Heard news, One Employer Can Only Sponser One LC/employee?

operations said:
This is a temporary victory. we are watching the USDOL. If they take any action we think is illegal, we will have no choice but knock at the court's door. I am dismayed and surprised that more lawyers did not join in this effort.

Anyhow, congratulations - for now.


PS Win or lose - NO EFFORT IS WASTED. I have seen plenty of changes in CIS working directly because of the lawsuit. I really dont care about winning. Keeping the work going keeps the govt. honest and aware of the little man - the individual. Also, keeps me out of trouble Lest I have too much free time. :D

PPS I was planning to work through the weekend on the lawsuit. Well, now I can wait till they come back with some other ill-considered policy. May be I will go catch a movie or something.

Congrats Rajiv and all of us.
A victory is a Victory small or BIG :)
 
Basically if you analyze why employers and petitioners want to file another LC while keeping the old one is because of all the uncertainty. They want to have safety (even if perceived though). In my opinion, the whole problem stems from 2 basic items: retrogression and even more - the 365-day-7th year extension rule.

What hoops did people have to jump through (including myself) to somehow squeeze an LC in before the last 365 days had started? Multiple LCs were filed to hopefully preserve the privilege to extend the H-1B based on some forever pending LC filed ages ago while at the same time trying to make use of the faster processing in PERM. The one-employer-one-job-one-employee LC causes other absurd scenarios such as I have experienced myself and witnessed among my friends: Abandon a good employer they might have happily worked for for years already since they cannot file a PERM LC with that employer since it might jeopardize the 'safe' pending LC - and join a new employer (often last-minute jumps sometime around the 5th or 6th year on H-1B). Is that fair towards the old employer that has supported them and sponsored them for many years? Obviously not - but one has to wonder if that is what CIS and DOL have in mind. Reality seems to indicate that they do unfortunately. And so we become job hopping GC desperate risk takers - driven by necessity more than by choice.

BECs could be cleared out in the next month if the following happened:
1) abandon the 365 day rule for 7th year H-1B extensions
2) allow people to retain their previous LC's PD regardless if it is an 'identical' filing (which is technically impossible anyway) if they are still with the employer who filed the original LC if they file PERM.
3) allow people who file PERM to extend their H-1B one last time (7th year only) even if they filed PERM already within the 6th year.
Item 3) may just be an interim provision until PERM works flawlessly since after that no extensions would be necessary anymore anyway - not accounting for retrogression.
4) since 2) preserves the original PD retrogression rules could be kept in place as they are right now (3-year ext. upon I-140 approval and so on).

In closing I somewhat agree with Sc3 that it might be a well intended rule but in the light of current CIS and DOL regulations as described above not conducive to furthering the use of PERM thereby reducing the workload of the BECs.

Sc3 said:
For once, I think I would like to side with USCIS... while their process of terminating the multiple filing could be contentious, I really think this is a good rule. Why would a employer want multiple filing for the same employee? Since the said employee can eventually work in only one position, multiple filings are nothing but a loophole for unscrupulous employers to hold on to multiple LCs and then trade them in odious "labor substitution" market. USCIS's rule to ban multiple filings are right on - they should follow up through legal means and close down multiple filings.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
GC_2000,
your points are right, and in the current situation the multiple labor from one employer for one employee is needed.
But you also know that employers just flaunt the rules for their favour rather than to help the employees. I have personally known 5-6 of my friends who have been a victim of their employers greed. They delayed the orignal LC by all means possible. I am not saying this just for the heck of saying, I can tell you the details exactly what tactis were employed by them to delay the LC especially when it became clear last year that EB3 numbers are going to be retrogressed by the end of the year.
These people had no choice but to file in PERM again even though the original LC got cleared after Jan 2005. For one the LC cleared just one week into 2005. They ended up paying another $2000 for filing in PERM EB2. Now that there are two LC and the employee is going to use the PERM EB2 LC to file for 485, the original one is with the employer and he will use it later to sell it to some other hapless person looking for Labor substitution at a hefty price. Offcourse the employer will have to wait until the EB3 Priority dates clear in order to make profit out of that labor. Its like a future investment.

I think the USCIS dint realize ealier that these rules will be abused by the employers to harass the employees, but I guess they dont care as such. Also now the reason they want to do away with multiple LC is not because they are concerned about the hapless employees. All this is mainly ways to acheive the 6 monthprocessing time by the end of 2006.
As I said before this rule is good but only after USCIS have first cleaned up the house.
 
neocor said:
But you also know that employers just flaunt the rules for their favour rather than to help the employees. I have personally known 5-6 of my friends who have been a victim of their employers greed. They delayed the orignal LC by all means possible.
I have seen it with my own eyes. After HR promised me in writing even to take care of GC in fastest possible way (RIR) they didn't do anything for the next 1 1/2 years. Only when my 6th year was approaching did they bother to move. I contacted the lawyer repeatedly and was told: we'll get to it when the time comes.' Well, as you can see from my profile I got laid off just a couple of months before AC-21 could have been useful and already into my 6th year. What as mess.

neocor said:
Now that there are two LC and the employee is going to use the PERM EB2 LC to file for 485, the original one is with the employer and he will use it later to sell it to some other hapless person looking for Labor substitution at a hefty price. Offcourse the employer will have to wait until the EB3 Priority dates clear in order to make profit out of that labor. Its like a future investment.
Since they want to do away with LC substitution that will take care of the 'investment'.
 
Urgent Help Needed

Respected Sir/Madam,

My employer filed a petition on 9th Aug 2005 for conversion of my B1 Visa to H1 Visa. We received the WAC # and I guess the approval intimation will come only in October end or later. However, until then I will not be able to work and I have to stay here. Is it possible for me to go India now? In that case will we be required to change the petition from change of status to overseas filing?

I am a CPA frm California and currently I hold a 10 yr. Multiple Visitors Visa.

If the change is permissible and we change it, will it affect the answer to my petition?

Can they reject my petition in such a scenario?

And, will I get a visa stamp from Mumbai Consulate?

If my H1 is rejected either from USA or Mumbai, does that mean that my visitor visa is also void?

Awaiting an early reply!!!!!
 
Mr. Rajiv..Thank You!

Thank you for all your support! Do you know of any timeframe DOL will be issuing a clarified response on their last FAQ? My company and I are supposedly applying for another LC through PERM/EB2 but this FAQ is holding us up.

Best regards,

RIR/CA/EB3
PD: 09/25/03
RD: 10/04/04
BEC#: P-04303-30451
RECD 45DL: 02/17/05
RPLD 45DL: 02/23/05
 
I'm really confused now. I just got my EB3 application certified. It was a mistake and laziness on part of me previuos lawyer who mixed up applications and filed many people under EB3 category though they were supposed to be EB2. But when we found out that it was too late. Anway, that lawyer was fired already.
Now EB3 is retrogressed for Other countries (I'm European). And I would like to try to resubmit LC application through PERM in EB2 category. Since EB2 for other countries is still current, it does make sense. Is that true that my employer is supposed to cancel my already approved LC I already received in order to file PERM? Or it's still possible to file another application and keep my old one just in case? I know that in case if I had I-140 approved and changed job I would be able to keep PD. What if I had I-140 and staied with the same employer and filed new LC? What's then? Only questions. I did not find anything useful on this forum or FAQ's published by DOL.
 
First of all I would like to thank Mr. Khanna for this effort. We are fortunate to have some one like you to lead the immigraton community during good and bad times.

I would like to ask you a question following this development. Does this mean DOL will allow multiple filing and would not deny the 2nd application filed for the same alien from same company (different position)?

I have a pending RIR in BEC and would like to file a PERM for different position from the same company. What is the likelyhood that they will deny the RIR due to the filing of the PERM application.

Your input is very much appreciated. I think this will also help others in this forum to take the right decesion.

Thanks,



operations said:
This is a temporary victory. we are watching the USDOL. If they take any action we think is illegal, we will have no choice but knock at the court's door. I am dismayed and surprised that more lawyers did not join in this effort.

Anyhow, congratulations - for now.


PS Win or lose - NO EFFORT IS WASTED. I have seen plenty of changes in CIS working directly because of the lawsuit. I really dont care about winning. Keeping the work going keeps the govt. honest and aware of the little man - the individual. Also, keeps me out of trouble Lest I have too much free time. :D

PPS I was planning to work through the weekend on the lawsuit. Well, now I can wait till they come back with some other ill-considered policy. May be I will go catch a movie or something.
 
Victoria97 said:
I would like to ask you a question following this development. Does this mean DOL will allow multiple filing and would not deny the 2nd application filed for the same alien from same company (different position)?

+++++++++I think USDOL should not outright deny duplicate filings. They will have to assess each case individually.

Victoria97 said:
I have a pending RIR in BEC and would like to file a PERM for different position from the same company. What is the likelyhood that they will deny the RIR due to the filing of the PERM application.


+++++++++++++++++++Your lawyers should help you assess that.

Victoria97 said:
Your input is very much appreciated. I think this will also help others in this forum to take the right decesion.

Thanks,
 
PERM as second application

Hi All,

My company is about to file my PERM application in EB2 category in first week of October 2005. I already have a remanded EB2 application with PD July 2001. I wanted to confirm that the second PERM application does not put my first application in any form of danger. I do understand that DOL revoked their initial statement of only one LC application per employee-employer. Can someone please confirm ? I hope I've not missed any updates from DOL in this matter.

-- Thanks
 
Top