Please sign for EB improvement - AILA

[nyc8300]

Let me translate your comment below

Why will an employer apply for GC if he is not getting a 'slave'.

I think you are right.

Perm Labor comes in 1 month
I140 comes in 1 week with premium processing
Apply 485 immediately
Quit in 6 months using AC21

Do you really think this will work? What employer will sponsor a GC if they dont get anything "real" in return?

 

[GreenCardVirus]

Talking about retrogression, starting around 2001, lot of people were made to believe that GC's were easy to get.

Before 2001, people had to wait for 3+ years to apply for 485, had to go back to their home country after 6 years on H1. It was easier back then, if you could not win the race against time, you had to go back, no exceptions. The only option to save GC processing was to go for consular processing, come back after 1 year on H1 and get consular processing done when the time came.

If I could change one thing, it would be that the DOS release Visa numbers based on the number of Labor Certifications applied minus some percentage for rejections. Atleast the expections would have been real and the current retrogression would have been evident long time back.

 

[nyc8300]

UN/Bare Babu,

We are waiting with bated breathe for your solution. You are the resident expert on this forum, not me! So please propose a solution as to how retrogessed workers should be allowed to file I-485's without dates being current and get EAD's.

I have said I am not against H-1b's but I won't propose it as I do not think it is my agenda. If AILA wants to propose it let them do so. I don't want AILA to propose H-1b and not support measures against retrogession. I don't want GC too. I would prefer letting retrogessed workers file for I-485's to make employers hire americans/skilled immigrants purely on the basis of merit.

You must be really new to this stuff. You are throwing around big words.

How can anyone with 2% of a brain call foreign labor "slaves". It is an injustice to even use that word as it is such a big insult to the real slaves of this country.

You have all the freedome in USA to change jobs. No one has handcuffs on you. If you choose to be a "slave" then that is by choice.

You seem to have some real issues. You want to tell on the staffing companies, you don't want anyone else to come to usa to compete with you and you want your greencard yesterday.

 

[nyc8300]

Bare Babu = 'the man'!

UN/Bare Babu,
Bare Babu is a senior officer in an office who moves issues to the right place. Without Bare Babu nothing gets signed or moved. Bare Babu is 'the man'!

I suggest I-485 filings be allowed as it creates a level playing field for employers to hire americans/skilled immigrants based on skill only. It cleans the system and not let people fret over visa Bulletins. .

But as I said, you are the Bare Babu here. Why don't you suggest
pros and cons for allowing workers file for I-485's.

We are waiting for your comments....

btw; English is my first and second language. Therefore, when you use south asian sayings, I have no idea what you are saying.

Therefore, I have no idea what Bare Babu means.

How is it you god given right to file 485/ead/ap when there are no visas available. Why should they even do this. Why not just have open border. If you can lean close to a glass window and breathe and there is a smudge then let USA let you in. Only requirement is a pulse.

Just because you want something and it is a wish, you need to prove it other then it is your wish.

I'd like to have a Bentley with a 6,000 square foot home in Hollywood and go to dinner with Pamela Anderson. This doesn't mean I am going to get it.

 

[GreenCardVirus]

Why don't you suggest
pros and cons for allowing workers file for I-485's

The path I would take to show how useful EB immigration is by showcasing how harmful is Family Based Immigration. I know so many people who are an instant drain on the American Economy after they come here in FB category.

Any immigration should be useful to America.

 

[GreenCardVirus]

Bare Babu is a senior officer in an office who moves issues to the right place Without Bare Babu nothing gets signed or moved. Bare Babu is 'the man'!

Yeah right!! Bare Babu is also synonymous to corruption. Nothing gets moved unless you show green to Bare Babu.

 

[nyc8300]

I don't agree with this line of action. Let's only talk about I-485 filings when dates are not current.
Why muddle the issue with anything else. Any study towards pro/against immigration is not conclusive.

I really want to know what is the harm in this proposal of allowing I-485 filing. I think of all the issues in the agreed upon SKIL Bill, this is probably the easiest. If USCIS wants to facilitate this, they can charge for it in fee.

Bare Babu! where are you....

The path I would take to show how useful EB immigration is by showcasing how harmful is Family Based Immigration. I know so many people who are an instant drain on the American Economy after they come here in FB category.

Any immigration should be useful to America.

 

[nyc8300]

We know that is not the case here. If retrogession could be removed by paying people off, there would have been no retrogession. People are prepared to pay for this if USCIS wants to charge.

Let's be focussed on the issue of discussion here.... I-485 filing when dates are not current; pros and cons! and solutions

Yeah right!! Bare Babu is also synonymous to corruption. Nothing gets moved unless you show green to Bare Babu.

 

[desi3933]

We know that is not the case here. If retrogession could be removed by paying people off, there would have been no retrogession. People are prepared to pay for this if USCIS wants to charge.

Let's be focussed on the issue of discussion here.... I-485 filing when dates are not current; pros and cons! and solutions

There are many issues involved with allowing to file I-485 while date is not current.
1. Other people in USA (like on H1 and married to GC Spouse) will also would like to file I-485 even though their family based visa dates are not current.
2. People outside USA who have approved I-140 will also would like have "special visa" to match benefits while PD is not current.
3. If the argurment is to use AC-21 after 180 days of filing, then clearly the intent of employemnt is "missing". In this case, employment based GC means little sense.
4. Some people say "I am here for 9 years and still no GC". Well, what really counts is the PD. Last time I checked, there is no provision that allows a person to get GC based on x number of years in US.

The option of 3 year extension with approved I-140 is best option right now and H1 does allow to work for job of your choice.

Retrogession is there simply due to difference in demand and supply. There are more people coming on H1 than employment based green cards numbers. Thsi simply means that line is getting bigger and person who has joined line later has to wait longer. This is why people who have PD of 2000 got in 3 years or less (on average) and PD with 2001 and later are waiting for longer time. I do not know why it is so hard to understand. People come out with all "theories" for Retrogession to believe that something is holding visa PD to move forward. People will believe what they want to believe.

nyc8300, let me say this to you. H1 does allow you to work for job of your choice. Nobody is stopping to you change your job, if you are not happy with your current job. It is your choice.

 

[saras76]

Retro ..

There are many issues involved with allowing to file I-485 while date is not current.
1. Other people in USA (like on H1 and married to GC Spouse) will also would like to file I-485 even though their family based visa dates are not current.
2. People outside USA who have approved I-140 will also would like have "special visa" to match benefits while PD is not current.
3. If the argurment is to use AC-21 after 180 days of filing, then clearly the intent of employemnt is "missing". In this case, employment based GC means little sense.
4. Some people say "I am here for 9 years and still no GC". Well, what really counts is the PD. Last time I checked, there is no provision that allows a person to get GC based on x number of years in US.

The option of 3 year extension with approved I-140 is best option right now and H1 does allow to work for job of your choice.

Retrogession is there simply due to difference in demand and supply. There are more people coming on H1 than employment based green cards numbers. Thsi simply means that line is getting bigger and person who has joined line later has to wait longer. This is why people who have PD of 2000 got in 3 years or less (on average) and PD with 2001 and later are waiting for longer time. I do not know why it is so hard to understand. People come out with all "theories" for Retrogession to believe that something is holding visa PD to move forward. People will believe what they want to believe.

nyc8300, let me say this to you. H1 does allow you to work for job of your choice. Nobody is stopping to you change your job, if you are not happy with your current job. It is your choice.

desi3933,

There is no arguing the fact that "Retro" is a result of more demand than supply but the current situation is also a direct result of bad policies on the part of the USCIS. In ’03 and ’04 a LOT of people with PDs in '01, '02 and '03 were approved in totally random fashion. I personally know of a lot of my friends with '01 PDs who have now had their GCs for over two years now. When PDs were current, different Service Centers were processing cases in totally different speeds. Certain centers were using over 70% of the available visas because they were approving more cases. Tons of cases were being shipped to local offices to reduce backlogs. My case was randomly transferred to a local office in Miami (I am in GA) and was promptly brought back after a year. Through AILA inquires and visits to the local office in Miami I found that TSC had randomly sent boxes full of cases to different centers right before the yearly audit, a brilliant move to make the numbers look good. Soon after the audit most cases were recalled. This is just one instance of the kind of things that really do go on in these Service Centers.

Now everything can be conveniently blamed on unprecedented demand but the blame cannot be put squarely on countries that have huge demand. Between the years of 2001-2004 this whole system was a lottery, now everyone is paying the price for those practices.

Regards,

saras

 

[GreenCardVirus]

In ’03 and ’04 a LOT of people with PDs in '01, '02 and '03 were approved in totally random fashion. I personally know of a lot of my friends with '01 PDs who have now had their GCs for over two years now. When PDs were current, different Service Centers were processing cases in totally different speeds. Certain centers were using over 70% of the available visas because they were approving more cases.

That is why any attempt to increase visa numbers wont make much sense, not until they fix the way they do processing. Assuming they create 200k additional numbers and everybody will be current, this will only create another wave of discontended GC seekers.

 

[desi3933]

Saras,

You have raised valid points regarding the application processing order.

My main intent was to raise points against allowing I-485 app even if PD is not current. The points are
1. Other people in USA (like on H1 and married to GC Spouse) will also would like to file I-485 even though their family based visa dates are not current.
2. People outside USA who have approved I-140 will also would like have "special visa" to match benefits while PD is not current.
3. If the argurment is to use AC-21 after 180 days of filing, then clearly the intent of employemnt is "missing". In this case, employment based GC means little sense.

In short, people would like to see change that benefit them most. The arguements should make sense in overall big picture. Just becuase I-140 is approved and person is in US should not grant him/her extra benefits versus another person who also has I-140 approved but is outside US.

Good Luck.

 

[nyc8300]

Although I am still waiting for UN/Bare Babu to comment....

Points 1 and 2 are points for USCIS to consider but that does not mean we don't ask for I-485 filing ability.
Point 3 can be reasoned both ways. It is not an 'intent' to use EAD's to switch jobs but given 'retrogession' is here to stay, people should be allowed to do this. Reapplying for Labor and I-140 just creates more money for lawyers/AILA. Why not give that money to USCIS as fee....

Agree on the H-1b thing. You can change your job if you choose to. If you choose you have a lot of options but we have to make a start at unstringing
this whole mess from some point. Letting people file for I-485's is probably
the least controversial topics. Why don't we make a start there?

Saras,

You have raised valid points regarding the application processing order.

My main intent was to raise points against allowing I-485 app even if PD is not current. The points are
1. Other people in USA (like on H1 and married to GC Spouse) will also would like to file I-485 even though their family based visa dates are not current.
2. People outside USA who have approved I-140 will also would like have "special visa" to match benefits while PD is not current.
3. If the argurment is to use AC-21 after 180 days of filing, then clearly the intent of employemnt is "missing". In this case, employment based GC means little sense.

In short, people would like to see change that benefit them most. The arguements should make sense in overall big picture. Just becuase I-140 is approved and person is in US should not grant him/her extra benefits versus another person who also has I-140 approved but is outside US.

Good Luck.

 

[desi3933]

Although I am still waiting for UN/Bare Babu to comment....

Points 1 and 2 are points for USCIS to consider but that does not mean we don't ask for I-485 filing ability.
Point 3 can be reasoned both ways. It is not an 'intent' to use EAD's to switch jobs but given 'retrogession' is here to stay, people should be allowed to do this.
What do you mean? Can you give some more details?

Reapplying for Labor and I-140 just creates more money for lawyers/AILA. Why not give that money to USCIS as fee....
If one is not happy with employer and he wants to change job, why he/she wants to GC from that employer? That does not make sense. I don't think it is right from legal point of view.

Also, it is the Employer that should pay for labor and I-140, and not the employee.

Agree on the H-1b thing. You can change your job if you choose to. If you choose you have a lot of options but we have to make a start at unstringing
this whole mess from some point.
Letting people file for I-485's is probably the least controversial topics.
How can you make that claim? Anything to justify your claim.
Why don't we make a start there?
Then make reasonable points of arguement why it should be allowed and why it should be allowed only for EB and not for Family based immigration.

 

[nyc8300]

Bhai sign karoge ki nahi!

UN/Bare Babu,
Thanks for the reply. You are right, I am no expert in immigration but I don't see the experts being able to do anything concrete. I have 2 questions

1.Your points are comprehensive, so do you think the SKIL bill is a good mix. It may not be perfect but would you say you support that.

2.Another question, the whole movement to create PERM/electronic process was supposed to be to clean up the system. I think allowing I-485 filing is an additional step in this process. Would you not agree Also due to country specific limits and differences in demand and supply per country, a worker from UK can get a work permit/GC in 6 months. Why should it not be the same for a worker from India/China etc. I-485 resolves this process to some extent. In case USCIS is not able to change country limits, why is it not reasonable to ask for an equitable treatment in the mean time? ?

Right now what you are saying is
Phele uska sign lao jisne likha tha ki tumhara baap chor hai and I am saying Bhai sign karoge ki nahi!

Forget this....
Let's talk about 1 and 2.

As I stated earlier; you seem to be very new to these topics. It is difficult to debat with someone who doesn't understand how immigration works. Most people on these boards have a very good understanding due to them examining postings, different web-sites, researching the law, etc.



Most indians in eb2 and eb3 are IT; many ROW people in eb3 are 245i's or are in skilled worker category. You want the government to supply relief for a specific class of people which senators/congressmen are seeing layoffs and unemployed workers.

companies don't have to sponsor you for a greencard. Many companies who are traditional American companies won't even do H-1b's and if they do they won't do a greencard. Government knows this and know that there is a lot of gaming of the system and this is how people are getting greencards.

If the problem of getting uscis/dol on board is the belief that there is a gaming of the system then whatever proposal there is should also have some unfavorable rules also.

The discussion would go something like this:

There are many law abiding people in eb2 and eb3 from retrogressed countries. We don't have any statistics but it is unreasonable for people to be in uncertainty for a number of years. There will always be demand for workers in this country but we need to give relief to the people who have been waiting for a long time.

We realize that there are some minor cases of people gaming the system. We want to ensure that people are following the system and that there is purely a system which will match a company which needs a foreign worker and the foreign worker themselves.

We are proposing a tightening of the rules along with an increase in the visas.

Tightening of the rules:

Limit the number of foreign workers that can be employed in a company.
Limit the number of foreign workers that a company can sponsor for permanent residency

For those companies that adhere to the limits then the following will not apply:

For those companies who exceed the number of foreign workers as a % of the work force then H-1b and greencard has to go through supervised recruiting before they can file the H-1b and/or permanent labor.

Revert H-1b and L-1 back to no immigrant intent. If an H-1b or L-1 worker has relatives in USA who could sponsor them then consider whether the job is a bona fide opportunity or an end run around family base immigration. Scrutinize the application/company much more

On an annual basis, companies who exceed the number of foreign workers as a % would have to prove they have been adhering to employment laws (tax withholdings, LCA conditions and satisfy DOL that they are adhering to all immigration laws).

If there is significant delay between when a labor was filed and when the person ultimately adjusts status, then proof needs to be supplied that the labor market was still tested. (Note: in this day and age, no company holds a job open for a worker for more then a month).

____________________________________________________________

Now, that we have ensured that there will be no gaming of the system:

Have special quotas for underserved employment areas. If the company and candidate is to work in a designated underserved area then they will fall under this quota. This should be a temporary greencard with conditions lifted after two years. The person must have a permanent home and reside in this area for 75% of the time. The person would be required to go for an interview at the end of two years and prove to the satisfaction to USCIS that they have been living/working in this underserved area.

H-4 spouses should be given work authorization. Since L-2 dependents and E-3 dependents are given work authorization, it would be fair to also give dependents work authorization.

Do not include dependents as part of the employment base cap.

Have citizenship clock start from the date the labor was filed for the candidate (non substitution cases only) if they are in the country, and working for the sponsor throughout the greencard process.

Remove country cap limitations



----------------------------------------------------------

There is more that could be added. It can't just be a change that is totally one way.

It would appease the regulators/legislators that people/companies won't be gaming the system.

 

[desi3933]

two simple questions

Originally Posted by nyc8300
Although I am still waiting for UN/Bare Babu to comment....

Points 1 and 2 are points for USCIS to consider but that does not mean we don't ask for I-485 filing ability.
Point 3 can be reasoned both ways. It is not an 'intent' to use EAD's to switch jobs but given 'retrogession' is here to stay, people should be allowed to do this.
What do you mean? Can you give some more details?

Reapplying for Labor and I-140 just creates more money for lawyers/AILA. Why not give that money to USCIS as fee....
If one is not happy with employer and he wants to change job, why he/she wants to GC from that employer? That does not make sense. I don't think it is right from legal point of view.

Also, it is the Employer that should pay for labor and I-140, and not the employee.

Agree on the H-1b thing. You can change your job if you choose to. If you choose you have a lot of options but we have to make a start at unstringing
this whole mess from some point.
Letting people file for I-485's is probably the least controversial topics.
How can you make that claim? Anything to justify your claim.
Why don't we make a start there?
Then make reasonable points of arguement why it should be allowed and why it should be allowed only for EB and not for Family based immigration.

So far, no reply from nyc8300.

Let me ask you two simple questions:
1. Who should pay for LC and I-140 applications
2. Employment based GC means that one would like to work that employer and is happy in that job. Right?

 

[nyc8300]

desi3933,
Will reply but I am waiting for UN/Bare Babu's comments. Please see the last message to UN given below also. Thanks

Bhai sign karoge ki nahi!

--------------------------------------------------------------------------

UN/Bare Babu,
Thanks for the reply. You are right, I am no expert in immigration but I don't see the experts being able to do anything concrete. I have 2 questions

1.Your points are comprehensive, so do you think the SKIL bill is a good mix. It may not be perfect but would you say you support that.

2.Another question, the whole movement to create PERM/electronic process was supposed to be to clean up the system. I think allowing I-485 filing is an additional step in this process. Would you not agree Also due to country specific limits and differences in demand and supply per country, a worker from UK can get a work permit/GC in 6 months. Why should it not be the same for a worker from India/China. I-485 resolves this process to some extent. In case USCIS is not able to change country limits, why is it not reasonable to ask for an equitable treatment in the mean time?

Right now what you are saying is
Phele uska sign lao jisne likha tha ki tumhara baap chor hai and I am saying Bhai sign karoge ki nahi!

Forget this....
Let's talk about 1 and 2.

So far, no reply from nyc8300.

Let me ask you two simple questions:
1. Who should pay for LC and I-140 applications
2. Employment based GC means that one would like to work that employer and is happy in that job. Right?

 

[desi3933]

desi3933,
Will reply but I am waiting for UN/Bare Babu's comments. Please see the last message to UN given below also. Thanks

You are right, UN. It is difficult to debate with someone who doesn't understand how immigration works.

 

[tusharvk]

Well, earlier this summer when lawmakers visited comprehensive immigration package, they focused on the issue of illegals. This makes sense because there are 11 millions of such people and more coming everyday. (As impatient as some people on this board are about getting their GCs, someday when these same people get their GCs and citizenships, they will start cursing those same lawmakers for not doing something to curb this illegal immigration.) Due to the focus on illegals, the issues of the EB hopefuls were not addressed.

Gaming of the system has been going on for a long time and people will always find ways to game the "new & improved" system that is being proposed in various formats. However, this does not mean that the smart and talented people from countries like India and China who want to come here should be punished.

The speed with which the perm-lc and I-140 are being approved means that some people with pd in 2005 have to wait for years while the BECs clear their backlog. If the lc and I140 took years to be approved, people would not notice or complain about their inability to file the I485. Hence, while the BECs are clearing their backlog, some temporary relief needs to be given to these EB hopefuls. After all, they have cleared the first two stages of their GC journey and hence, they are indeed wanted by the employer. Further there is the ability to keep extending H1b for indefinite time while they are waiting for filing their I485s. This also means that this country indeed wants them to wait it out. The problem in so waiting is the delay in obtaining any GC-like benefits (getting promotions in the jobs, in-state tuition, aging out of children, delay in getting citizenship and the attendant benefits, etc. Note that I am not at all talking about the ability to change the employer which violates the spirit of EB immigration.) Such provisions should only apply to EB hopefuls while the BECs are clearning their backlogs and have sunset provisions at that point in time when the labor applicants from the BECs are expected to receive their GCs.

Other issues such as lifting per country limit, increasing EB quota, how to fix the gaming of the system, etc. are of a more permanent nature. For addressing those, there needs to be a comprehensive look at EB immigration by itself.

desi3933,
Will reply but I am waiting for UN/Bare Babu's comments. Please see the last message to UN given below also. Thanks

Bhai sign karoge ki nahi!

--------------------------------------------------------------------------

UN/Bare Babu,
Thanks for the reply. You are right, I am no expert in immigration but I don't see the experts being able to do anything concrete. I have 2 questions

1.Your points are comprehensive, so do you think the SKIL bill is a good mix. It may not be perfect but would you say you support that.

2.Another question, the whole movement to create PERM/electronic process was supposed to be to clean up the system. I think allowing I-485 filing is an additional step in this process. Would you not agree Also due to country specific limits and differences in demand and supply per country, a worker from UK can get a work permit/GC in 6 months. Why should it not be the same for a worker from India/China. I-485 resolves this process to some extent. In case USCIS is not able to change country limits, why is it not reasonable to ask for an equitable treatment in the mean time?

Right now what you are saying is
Phele uska sign lao jisne likha tha ki tumhara baap chor hai and I am saying Bhai sign karoge ki nahi!

Forget this....
Let's talk about 1 and 2.

 

[nyc8300]

Thanks for the note. Very valid points. There was an article on WSJ front page about a scientist not being able to serve to the best of his ability due to retrogession. I am trying to look up that article.


I think EB candidates in itself (porbably 150,000 strong and more coming)
need to draft up a letter 'solely' for the I-485 filing allowance and send it to congress man. As we know AILA/Dems/Reps are not going to help us. They WILL use us to pursue their agendas.

Well, earlier this summer when lawmakers visited comprehensive immigration package, they focused on the issue of illegals. This makes sense because there are 11 millions of such people and more coming everyday. (As impatient as some people on this board are about getting their GCs, someday when these same people get their GCs and citizenships, they will start cursing those same lawmakers for not doing something to curb this illegal immigration.) Due to the focus on illegals, the issues of the EB hopefuls were not addressed.

Gaming of the system has been going on for a long time and people will always find ways to game the "new & improved" system that is being proposed in various formats. However, this does not mean that the smart and talented people from countries like India and China who want to come here should be punished.

The speed with which the perm-lc and I-140 are being approved means that some people with pd in 2005 have to wait for years while the BECs clear their backlog. If the lc and I140 took years to be approved, people would not notice or complain about their inability to file the I485. Hence, while the BECs are clearing their backlog, some temporary relief needs to be given to these EB hopefuls. After all, they have cleared the first two stages of their GC journey and hence, they are indeed wanted by the employer. Further there is the ability to keep extending H1b for indefinite time while they are waiting for filing their I485s. This also means that this country indeed wants them to wait it out. The problem in so waiting is the delay in obtaining any GC-like benefits (getting promotions in the jobs, in-state tuition, aging out of children, delay in getting citizenship and the attendant benefits, etc. Note that I am not at all talking about the ability to change the employer which violates the spirit of EB immigration.) Such provisions should only apply to EB hopefuls while the BECs are clearning their backlogs and have sunset provisions at that point in time when the labor applicants from the BECs are expected to receive their GCs.

Other issues such as lifting per country limit, increasing EB quota, how to fix the gaming of the system, etc. are of a more permanent nature. For addressing those, there needs to be a comprehensive look at EB immigration by itself.