How long to change job after GC

[gb111]

I am so sorry that you don't understand the difference between criminal defense lawyers and immigration lawyers.

Apology accepted.

In a particular case they have taken on, of course. But not with respect to general advice, e.g., on their website. You obviously have no clue about how law firms work. I have some highschool buddies who are lawyers now, so I have quite a lot more insight into that than you apparently have.
And your line about "as with any other profession" shows how clueless you are. Lawyers and doctors, for example, have ethics boards, and lawyers can get debarred for bad conduct (e.g., former president Clinton...)
Thank you for providing a perfect example of your cluelessness...

I'm constantly amazed that you have friends given your general pig-headedness. Maybe you need to hang out more with these so-called imaginary friends of yours rather than corrupting this board with your cluelessness.

btw, what is the difference between immigration lawyers and criminal defense lawyers? Aren't they goverened by the same ethics laws you quote above?

Don't assume that you are the only one who knows stuff.

Thank you for providing a perfect example of your naivete.

So take your condescending, all-knowing, mulish attitude and shove it.

You are far WORSE than dsfgh who you were so pissed at.

It goes to show how wrong you are, given that the entire immigration community on this forum is against you.

Keep up being hated, JoeF, hope it helps you sleep at night knowing that you are universally hated here....

You keep quoting Murthy's website? Is that law? Can she be held accountable for statements she makes regarding job portability on her website? HuH? So, it needs to be taken as any other non-legally-abiding advice. Maybe your so-called lawyer friends told you this already?

btw, i too know people who know people, who claim that you don't know anything about anything!!!

 

[ar888]

As I said before, please stop personal attacks. This forum is not meant for it.

 

[gb111]

The only one being pig-headed is you. You obviously aren't a people person. I hope you never end up in management...
Now get lost, troll.
PLONK!

I'm not a people person? hahahahahahahhaha
That's got to be the funniest thing I have heard of EVER.

Why don't you scroll through this site to see how many people you have offended vs. how many I have offended.

Here's what: Why don't you scroll through this posting itself and count the people you have ticked off with your mule-headedness.....

btw, sticks and stones, etc., you still didn't answer my question on how an immigration attorney's duties towards his client differs from a criminal attorney's durties to his client.....

Maybe you can write to your imaginary attorney friends for some help.

Not a people person.... hahahahaha
That is ironic coming from you of all people on this group.....

You are the complete anthesis of a people-person.

And instead of worrying about me being in management, I worry about your boss. Surely he must need to know how you spent the majority of your work day (that is if you do work) defending your archaic immigration opinions on this site.

Your entire mission on this group is to instill fear and paranoia in the minds of the immigration community. Unfortunate for everyone else, they have been so lambasted by the INS (and its various name changes) that they believe your narrow-minded, conservative, fear-instilling opinions.

Your opinions in my mind, are not worth the disk storage space so graciously donated by this site.

Why don't you get lost from this site for good? I pledge to donate $1000 to the various immigration-related causes on this site if Mr. Rajiv Khanna or the moderator bans JoeF from this site for instilling fear and spreading paranoia in others via his inane, conservative nonsense.

 

[FunnyWait]

Guys,

With all this discussion here and JoeF insisting on the 6 months to 1 year rule, I finally decided to check with my attorneys yesterday and I got their answer today. I got a very definite answer and that is "no, there is no problem in changing the job within a few months (about 3) after 485 approval (because I asked them if 3 months is ok)". I don't think anybody can be more definitive. They neither threw any 6 months to 1 year rule at me nor a 50-50/uncertain answer.

What else we want ? JoeF, you always ask others to check with their attorneys and I will strongly urge you to do the same.

I don't know the reason why you are stuck to your answer in spite of nobody agreeing with you. It's time to let go.

Hope my post gives relief to everyone. I also encourage everyone to check with your attorneys and let's share what they say. Also if your attorney is employed or paid by your employer, you can ask him/her by email marking it as confidential. This almost guarantees that the attorney won't disclose your question to the employer (at least by law they are not allowed to do so).

 

[zyu]

Guys,

With all this discussion here and JoeF insisting on the 6 months to 1 year rule, I finally decided to check with my attorneys yesterday and I got their answer today. I got a very definite answer and that is "no, there is no problem in changing the job within a few months (about 3) after 485 approval (because I asked them if 3 months is ok)". I don't think anybody can be more definitive. They neither threw any 6 months to 1 year rule at me nor a 50-50/uncertain answer.

What else we want ? JoeF, you always ask others to check with their attorneys and I will strongly urge you to do the same.

I don't know the reason why you are stuck to your answer in spite of nobody agreeing with you. It's time to let go.

Hope my post gives relief to everyone. I also encourage everyone to check with your attorneys and let's share what they say. Also if your attorney is employed or paid by your employer, you can ask him/her by email marking it as confidential. This almost guarantees that the attorney won't disclose your question to the employer (at least by law they are not allowed to do so).

when i asked my lawyer whether i can be deported due to changing employers, he laughed to death, and said that i was paranoid. he said that deportation is reserved for people who commit serious crimes (changing employers is regarded as one by JoeF, of course).

JoeF, if you want to win this debate, there is one very simple way. show us an example that someone was deported because he 1) changed employer after GC, or 2) got a promotion after GC (you once mentioned that this is also "guilty" and thus deportable). i have to tell you that if you can't find such an example,
your argument isn't worth a hill of beans. so my advice is: go find such an example, or keep your mouth shut.

 

[gb111]

What else we want ? JoeF, you always ask others to check with their attorneys and I will strongly urge you to do the same.

what else does he want?

- To have the last word in every thread
- To never admit his misguided attempts at badgering others to his views
- To coerce members on this forum to listen to his archaic, very conservative views on immigration
- To not have the backbone to admit he is wrong but persist in having the last word (however wrong).
- To get ticked off and call others names when they disagree with his holier-than-thou opinions

Believe me, he is going to come back and say your lawyer is WRONG and he is right!!! That's just his nature.

Maybe because he is such a people-person!!!

 

[FunnyWait]

I have always said that it is a rule of thumb. Geez, what part of that don't you understand??? How hard can it be to understand such a simple thing??? Rule of thumb. Look up what it means! Geez!

There is no rule of thumb !! In fact 6 months to 1 year is neither rule of thumb nor law. It's something you are saying a 'rule of thumb'. Which part of my post you didn't understand that made you say again 'rule of thumb'.....

Again - there is NO rule of thumb. 6 month to 1 year is a stupid advice to give to people.

 

[FunnyWait]

I have come to the conclusion that you guys are deliberately "misinterpreting" me. Your personal problems with me obviously have taken ahold of you. Just read what I said, instead of putting your own spin on it...

I have no personal problems with you and I never attacked you personally. In fact you must have noticed that I backed you with your fight with dsfg100. But when your advice is wrong, it's wrong. Those who don't agree with you doesn't mean they have personal problems with you.

If you are making it a prestigious issue then don't. Just let go. If you genuinely believe that somebody changing the job immediately after GC approval may land up in trouble soley for this reason, then you MUST talk with a good attorney and update your knowledge. You are a very knowledgeable person on immigration except this issue

 

[FunnyWait]

Huh? It is a rule of thumb to show that you had the good faith intent to stay with the employer when you became a PR.
If you have another way to show that intent, you don't have a need for such a rule of thumb. What part of that don't you understand??? Geez. First, not understanding that this is just a rule of thumb, and then not even understanding what "rule of thumb" means... It is such a simple concept that a child can understand it...

I thought my post was simple and it said - you don't need a rule of thumb !!! You are NOT required to stay with the employer for 6 months to 1 year to show the intent. If you refer to my previous posts, I have said that intent can not be proved. Also with 6 months to 1 year, you still can't prove intent and hence this advice is stupid. Your signature says you are not a lawer then how come you challenge what lawers are saying ?

I will try to make it clear to you one more time - YOU DON'T NEED A RULE OF THUMB. PERIOD.

 

[FunnyWait]

It is now obvious that you have a personal problem with understanding what I say.

This is what you think and you are free to think whatever you want. Anybody disagreeing with you can't mean they have a personal problem with you. I will continue to disagree with you on this issue no matter what you think.

Again, I don't know why, but you apparently have joined the ranks of the people who deliberately misinterpret me.

I don't misinterpret you deliberately but I believe your advice is wrong and you are supporting it for some reason. You seem to convince nobody and still you think you are right. You have made it a prestigious issue for you or you represent attorney community and you are trying to scare people and send them to attorneys so that attorneys can make money or some other reason. But in any case it's high time you pull back from your stand.

 

[gb111]

This is what you think and you are free to think whatever you want. Anybody disagreeing with you can't mean they have a personal problem with you. I will continue to disagree with you on this issue no matter what you think.


I don't misinterpret you deliberately but I believe your advice is wrong and you are supporting it for some reason. You seem to convince nobody and still you think you are right. You have made it a prestigious issue for you or you represent attorney community and you are trying to scare people and send them to attorneys so that attorneys can make money or some other reason. But in any case it's high time you pull back from your stand.

Didn't i tell you he was going to come back and say: your lawyer is WRONG and he is right???

JoeF is doing all the things he constantly accuses others of doing onto him:

- He deliberately misinterprets what others (and their lawyers) say
- He stoops to name calling if someone disagrees with him
- His catch all phrase to handle all conflicts: "I'm right! You are a troll! PLONK!"

As a final thought, the so-called ranks of conspirators that have grown against him (in his words) now includes EVERYONE who frequents this site!!!

 

[pralay]

As a final thought, the so-called ranks of conspirators that have grown against him (in his words) now includes EVERYONE who frequents this site!!!

And, I guess his/her killfile ran out of space too.

 

[dsatish]

I could not stop myself getting into this discussion.

People who are questioning the 'intent' and waiting for a period of 6 months after getting GC, If you think that 'intent is BS', then why can't you guys change the jobs after 180 days of 485, why do you have to wait for GC approval and then argue about 'lack of rules' for staying with the sponsoring employer. There is AC-21 to invoke; you don't have to wait for GC approval. So you want to play safe until the GC and then switch jobs? I didn't get the logic here.

Why don't you understand the logic that you yourself applied to your case ? Like us, you also did not use AC21, but changed jobs 1 month after approval.
This discussion is about changing jobs after becoming the PR, not before. You simply can't join any job using AC21. You need to find an employer who is going to give you a letter exactly the way it appears in your LC. It is not possible to get such letters from big companies. That's why a lot of people don't use AC21 unless they are willing to take risk or if they get an employer who is going to give him all the documents exactly the way the job description is mentioned in the LC. Once you get GC, there are no more job portability restrictions. That is what we are saying.

One more thing, certain people, who are for changing the jobs 'immediately' after GC, didn't change the jobs yet. They are playing it safe (by claiming that they didn't get a good job offer), waiting until 6 months and change jobs, but 'advising' others that there is no problem in changing jobs. Unfortunate.

Joef said in one of his posts, he himself played it safe and changed jobs after 1 year, and he is advising others, what he believed, what he followed. If you want to give advise others, you do it (change the jobs) and then advise others.

The discussion is about whether one CAN change jobs soon after getting the GC or not. It is NOT about whether one SHOULD change jobs or not. My advise applies to those people who are hesitating to take up an offer that came their way(the offer that they liked) just because of the fear of "intent law". Getting a job of your choice takes time. As soon as i completed 1 month after the stamping, i have started serious effort to get a good job and i have already posted my resume in job sites. If i have not already quit my consulting company, it is because it does not make any sense for me to get into another consulting company when my desire is to get a permanent job at a client site. I don't want to hop from one company to another every 3 months. But make no mistake, i am trying very very hard for a job of my choice and i am hoping that i will find one within a month or two. If i find it next week, i am giving 2 weeks notice and joining the new job. PERIOD.

I, myself, changed the job after 1 month. But still I won't give dangerous advise to others. Just because this is a public forum and nobody can sue us, people think they can talk anything they want. But responsible people (like attorneys) always go with conservative approach, not to jeopardize anybody's life.

Why do you think that what we say is a dangerous advise ? If it is so, why did you change the employer within a month ? Don't tell us that you are a risk taker. If you are one, then you would have used AC21 itself instead of waiting till you get the GC approval.

PS: I don't like arguments that deviate from the topic and go in a personal way. I wanted to answer your questions(you have indirectly made comments on me) and i hope i didn't hurt you. It would have been better if you presented your views on this topic rather than making comments on others.

 

[FunnyWait]

There is considerably less risk using AC21 than changing jobs right after getting the GC.

One difference though - Using AC21 you MUST have 'same or similar' job and after GC approval, you can get ANY job.

 

[zyu]

what else does he want?

- To have the last word in every thread
- To never admit his misguided attempts at badgering others to his views
- To coerce members on this forum to listen to his archaic, very conservative views on immigration
- To not have the backbone to admit he is wrong but persist in having the last word (however wrong).
- To get ticked off and call others names when they disagree with his holier-than-thou opinions

Believe me, he is going to come back and say your lawyer is WRONG and he is right!!! That's just his nature.

Maybe because he is such a people-person!!!

one more

- To scare other people by using terms like "guilty", "immigration fraud", "deportation" for people who attempt to change jobs or even get a promotion after GC. Spreading out unnecessary fears is just his nature.

 

[FunnyWait]

I only plonk people like you who are unable to conduct a discussion without resorting to personal attacks.

You are equally responsible for personal attacks. Did you not write a reply to my post stating "even a child will understand" ?

It looks like you are presenting your conservative thoughts in a more negative way and nobody likes to be hear negative thoughts. It's really as simple as that. Just let go my friend. People have asked their attorneys and that's the source of information they have. What's yours ?

 

[FunnyWait]

- To scare other people by using terms like "guilty", "immigration fraud", "deportation" for people who attempt to change jobs or even get a promotion after GC. Spreading out unnecessary fears is just his nature.

JoeF, did you tell that even promotion can cause problems ? I can't believe it. If you have said this, then I am convinced that you intent to spread fear and scare people. I would then tend to believe that you have some nasty intensions in giving the advice.

Even if I extend my imagination to any wildest possible level, I still can't buy that promotions can cause problems.

JoeF, I request you to please clarify your stand and the reasons for spreading scare. If you can't do it then we all will have to ban reading your posts. You seem to have good knowledge in immigration and I respect you for that. But advicing any body even against promotion is streching conservativeness little too far. If you haven't said about promotion, please ignore this post.

 

[gb111]

You are equally responsible for personal attacks. Did you not write a reply to my post stating "even a child will understand" ?

That's the whole point here!!!
JoeF is more than capable of attacking anyone who shows the slightest hint of disagreeing with him.

However, when someone stands up to his nonsense and calls BS, he cries foul and fakes personal insult.

ad-hominen attacks are perfectly fine as long as he is the one doing the attacking. When the tables are reversed, he starts whining that people are attacking him personally.

I would understand if he ticked off one or two people on this forum, but you can search all threads where he has posted his dribble, and you will see that he has managed to insult someone (and not the same person, mind you) in about 50% of those threads.

In baseball terms, that's a pretty healthy batting average (even if it is for the opposing team).

 

[gb111]

If you attack me personally, I attack back. Tit for tat.
I am not sitting here and let you guys run your despicable attacks. You have learned well from gb111 and others.
It is amazing how fast you succumbed to the wanna-be demagogic efforts of gb111 and others. Ask them for their agenda... they are obviously anti-immigrants in disguise. They are all about "we are in, now all others can stay out or get thrown out."
Call me when you have returned to reason.
PLONK!

Awesome logic!!!
Keep up the good work.
If I am an anti-immigrant, then maybe dsfgh was right when he called you a you-know-what!!!

You don't attack back. You initiate the attack if someone even mildly disagrees with you.

Your claim that someone after getting a GC shouldn't accept a pay-raise and promotion, goes to show that, in fact, you are an anti-immigrant in disguise.

I wouldn't be surprised to learn that you are a retired INS adjudicator, who is getting back at immigrants that have opportunities to make a lot of money while improving their job satisfaction.

So, hopefully, while you may be stuck in the same dead-end job that got you your GC, others have moved on to bigger and better things. And guess what?!?!?! They are still here in the U.S. of A without having being deported.

I reiterate my pledge to donate 1K to any immigration-related cause/fund sponsored by this forum if JoeF is banned for life....

JOEF IS AN ANTI-IMMIGRANT WHO DOES NOT WANT GC-HOLDERS TO ENJOY THE BENEFITS AND PRIVILEGES THAT COME WITH OBTAINING PERMANENT RESIDENCE!!!

THIS IS WHY HE PROMOTES HIS OWN CAUSES WHILE EXPECTING OTHERS TO STICK WITH THEIR OLD JOBS. MAYBE HE IS AFRAID THEY WILL GET HIS JOB SINCE HE OBVIOUSLY SPENDS LESS TIME WORKING AND MORE TIME ON THIS FORUM SCARING PEOPLE.

 

[zyu]

JOEF IS AN ANTI-IMMIGRANT WHO DOES NOT WANT GC-HOLDERS TO ENJOY THE BENEFITS AND PRIVILEGES THAT COME WITH OBTAINING PERMANENT RESIDENCE!!!

gb111, be careful. JoeF can sue you for slandering. slandering is a crime, and you can be deported!!!.