee to the new employer after AC21"?!!

I dont understand it.

I can understand the INS enforcing such a "tie-up" in the case where an employee leaves an employer soon after getting GC, leaving the employer holding the bag after incurring all the costs of the employee's GC.That is clear fraud.

But if USCIS is allowing the employee to change employers anyways using AC21, then what is the rationale for "tie-ing the employee to a new employer" who has incurred NO COST on behalf of the employee other than employing him? Where is the fraud in this? How does good faith intent come into the picture at all?

I cant even argue that iam "letting the USCIS know of a change of jobs" since it is not even mandatory to inform the USCIS of AC21.

I fail to see the rationale. Sorry for bringing the subject up but just had to say this!
 
qwerty,

My view is that the applicant should work for the new employer and not the sponsoring employer. Also my view is the common sense approach - as long as you dont intend to commit fraud on the USCIS you are okay to work for any employer. The USCIS has the burden of proving that you committed fraud, analyzing the "rapid course of events" upon getting the GC. That holds good for any employer.

The ONLY way for USCIS to prove fraud is analyzing the "rapid course of events after GC" - there is no other way.

The problem we are having is because we are putting WAY too much emphasis on "time periods" while not taking into account things in totality - WHY we are considering time periods in the first place.

The entire question is basically whether you have committed fraud or not - change employers a 100 times it doesnt matter to the USCIS.

The question of the "sponsoring employer" is to make sure that somebody does not commit fraud - it is not to make you a SLAVE of the employer for any period of time.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top