Wait over Dec Bulletin Out - Start Waiting for 2008 Bulletins
- Thread starter kk_00
- Start date
Phenomonal movement for EB3 India - 9 days...WOW. At this rate my priority date would be current in 6 years....Looking forward for it.
When will mine be current? PD 03/23/05 may be my 7 year old kid will be ready for work by then...
They say that additional retrogressions cannot be ruled out for EB2 (INDIA and CHINA).
They also say that it is possible for EB1 to have cut off dates.
Another thing I found interesting was that they listed November 13th in bold, highlighting that they considered the requests received upto yesterday before publishing the new bulletin today.
That tells me that USCIS has all the information in their systems. Its just a matter of what they want to share with the public.
If they wanted, they could provide on their website or thru their portfolio all the information that is available to the IIOs that they share when customers talk to them on the phone or via infopass.
They also say that it is possible for EB1 to have cut off dates.
Another thing I found interesting was that they listed November 13th in bold, highlighting that they considered the requests received upto yesterday before publishing the new bulletin today.
That tells me that USCIS has all the information in their systems. Its just a matter of what they want to share with the public.
If they wanted, they could provide on their website or thru their portfolio all the information that is available to the IIOs that they share when customers talk to them on the phone or via infopass.
TheRealCanadian
Volunteer Moderator
USCIS doesn't track visa numbers or issue the visa bulletin.
Another live proof of a broken immigration system and bureaucratic red tapism. Its beyond comprehension.
1. Why can't the previously lapsed number be recaptured at the discretion of DHS? Why does it have to go through the congress?
2. Why is EB category limited by country of charge-ability? The underline eligibility for permanent residency here is professional skills. Adding another level of filtering only points to medieval despotic mindset.
3. Why isn't # of visas with dual intent aligned to # of immigrant visas available? When the H1-B quota was raised (which is now back to original 65k), so should have been the immigrant visa #. This is just an overspill of that mess!
Political opportunists at the Hill clamor for immigration reforms for illegal immigrants. Overlooking reforms for legal immigrants only shows political shortsightedness!
My 2 cents on the latest bulletin!
Last edited by a moderator:
TheRealCanadian
Volunteer Moderator
DHS simply cannot make up the rules as they go along. If the law does not permit them to reallocate unused visa numbers, they cannot do so.
Because that's how the law is written. Personally, I wouldn't want to see 99% of all EB visas given to Indians and Chinese simply because there are so many more of them, but that's admittedly based on my own country of birth. With that in mind, I don't consider it unreasonable for Congress to allow diversity in applicants for numerically limited categories.
Because the qualifications for said visas are different, and not all H/L visa holders become immigrants.
To be utterly blunt, an alien who never immigrates never naturalizes, and then never votes against you.
susomething
Registered Users (C)
EB3/ROW have moved 1 month. At this rate mine will become current in one year. Not bad compared to yours.
Phenomonal movement for EB3 India - 9 days...WOW. At this rate my priority date would be current in 6 years....Looking forward for it
UNOnoneHIGHER
New Member
I have read the "bulletin" and everything is clear as mud to me. Actually, this whole immigration process is confusing and new to me. can some explain what all of this means in laymens terms. My husband is in Ghana, papers filed (I-130, and G-325a) 40 days ago, where does that put or leave us. Help me, I am soooo lost.
DHS simply cannot make up the rules as they go along. If the law does not permit them to reallocate unused visa numbers, they cannot do so.
Because that's how the law is written. Personally, I wouldn't want to see 99% of all EB visas given to Indians and Chinese simply because there are so many more of them, but that's admittedly based on my own country of birth. With that in mind, I don't consider it unreasonable for Congress to allow diversity in applicants for numerically limited categories.
Because the qualifications for said visas are different, and not all H/L visa holders become immigrants.
To be utterly blunt, an alien who never immigrates never naturalizes, and then never votes against you.
Pun at nothing but archaic process has been misconstrued!
Last edited by a moderator:
Having diversity is a good thing.
But in this case they attempted to get diversity only from half way point.
If they want it to be a smooth transition for every body, they should apply the same country limitations for the dual intent work visas.
Another huge factor contributing to the mess is the counting of the visa numbers. They allow all dependents of a H1 to come (the H4 visas are not counted towards the yearly limit.) But when time comes for the GC, they count those given to the dependents too.
Here again, if they count all the H visas towards the yearly limit, that would make it a more uniform flow of immigration.
I would really like to see the counting of all H visas towards the yearly limit. That would mean that the corporate world can get may be 30K (out of 65K) H1s, rest 35 would go to the dependents' H4. (assuming for every H1 there would be 0, 1 or 2 dependents)
Then see how fast the legislations will change
Also, in today's global economy, using the per country limit to get diversity will not get the desired results.
They would still end up with majority of people with Indian/Chinese heritage because they are spread all around the world. The global migration of Indians/Chinese is not surprising considering that they are the two most populous countries in the world and they are competing with the limited resources available in their countries.
They would still end up with majority of people with Indian/Chinese heritage because they are spread all around the world. The global migration of Indians/Chinese is not surprising considering that they are the two most populous countries in the world and they are competing with the limited resources available in their countries.
I agree on this view. Infact they should classify H1b as well based on diversity... they need lot of security guards in investment banks.wake up.
My friend: there is a another visa for that category; just because you dont like - it never becomes right.pls get rid of this attitude:chinese and indians are not bad people just they were born in those countries. it is legitimate for any H1b to ask for a GC(granting is another thing). because they been paying taxes and help running the system as you see today.
It is quite reasonable request to match the visa numbers. It makes absolutely no sense to fire somebody from a coy who is working hard and doing great just because his visa is finished.
Dismayed!
I am completely dismayed that EB2 for India has moved back to Jan 2002. I thought that for several years the cutoff date was stuck and then they gradually moved it to April 2004.So from where did they get applications that filled up 38% of the annual quota?
Is it because of old labor approvals from the backlog centers. I am struggling to understand the logic. Any ideas?
I am completely dismayed that EB2 for India has moved back to Jan 2002. I thought that for several years the cutoff date was stuck and then they gradually moved it to April 2004.So from where did they get applications that filled up 38% of the annual quota?
Is it because of old labor approvals from the backlog centers. I am struggling to understand the logic. Any ideas?
TheRealCanadian
Volunteer Moderator
I would agree with that. For a variety of reasons (not all of them legitimate) the H-1B is seen as the visa of underpaid Indian computer professionals and little more. Ensuring diversity in country of birth and profession would probably be a good idea, but the pessimist in me suggests that no one really wants the H-1B system to be fixed.
I would NOT want, however, to see a matching of H-1B numbers to EB numbers. EB permanent residents come from a variety of backgrounds, and not all of them previously held an H or L. There are plenty of folks on the L who never become permanent residents, and there are plenty of EB permanent residents who were in O, E or TN status - and plenty of EB immigrants who never had a non-immigrant status. Not everyone does H1->GC.
One relatively new development which I think will spur reform is that priority date waits are no longer limited to the Indians and Chinese; they affect ROW in EB3 and that spread pain makes the issue more in need of addressing.
That is really a sad perception when in reality it is far from the truth. Majority of the Indians are very ambitious and well paid (better than or on par with US citizens). And they are always looking for better opportunities.
Every once in a while a crooked body shop is busted and that brings to fore the H1 employees that were underpaid/not paid by that company. And that gets sensational media exposure.
I am not sure country of birth is the way to go to get diversity.
As I said earlier, with the global economy, people are moving freely around the world either on a temporary basis or permanent basis. This started happening about 10 years ago, but is more rampant today.
If an Indian couple happen to have a baby on such a trip, that baby would be counted in that country's quota. In this case, where is the diversity? The baby still is brought up in an Indian household; may be even in India if the parents have gone back to India after their temporary trip abroad.
(This is just an example. Does not mean to say that every one wants to come to USA.)
I think if they really want diversity, they should go by racial ethnicity.
I don't think anyone would dare to use the "racial" term in a legislative writing though, unless it is also associated with the "no discrimination" in the same sentence.
Last edited by a moderator:
there are some bad apples, for sure, but one (you or others) cannot generalize this for all indian professionals. you're re-iterating and recycling this without questioning it and that's part of the problem - how this thing gets crystallized and stereotyped.
The policy makers aren't realizing that making immigration difficult for people with high-end profession skills is only going to backfire. The reason Indian and Chinese economies are growing consistently at > 8% growth rate is because - in part - of the abundance of skilled professionals. Most of the companies now have well qualified people with degrees from US universities - which are arguably the best in the world. If US can't generate interest for Science and Maths within its own people, the only way it can sustain technological growth is by inviting foreign brains.
Its sad that progressive looking bills like the SKIL and DREAM are nonchalantly being snubbed by a group of politicians for their own selfish ends. The crux of these reforms is to stop the reverse brain drain from happening and that to any should make sense. And if someone claims that H-1B nothing but a passport to cheap labor is certainly oblivious to the changing dynamics of the IT industry - which takes up bulk of the quota.
Other nations realize it. EU is now coming up with their own "blue card". Canada has always allowed smooth immigration. Australia too has followed suit in recent years. UK, with its own perennial issues with immigration, also had a discriminatory decree shot down early this week. Its a global economy and if this country has to sustain its superiority in technology, it has to *fix* this hole.
Its sad that progressive looking bills like the SKIL and DREAM are nonchalantly being snubbed by a group of politicians for their own selfish ends. The crux of these reforms is to stop the reverse brain drain from happening and that to any should make sense. And if someone claims that H-1B nothing but a passport to cheap labor is certainly oblivious to the changing dynamics of the IT industry - which takes up bulk of the quota.
Other nations realize it. EU is now coming up with their own "blue card". Canada has always allowed smooth immigration. Australia too has followed suit in recent years. UK, with its own perennial issues with immigration, also had a discriminatory decree shot down early this week. Its a global economy and if this country has to sustain its superiority in technology, it has to *fix* this hole.
Last edited by a moderator:
InTheMoment
Registered Users (C)
One good comprise to circumvent 99% Indians and Chinese getting GC's if country limits are removed and to maintain this diversity would be:
Simply remove dependents from getting counted towards a visa number and keep the dear country limits in place.
There are on an average 1.5 depends per primary applicant in EB.
This would be a path of least resistance and would increase the visa numbers available by more than double.
Bottom line there are ways to do it. Only, as someone pointed, the political shortsightedness and ignorance is removed first with a high powered washer and dryer !
Simply remove dependents from getting counted towards a visa number and keep the dear country limits in place.
There are on an average 1.5 depends per primary applicant in EB.
This would be a path of least resistance and would increase the visa numbers available by more than double.
Bottom line there are ways to do it. Only, as someone pointed, the political shortsightedness and ignorance is removed first with a high powered washer and dryer !