Is AC21 better than the GC?

E

eb2_I485_RD0901

Registered Users (C)
Issue:
AC21 allows a person to change jobs when I-485 is pending for 180 days. But after getting GC , it is "recommended" to work for 6 months.

So the question is what happed to the "INTENT to work for the Sponsoring Employer" in AC21 ? Why this disparity in the AC21 & GC ?

I know the AC21 is silent about the job changes after GC. Any comments ??
 
Thanks for the info JoeF.

So based on all the "Current publised laws" (as of May 03) is it better to change jobs using the AC21 or wait for GC +6 months ?

Also the question of "Intent to work for the sposoring Employer" ? is ironic and ambiguous.
 
http://boards.immigrationportal.com/showthread.php?s=&threadid=79994&perpage=15&pagenumber=3

*****

http://boards.immigrationportal.com...hlight=RFE and Paystubs and I140&pagenumber=6

*********
PLEASE READ THE ABOVE THREADS

*********

NOBODY including the BCIS is veryfying the paychecks during/AFTER(ESPECIALLY AFTER THE GC APPROVAL) BY the BCIS.

If the the paychecks are veryfied after the gc approval for one and all by the BCIS for, let us say a MONTH ATLEAST A MONTH IF NOT MORE like 6 months THEN this intent of working for the sponsored rule will make a lot of sense as to stick with the employer for the paychecks VERIFIED period.

Dont infer fictitious conditions when practicaly the employers looses the UTILITY of hiring CHEAP/EASY/CONVENIENT alien/foreign labor if the paychecks are asked for /demanded for by BCIS/LABOR DEPT. The gc process is for the employers ability to hire CHEAP/EASY/CONVENIENT alien/foreign labor from in/outside USA . He can do and undo the gc process according to his needs and circumstances.

After the gc approval he looses whatever ability he has over this gc process/approval and I doubt if he/anyone can revoke the gc.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Ah Atleast you are BECOMING normal at last thought you were ABNORMAL so far. Keep it up You'll make it.

As far I'am concerned NOBODY,NOBODY COMMENTED like you did and that shows who is ABNORMAL on this forum.You might want to go see a Doctor and get some help IMMEDIATELY.

You ADMITTED AS OF NOW BCIS IS NOT CHECKING THE INTENT RULE IN ANYWAY WHATSOEVER., NOR THERE HAS BEEN ANY CASE THAT GOT INTO TROUBLE FOR QUITTING AS SOON AS THE GC IS APPROVED.

What has PREVENTED THEM FROM CHECKING THE INTENT RULE SO FAR ALL THESE YEARS? It is because they inferred the rule MY WAY NOT your way.

FUTURE***** If BCIS STARTS doing the pay check verification AFTER the GC approval the employers ability to hire CHEAP/EASY/CONVENIENT alien/foreign labor from in/outside USA is GONE-- down the DRAIN.

If BCIS STARTS doing so they HAVE to MENTION that RULE(checking the paychecks of one and ALL, ALL the TIME ) in the eta 750a&b form.

***
Geez, you get on my nerves. The question was not about paychecks, or if BCIS is verifying that.
The question is about if they could check the intent.
And yes, they could do that. Do they do that now? Maybe not, but there is nothing that would prevent them from doing that, now or in the future. Now get off your crusade and become a normal member of society again.


durgum http
 
It really doesnt matter as long as the employer is cooperative with the employee LEAVING the company as soon as the gc is approved.Like I said before Lawyers say so many things for sinister designs (some.), to make sure their work is ACKNOWLEDGED and SOUGHT after DESPERATELY.

Atleast some lawyers dont say nothing about the 1/2/3/6 month rule as in the case of the PACHHAS case in this forum.So there is definitely some inconsistency in this issue.

***
http://boards.immigrationportal.com...hlight=RFE and Paystubs and I140&pagenumber=6
***

Paccha
Senior Member

Registered: Sep 2002
Location:
Posts: 204
Yes Durgum...
Dear Durgum,

I agree with you.

In this market, even if someone say that he/ she got laid off, it is not that a bad situation as far your employer supports you.

Moreover, this country is a lawyers paradise, who just take advantage of the ignorance, anxiety and fears of the candidates. The best example is the consulting companies itself. Most of these are started by Consultant turned Green card people who hrdly have any idea about labour and immigration laws. There comes the great saviours-immigration lawyers who in turn make the life of our H1 guys miserable.

But, there are exceptionally good lawyers also. The best example is my lawyer.

with regards,


__________________
RD : 09/11
ND : 11/09
1-RFE Issued: 10/21
1-RFE Updated: 12/09
2-RFE Issued: 01/02
2-RFE Updated: 01/15
AD: 04/16/03

***

If there had neen a case supporting your 6 month rule in reality ATLEAST in this forum Then you might have been on the right side.But as you FAILED in showing such a case I'm on the right side.

Lawyers MIGHT be saying that 6 month rule as they may want to be on the safe side IF the employer CREATES trouble in the scenerio of the employer leaving the company as soon as the gc is approved.

In REALITY I doubt that it is NOT CHEAPER for the employer to hire a lawyer and try to REVOKE the employees gc THAN HIRING another NON gc holder/non born/immigrated/naturalized US citizen as an employee to replace that employee who quit as soon as his gc was approved.That is where the utility of this whole process of the GC comes in HANDY for the employee.

It is a FREE FORUM HAHA You will fail AGAIN in KILLING ME ON THIS FORUM. That shows your IGNORANCE AGAIN WHICH DOESNT SURPRISE ME.
 
Here below is the AC21 106(c)

AC21 106(c) - Change of Employment Permitted in Cases of Lengthy Adjustment Adjudication


he AC21 106(c) provides that the certification or Form I-140 approval of an EB immigrant
petition shall remain valid when an alien changes jobs, if:
(a) a Form I485, Application to Adjust Status, on the basis of the EB immigrant petition has
been filed and remained unadjudicated for 180 days or more; and
(b) the new job is in the same or similar occupational classification as the job for which the
certification or approval was initially made.

Procedures for Processing Benefits under AC21 106(c)

If an alien has complied with the above statutory requirements, adjudicators shall not deny applications for adjustment of status on the basis that the alien has changed jobs. Under present practices it is expected that an I-485 applicant notify the Service when they no longer intend to enter into employment with the employer who sponsored them on the I-140 petition.
The Service should continue to expect the applicant to submit a letter notifying INS of this change in intent, if the Adjudicator has reason to believe that the applicant's intent has changed a Request for Evidence (RFE) may be issued to clarify the applicant's intent in regards to employment.
In instances where the applicant no longer intends to be employed by the employer who sponsored him/her on the I-140, the Service should request a letter of employment from the new
employer. The letter from the new employer verifying that the job offer exists should contain the new job title, job description and salary. This information is necessary to determine whether the
new job is in the same or similar occupation and to determine whether the alien is admissible under the public charge ground of inadmissibility at INA 8212(a)(4). To determine whether a
new job is in the same or similar occupational classification as the original job for which the certification or approval was initially made, the adjudicating officer may consult the Department
of Labor's Dictionary of Occupational Titles or its online O'NET classification system or similar publications.
The Service is currently formulating proposed regulations to establish a policy framework in which to adjudicate AC21 106(c) benefits. Until the Service promulgates final regulations establishing such a policy framework, adjudicators shall consult, on a case by case basis, with Headquarters before denying cases on the basis that the new job is not in the same or similar classification.

***********************************************

Now the following line is very interesting:--->

In instances where the applicant no longer intends to be employed by the employer who
sponsored him/her on the I-140, the Service should request a letter of employment from the new
employer

So INS has NO PROBLEM if the INTENT has changed if the I485 is pending for 180 days or more.

My analysis on this entire issue is as follows:

Getting a I140 approval is getting a Immigrant Visa , once this is approved , the I485 is just a formality. The I485 just provides a Card that is a means to an end of this paper work.

The 180 days after the I140 is to mandate the employee had intent to work for at least 180 days for that employer , after that he is free ..(as long as similar job etc ).

Now let us assume that the I485 is approved in ONE day. So-->
1. Get I140 approved.
2. Get I485 approved immediately (say in one week after i140).
3. Get GC.
4. Work for 6 months
5. Free to leave.

so the AC21 removes the wait for step 2 & 3 and as long as 4 is met the employee can proceed to Step 5 ( of course with a small condition : same job etc )


Other people on this forum have said that after getting GC it is best to work for 6 months so this rule of thumb is kind of vaildated in the AC21 ( 180 days after I140 )

I think this also goes well with those who do CP.

So once again the question of INTENT (or Change in INTENT) is clear from the AC21 as long as I140 has been approved and 180 days or more have passed.
So INS has NO PROBLEM if the INTENT has changed if the I485 is pending for 180 days or more ( after the I140 has been approved)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top