New method for 6 month LC in CA

Here are some other case types that are certified much much faster than most of our cases, from Phily DOL

Tile Setter
Poultry Dresser (Close to 50 cases for 1 Co.)
Home Attendant
Jeweler
Custom Tailor
Poultry Dressing Worker (Same Co. as above )
Companion (???)
Cement Mason
Maintenance Mechanic
House Worker, General

Are there grounds for lawsuits based on this information...?

As for joining a circus, seems to me that we are already in a circus just on the wrong side......

Originally posted by morpheus12
It's easy to get your LC in six months, even in a state like CA.

Just join the circus, and all your wishes will be granted!

Alternatively, join a university and they will process your LC in a week!

http://boards.immigration.com/showthread.php?s=&threadid=115080

Anyone else think this is grossly unfair?
Click to expand...
 
Remember, LC's are approved based on unavailbility of local workers to do the job, it may be the case that DOL has seen a trend that those categories of jobs are not taken up by an American/GC holder - and hence they may pass through with limited review.

Of course it looks unfair - but will you be willing to do their jobs?? Each and every profession has its own hardships, so dont discount them. I know there are cases where even engineers etc have gotten approved within weeks if not days of going into Federal level, I did not hear any one saying that as unfair.

001

Originally posted by morpheus12
It's easy to get your LC in six months, even in a state like CA.

Just join the circus, and all your wishes will be granted!

Alternatively, join a university and they will process your LC in a week!

http://boards.immigration.com/showthread.php?s=&threadid=115080

Anyone else think this is grossly unfair?
Click to expand...
 
Re: Re: New method for 6 month LC in CA

Originally posted by lca_001
Remember, LC's are approved based on unavailbility of local workers to do the job, it may be the case that DOL has seen a trend that those categories of jobs are not taken up by an American/GC holder - and hence they may pass through with limited review.
Click to expand...

Regardless, that doesn't justify the DOL taking two years to process some applications and six months to do others, based solely on the occupation. It certainly doesn't justify academics and performers getting 'priority treatment'.

If they are going to reject the LC because there are plenty of IT workers, that is their decision. I wold rather they reject it quickly rather than making us wait two or more years to find out!
 
Yeah it does not sound rational - but limited reviews have been placed thru: General Administrative Letter No. 1-97, Change 1(Also known as GAL No. 1-97)

Refer to details of limited review on:

http://www.oalj.dol.gov/public/ina/refrnc/64_23983.htm

You can however demand an explanation, if you feel one field is being singled out specifically or that number of fields in limited review listing in improperly high. Rajiv has permitted Atlanta people to make such a petition. (see his post around Feb 20, 2004 in same thread).

Maybe you would like to do it for CA too.
 
I found an interesting quote by Sam Udani which explains the essential issue:

The new delays will once again highlight the abandonment of the first-in-first-out principle of processing labor certification applications at some SESAs (e.g. California), and in most USDOL Regions. Most attorneys have ignored the issue so far. One notable exception was the Lauretta litigation in California. This issue is complex, and cannot be done justice in a few lines, however, I may write on this topic in a future article. The practice pointer here is that litigation may be a realistic alternative in some labor certification cases which are delayed as a result of this USDOL policy.

http://www.ilw.com/lawyers/articles/2001,0416-Udani.shtm

The Lauretta case is Lauretta V. Herman, also mentioned in the link Jharkhandi supplied above.
 
Originally posted by morpheus12
I found an interesting quote by Sam Udani which explains the essential issue:

The new delays will once again highlight the abandonment of the first-in-first-out principle of processing labor certification applications at some SESAs (e.g. California), and in most USDOL Regions. Most attorneys have ignored the issue so far. One notable exception was the Lauretta litigation in California. This issue is complex, and cannot be done justice in a few lines, however, I may write on this topic in a future article. The practice pointer here is that litigation may be a realistic alternative in some labor certification cases which are delayed as a result of this USDOL policy.

http://www.ilw.com/lawyers/articles/2001,0416-Udani.shtm

The Lauretta case is Lauretta V. Herman, also mentioned in the link Jharkhandi supplied above.
Click to expand...
I would strongly suggest LIFO both in DOL and BCIS, it balances anyway.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top