San Francisco Regional DOL Tracker - Old (Archived on 09/23/2004)
- Thread starter gp111
- Start date
- Status
ss1123,
I am in the same boat. My case was presented as MS+0 experience. I think my lawyer only submited a summary of the recruiting efforts not the details. According to the new guidance
there are 3 options for this kind of application:
1) withdraw the application
2) remanded to the state
3) retest the job market
But I don't know whether we can choose any of the 3 options or the certifying officer will assign one of them.
If I choose retest the market, what is my chance of getting approved after that?
I think the best thing to do is to ask our lawyers. Can we exchange the information we get from our lawyers? Or does any of you know more information? Thanks.
This is a great forum.
I am in the same boat. My case was presented as MS+0 experience. I think my lawyer only submited a summary of the recruiting efforts not the details. According to the new guidance
there are 3 options for this kind of application:
1) withdraw the application
2) remanded to the state
3) retest the job market
But I don't know whether we can choose any of the 3 options or the certifying officer will assign one of them.
If I choose retest the market, what is my chance of getting approved after that?
I think the best thing to do is to ask our lawyers. Can we exchange the information we get from our lawyers? Or does any of you know more information? Thanks.
This is a great forum.
mujhe_gc_do
New Member
AVM message changed
My case was remanded on June 12, 2003. AVM was playing the remad mesage till 21 Nov. On 21 Nov, the message was changed to "Returned to DOL from remand". My labor was filed as BS+2 years of exp. My lawyer tells me that as per the new guidelines, I will most probably get a retest option.
After my case was remanded after a wait of 2 years, I was almost devastated by the news. But I hope that there is still hope for us out there..Lets hope for the best..
My case was remanded on June 12, 2003. AVM was playing the remad mesage till 21 Nov. On 21 Nov, the message was changed to "Returned to DOL from remand". My labor was filed as BS+2 years of exp. My lawyer tells me that as per the new guidelines, I will most probably get a retest option.
After my case was remanded after a wait of 2 years, I was almost devastated by the news. But I hope that there is still hope for us out there..Lets hope for the best..
How does following affect the cases that are currently pending with DOL? Will they be processed after April 2004?
The State Workforce Agency (SWA) for California (EDD) today announced that DOL is recalling all cases that were formerly "mass-remanded" to EDD due to "U. S. worker availability," with the exception of those that only require a BS and zero years of experience (which will remain at EDD for supervised recruitment). EDD is in the process of sending these previously remanded cases back to DOL for reconsideration.
EDD estimates that cases remanded in June 2003 will all be returned to DOL by as early as mid-December. Cases remanded between July 1-10, 2003, will all be returned to DOL by as early as the beginning of January. Cases remanded after July 10th have not been logged in yet; EDD hopes to have all of them back to DOL no later than April.
EDD has requested that attorneys and applicants NOT call to inquire about specific cases (except in unusual circumstances), as this will only cause further delays in sending the cases back to DOL for reconsideration.
The State Workforce Agency (SWA) for California (EDD) today announced that DOL is recalling all cases that were formerly "mass-remanded" to EDD due to "U. S. worker availability," with the exception of those that only require a BS and zero years of experience (which will remain at EDD for supervised recruitment). EDD is in the process of sending these previously remanded cases back to DOL for reconsideration.
EDD estimates that cases remanded in June 2003 will all be returned to DOL by as early as mid-December. Cases remanded between July 1-10, 2003, will all be returned to DOL by as early as the beginning of January. Cases remanded after July 10th have not been logged in yet; EDD hopes to have all of them back to DOL no later than April.
EDD has requested that attorneys and applicants NOT call to inquire about specific cases (except in unusual circumstances), as this will only cause further delays in sending the cases back to DOL for reconsideration.
How does following affect the cases that are currently pending with DOL? Will they be processed after April 2004?
The State Workforce Agency (SWA) for California (EDD) today announced that DOL is recalling all cases that were formerly "mass-remanded" to EDD due to "U. S. worker availability," with the exception of those that only require a BS and zero years of experience (which will remain at EDD for supervised recruitment). EDD is in the process of sending these previously remanded cases back to DOL for reconsideration.
EDD estimates that cases remanded in June 2003 will all be returned to DOL by as early as mid-December. Cases remanded between July 1-10, 2003, will all be returned to DOL by as early as the beginning of January. Cases remanded after July 10th have not been logged in yet; EDD hopes to have all of them back to DOL no later than April.
EDD has requested that attorneys and applicants NOT call to inquire about specific cases (except in unusual circumstances), as this will only cause further delays in sending the cases back to DOL for reconsideration.
The State Workforce Agency (SWA) for California (EDD) today announced that DOL is recalling all cases that were formerly "mass-remanded" to EDD due to "U. S. worker availability," with the exception of those that only require a BS and zero years of experience (which will remain at EDD for supervised recruitment). EDD is in the process of sending these previously remanded cases back to DOL for reconsideration.
EDD estimates that cases remanded in June 2003 will all be returned to DOL by as early as mid-December. Cases remanded between July 1-10, 2003, will all be returned to DOL by as early as the beginning of January. Cases remanded after July 10th have not been logged in yet; EDD hopes to have all of them back to DOL no later than April.
EDD has requested that attorneys and applicants NOT call to inquire about specific cases (except in unusual circumstances), as this will only cause further delays in sending the cases back to DOL for reconsideration.
MAtrix1,
I am looking to see if my lawyers can amend my application with experience details, I intend to not give up till the end! My managers are now aware of this situation and are willing to support me.
Also, I read in this forum that DOL can issue a NOF to our kind of cases at which point we can add the exp. I don't know how far all this is valid.
Just cannot believe that after 2.5 yrs I am looking at starting all over again. I do not have the luxury of time as my 6 yrs expire in Sep 2003
At this time plans for career or for that matter just basic peace seems fleeting memory / dream
Lawyers do not share all the info, they share bits and peices and are not willing to cooperate as you would like them to.
Regards,
I am looking to see if my lawyers can amend my application with experience details, I intend to not give up till the end! My managers are now aware of this situation and are willing to support me.
Also, I read in this forum that DOL can issue a NOF to our kind of cases at which point we can add the exp. I don't know how far all this is valid.
Just cannot believe that after 2.5 yrs I am looking at starting all over again. I do not have the luxury of time as my 6 yrs expire in Sep 2003
At this time plans for career or for that matter just basic peace seems fleeting memory / dream
Lawyers do not share all the info, they share bits and peices and are not willing to cooperate as you would like them to.
Regards,
ss1123,
I understand your pain. Go to www.usvisanews.com. They seem to have more details about the new guidance. From my understanding, we can add more years of experience as long as it is not acquired on your current job. However, if more experience is required, does it mean the prevailing wage will be increased too? This is not a fair game, in which one party keeps changing the rules.
I will talk to my lawyer next week about this.
I understand your pain. Go to www.usvisanews.com. They seem to have more details about the new guidance. From my understanding, we can add more years of experience as long as it is not acquired on your current job. However, if more experience is required, does it mean the prevailing wage will be increased too? This is not a fair game, in which one party keeps changing the rules.
I will talk to my lawyer next week about this.
Matrix1,
We have four levels in my job position, I suspect that position 1 may have required MS +0, I was hired at level 3 in 2001, at that time I had MS+5.5 yrs of exp. That level typically requires MS +3-5 yrs
I suspsect that the lawyers kept the requirement as generic as possible to MS+0exp
Regards,
We have four levels in my job position, I suspect that position 1 may have required MS +0, I was hired at level 3 in 2001, at that time I had MS+5.5 yrs of exp. That level typically requires MS +3-5 yrs
I suspsect that the lawyers kept the requirement as generic as possible to MS+0exp
Regards,
tonysharma
Registered Users (C)
DOL SFO DATES
State Processing Times (This reflects the date the application was received by the State)
Program Title: Regular Permanent RIR H-2B Date Updated
Arizona Dec. 2002 Apr. 2003 Oct. 2003 Nov. 2003
California Apr. 2001 Dec. 2002 N/A Nov. 2003
Guam Apr. 2001 Apr. 2003 N/A Nov. 2003
Hawaii Apr. 2001 Aug. 2001 N/A Nov. 2003
Nevada Apr. 2001 Aug. 2003 Nov. 2003 Nov. 2003
Regional Processing Times(This reflects the date the application was received by the region)
San Francisco Nov. 2002 Aug. 2002 Nov. 2003 Oct. 2003 Nov. 2003
State Processing Times (This reflects the date the application was received by the State)
Program Title: Regular Permanent RIR H-2B Date Updated
Arizona Dec. 2002 Apr. 2003 Oct. 2003 Nov. 2003
California Apr. 2001 Dec. 2002 N/A Nov. 2003
Guam Apr. 2001 Apr. 2003 N/A Nov. 2003
Hawaii Apr. 2001 Aug. 2001 N/A Nov. 2003
Nevada Apr. 2001 Aug. 2003 Nov. 2003 Nov. 2003
Regional Processing Times(This reflects the date the application was received by the region)
San Francisco Nov. 2002 Aug. 2002 Nov. 2003 Oct. 2003 Nov. 2003
No Education level soecified in my case
When my company advertised my position, no Degree+experience was included. However, the position is a Senior level, and I do have MS + 3 years' of experience. Do you guys think that my case can pass the newly-found-criteria? Thanks.
When my company advertised my position, no Degree+experience was included. However, the position is a Senior level, and I do have MS + 3 years' of experience. Do you guys think that my case can pass the newly-found-criteria? Thanks.
Our laywer said that if ad did not have experience, that means ad will be considered as with 0 experience.
That from our lawyer's letter:
ads that were being run then required a Bachelor degree and no employment experience. That complied with the DOL's encouragement to streamline RIR apps. We had no employment experience requirement.
Because we streamlined the requirements based on the above, we will not satisfy the first two options of the memo's item (a):
(a) if the position requires a "Bachelor's Degree and three (3) or more years of experience or a Master's Degree (+) six (6) months of experience
That leaves us with the more subjective item (b):
(b) if "the level of recruitment and the detail provided in the recruitment report" satisfy the certifying officer that further recruitment is unnecessary
That from our lawyer's letter:
ads that were being run then required a Bachelor degree and no employment experience. That complied with the DOL's encouragement to streamline RIR apps. We had no employment experience requirement.
Because we streamlined the requirements based on the above, we will not satisfy the first two options of the memo's item (a):
(a) if the position requires a "Bachelor's Degree and three (3) or more years of experience or a Master's Degree (+) six (6) months of experience
That leaves us with the more subjective item (b):
(b) if "the level of recruitment and the detail provided in the recruitment report" satisfy the certifying officer that further recruitment is unnecessary
If your case wasn't remanded than my message is not relevant in that regard. For some reasons I though that you was conserned that your remanded case will not be returned for reconsideration. I think with all that remanded cases processing you'll have to wait some time before DOL will start processing December, 2002.
Good luck!
Good luck!
How does following affect the cases that are currently pending with DOL? Will they be processed after April 2004?
The State Workforce Agency (SWA) for California (EDD) today announced that DOL is recalling all cases that were formerly "mass-remanded" to EDD due to "U. S. worker availability," with the exception of those that only require a BS and zero years of experience (which will remain at EDD for supervised recruitment). EDD is in the process of sending these previously remanded cases back to DOL for reconsideration.
EDD estimates that cases remanded in June 2003 will all be returned to DOL by as early as mid-December. Cases remanded between July 1-10, 2003, will all be returned to DOL by as early as the beginning of January. Cases remanded after July 10th have not been logged in yet; EDD hopes to have all of them back to DOL no later than April.
EDD has requested that attorneys and applicants NOT call to inquire about specific cases (except in unusual circumstances), as this will only cause further delays in sending the cases back to DOL for reconsideration.
The State Workforce Agency (SWA) for California (EDD) today announced that DOL is recalling all cases that were formerly "mass-remanded" to EDD due to "U. S. worker availability," with the exception of those that only require a BS and zero years of experience (which will remain at EDD for supervised recruitment). EDD is in the process of sending these previously remanded cases back to DOL for reconsideration.
EDD estimates that cases remanded in June 2003 will all be returned to DOL by as early as mid-December. Cases remanded between July 1-10, 2003, will all be returned to DOL by as early as the beginning of January. Cases remanded after July 10th have not been logged in yet; EDD hopes to have all of them back to DOL no later than April.
EDD has requested that attorneys and applicants NOT call to inquire about specific cases (except in unusual circumstances), as this will only cause further delays in sending the cases back to DOL for reconsideration.
hi,
i have been following the messageboard for quite sometime .
my LC was AutoRemanded on June-03.
The position requirement is MS+0 yrs so will my case be re-reviewed by DOL?
If labor conditions are not good will it be sent back to SWA or an RFE will be sent to my company.
Thanks
raj_sfo
i have been following the messageboard for quite sometime .
my LC was AutoRemanded on June-03.
The position requirement is MS+0 yrs so will my case be re-reviewed by DOL?
If labor conditions are not good will it be sent back to SWA or an RFE will be sent to my company.
Thanks
raj_sfo
issues while remanding to SWA
My case initially filed at SWA on July 19th 2001 and it moved to DOL on April 12th 2002 with DOT code 999.151-031. My lawyer has received three options NOF and they have chosen to send back to SWA for non-RIR processing. Lawyer has intimated me that it has been send back to SWA. When I check my case status using DOL AVM, it is giving that ”DOL has received my case on April 2002”. It never updated so far. I thought there might be some problem in AVM database update. When I called (916 464 3400) SWA today morning, they mentioned that they never received remanded case from DOL. My lawyer is telling me that case is remanded to SWA longtime back. Please let me know if anybody experienced similar kind of problem.
My case initially filed at SWA on July 19th 2001 and it moved to DOL on April 12th 2002 with DOT code 999.151-031. My lawyer has received three options NOF and they have chosen to send back to SWA for non-RIR processing. Lawyer has intimated me that it has been send back to SWA. When I check my case status using DOL AVM, it is giving that ”DOL has received my case on April 2002”. It never updated so far. I thought there might be some problem in AVM database update. When I called (916 464 3400) SWA today morning, they mentioned that they never received remanded case from DOL. My lawyer is telling me that case is remanded to SWA longtime back. Please let me know if anybody experienced similar kind of problem.
For people who do not fall under BS+3 or MS+six mo, the only option is:
Additional Recruitment May be Required in Certain Cases
The second category is for labor certifications in which the minimum requirements for the position are below a bachelor’s degree and three additional years of experience or a master’s degree and six additional months of experience. The Certifying Officer must review the application to determine whether the recruitment report has sufficient detail and demonstrates that recruitment was adequate. If sufficient, the labor certification will be certified. Because cases that fall into the second category are subject to the retesting provisions, it would appear that the Certifying Officer is permitted to look into current market conditions in making the determination as to whether retesting is required or whether to simply certify the case.
So basically we are going to be at the mercy of the DOL officer who will handle our case.
Please post any certifications if you fall under this category
Additional Recruitment May be Required in Certain Cases
The second category is for labor certifications in which the minimum requirements for the position are below a bachelor’s degree and three additional years of experience or a master’s degree and six additional months of experience. The Certifying Officer must review the application to determine whether the recruitment report has sufficient detail and demonstrates that recruitment was adequate. If sufficient, the labor certification will be certified. Because cases that fall into the second category are subject to the retesting provisions, it would appear that the Certifying Officer is permitted to look into current market conditions in making the determination as to whether retesting is required or whether to simply certify the case.
So basically we are going to be at the mercy of the DOL officer who will handle our case.
Please post any certifications if you fall under this category
ss1123,
Where did you get this information?
Does it mean that it is possible that the CO will still certify a case even if it is not MS/6+months or BS/3+yrs and does not have the recruitment details, as long as he thinks there are not sufficient american workers in the current job market?
Matrix
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
Because cases that fall into the second category are subject to the retesting provisions, it would appear that the Certifying Officer is permitted to look into current market conditions in making the determination as to whether retesting is required or whether to simply certify the case.
Where did you get this information?
Does it mean that it is possible that the CO will still certify a case even if it is not MS/6+months or BS/3+yrs and does not have the recruitment details, as long as he thinks there are not sufficient american workers in the current job market?
Matrix
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
Because cases that fall into the second category are subject to the retesting provisions, it would appear that the Certifying Officer is permitted to look into current market conditions in making the determination as to whether retesting is required or whether to simply certify the case.
- Status