makemygc
01-07 06:59 PM
I had the same scenario and got my EAD renewed using the new passport number without any issues. What USCIS is mainly concerned about is your A# that you fill up in your EAD form.
Thx
MakeMyGC
I would like to know the answer to this question too. does anybody know?
also pkv..how many days did it take you to get the new passport?
Thx
MakeMyGC
I would like to know the answer to this question too. does anybody know?
also pkv..how many days did it take you to get the new passport?
wallpaper 7 Interesting Places On Google
krishna_brc
08-04 01:54 PM
She applied for second AP before travelling. My question is does she have to return before first AP expires OR can I mail her the second AP when it gets approved?
I think it is safer to come back on old AP.
I think it is safer to come back on old AP.
posmd
04-07 09:07 PM
I am 100 percent of this view. IV core members should review this with QGA.
We are already hearing that the whitehouse is pushing this thing to conference even without full senate approval, perhaps they know something we do not, that in some form or fashion something is going to pass the senate.
Sensenbrenner is not a guy against legal immigration per se. Some of the core members know this from the S1932 experience. There was a guy by the name of "superman" who some of the core members are aware of, who lives in sensenbrenner's district and tried his best during conference in that budget bill.
We need to involve all those forces so that he does not resist our just and fair provisions. He must be made to realise that to have a clear moral argument about the illegals he must clearly support the legal immigrant provisions.
We are already hearing that the whitehouse is pushing this thing to conference even without full senate approval, perhaps they know something we do not, that in some form or fashion something is going to pass the senate.
Sensenbrenner is not a guy against legal immigration per se. Some of the core members know this from the S1932 experience. There was a guy by the name of "superman" who some of the core members are aware of, who lives in sensenbrenner's district and tried his best during conference in that budget bill.
We need to involve all those forces so that he does not resist our just and fair provisions. He must be made to realise that to have a clear moral argument about the illegals he must clearly support the legal immigrant provisions.
2011 As proud as the Google Maps
PMisYMMV
09-03 11:13 AM
I have got an LUD on 09/01/2009 for both the cases, but the status is still pending.
I am worried, did any have similar experience?
I am worried, did any have similar experience?
more...
Alabaman
08-24 09:48 PM
Start being creative first.. dont just copy some captions and come up...
If I were you, I would read the "captions" before responding.:mad:
If I were you, I would read the "captions" before responding.:mad:
bekugc
04-04 03:13 PM
Flexi,
ur just making what we refer to as a 'h1 transfer'. u donot have to wait till oct to begin ur work at the new employer. anytime after u get ur receipt u can terminate the first job and join the new one.
regarding
- Is traveling to my home country OK while filing the petition or is it better to wait until I come back?
ans: as long as u have NOT terminated ur existing H1 employment, u can travel ( assuming u have a valid visa to reenter the US). it doesnt matter whether u applied for h1 transfer or not, as long as ur current H1 visa is valid and ur maintaining proper H1 status at existing emplyer, u shud not have problems coming back to US on H1. after u come back , depending on whether ur got ur new h1 receipt , u can terminate first job and join the new one.
In regards to the timing of a petition -
as we have mentioned, ANY time after recieving receipt u can start ur new work...so why u waiting for absolute 1 or 2 weeks before july to start the paperwork???? do it 4 weeks before, and even if receipt comes early, nobody will force u to join then and there. once u have receipt, u can give whatever reason u want and join the new employer at ur chosen date....
ur just making what we refer to as a 'h1 transfer'. u donot have to wait till oct to begin ur work at the new employer. anytime after u get ur receipt u can terminate the first job and join the new one.
regarding
- Is traveling to my home country OK while filing the petition or is it better to wait until I come back?
ans: as long as u have NOT terminated ur existing H1 employment, u can travel ( assuming u have a valid visa to reenter the US). it doesnt matter whether u applied for h1 transfer or not, as long as ur current H1 visa is valid and ur maintaining proper H1 status at existing emplyer, u shud not have problems coming back to US on H1. after u come back , depending on whether ur got ur new h1 receipt , u can terminate first job and join the new one.
In regards to the timing of a petition -
as we have mentioned, ANY time after recieving receipt u can start ur new work...so why u waiting for absolute 1 or 2 weeks before july to start the paperwork???? do it 4 weeks before, and even if receipt comes early, nobody will force u to join then and there. once u have receipt, u can give whatever reason u want and join the new employer at ur chosen date....
more...
LostInGCProcess
09-19 05:12 PM
as I was not getting a corp to corp job for more than a year.I desperately need to work.now I am on a project for 3 months and it will end soon also.but this company wants to hire me full time. thats why I want to join them with EAD and when my h1b approves I will get it stamped and reenter..
You can continue to work with the company from the day they apply for your H1(of from the day you get the receipt of h1 application)....you don't have to wait till you get an approved H1.
You can continue to work with the company from the day they apply for your H1(of from the day you get the receipt of h1 application)....you don't have to wait till you get an approved H1.
2010 May 8 2008 Google Maps Reveals
skd
01-12 02:17 PM
Skd, it was nice of you .. I gave you green :)
God Bless everyone and everywhere.
God Bless everyone and everywhere.
more...
raysaikat
04-23 03:28 PM
Hello thanks for the reply.
By applying for a petition did you mean:
- give the job advertisement in a newsletter,
- get the LCA
- then apply for a petition - I-129
>> what is the time frame for this petition application?
- apply for the waiver (i mean J1 applies and gets it lets say in 2-3 months)
>> i'll be still working with my J2 EAD, during waiver comes.
- once the waiver comes, then what is the procedure?\
Thanks again!
Your company needs to hire an immigration lawyer for doing the H1-B petition and you need to talk to that person. The forums are not a substitute for lawyers; for one, you may not get the response/information/answer that fits your specific situation. Forums are for getting a good overview --- general knowledge, so to say --- so that you know what is happening --- and you already have more than enough general information.
By applying for a petition did you mean:
- give the job advertisement in a newsletter,
- get the LCA
- then apply for a petition - I-129
>> what is the time frame for this petition application?
- apply for the waiver (i mean J1 applies and gets it lets say in 2-3 months)
>> i'll be still working with my J2 EAD, during waiver comes.
- once the waiver comes, then what is the procedure?\
Thanks again!
Your company needs to hire an immigration lawyer for doing the H1-B petition and you need to talk to that person. The forums are not a substitute for lawyers; for one, you may not get the response/information/answer that fits your specific situation. Forums are for getting a good overview --- general knowledge, so to say --- so that you know what is happening --- and you already have more than enough general information.
hair google maps funny street view.
optimystic
04-21 03:07 PM
One of my colleagues with RD July 27th at NSC got his approval last monday. He is EB2 - I. And the processing dates at NSC is not current for him either.
My RD is July 30th at NSC !! Hoping for good news soon !
My RD is July 30th at NSC !! Hoping for good news soon !
more...
shukla77
11-20 08:02 PM
Please send emails to CBS 60 Minutes and other media sources. Send them personalized emails explaining backlog issues and efforts from IV. Considering passage of SKIL Bill in lame duck session a remote possibility, this would be a step in right direction. Also it would bring IV in media focus.
****So far ~10 people have sent emails to CBS..*****
****5990 to go..*****
Good Luck
Shukla77:)
****So far ~10 people have sent emails to CBS..*****
****5990 to go..*****
Good Luck
Shukla77:)
hot find this on Google Maps,
serg
10-30 08:47 PM
You can start working on EAD now and wait for the H1 approval to come through.
WTF are you talking about, man??? It was said hundreds times: once one use EAD, h(is|er) H(1|4) is GONE!!! Per my lawyer, if you filed H1 extension before expiration, you are ok, in this case ext. filing date make sense.
WTF are you talking about, man??? It was said hundreds times: once one use EAD, h(is|er) H(1|4) is GONE!!! Per my lawyer, if you filed H1 extension before expiration, you are ok, in this case ext. filing date make sense.
more...
house Another interesting google
hoolahoous
03-18 10:51 AM
i am switching job using ac21. my current employer trusts immigration attorneys. and as expected attorneys suggested (since they get paid) that company should withdraws both H1 and I-140 after I leave. I know I am safe, however USCIS will definitly send me an RFE at time of processing my application and I will have to answer that. So I am trying to put my side to them saying that if it is optional, they should not.
So my question is, does the Law say that an employer has to withdraw all (or some) immigration petitions after employee leaves ? I was trying to search but I couldn't find anywhere where it said that it is mandated.
Also as far I could tell from forum posts, there is no set form which needs to be filled by employeers to withdraw the application. That would seem to suggest that it is not mandated.
On flip side, if it is mandated, then why most of the employers do not withdraw the application ?
So my question is, does the Law say that an employer has to withdraw all (or some) immigration petitions after employee leaves ? I was trying to search but I couldn't find anywhere where it said that it is mandated.
Also as far I could tell from forum posts, there is no set form which needs to be filled by employeers to withdraw the application. That would seem to suggest that it is not mandated.
On flip side, if it is mandated, then why most of the employers do not withdraw the application ?
tattoo Interesting: Google Maps + My Maps.
GCard_Dream
04-27 05:15 PM
I am not sure. May be it is. Details are still not out yet and I don't see the text of the bill on thomas. Hopefully more detail will emerge in next day or so and then we will know for sure.
http://www.swnebr.net/newspaper/cgi-bin/articles/articlearchiver.pl?160478
http://www.swnebr.net/newspaper/cgi-bin/articles/articlearchiver.pl?160478
more...
pictures Google Maps Copywriter CV
ds37
06-12 10:33 AM
Why before October?
Because Mahatma Gandhi was born on october.:):)
His 6years end in oct 2010.
ds
Because Mahatma Gandhi was born on october.:):)
His 6years end in oct 2010.
ds
dresses Top 5 Interesting Google Maps
gee_see
10-19 12:06 PM
As i mentioned in my first post, new job offer salary is more than prevailing wages for that location.
My concern is how USCIS will interpret AC21 cases where the salary is more than prevailing wages for the new location but less than specified in LC.
Does it help if we include a letter explaining salary difference and prevailing wage information for the new location from DOL site
Please advise
My concern is how USCIS will interpret AC21 cases where the salary is more than prevailing wages for the new location but less than specified in LC.
Does it help if we include a letter explaining salary difference and prevailing wage information for the new location from DOL site
Please advise
more...
makeup According To Google Earth
vinayskadam
11-29 08:18 PM
Thanks for the Reply and I had called up the USCIS and they had asked me to send a letter for correcting the information. I have sent the letter now along with the supporting documents. Hope evverything goes fine.
girlfriend interesting Google Map
chanduv23
03-03 12:14 PM
chanduv
thanks for the encouraging reply. it seems like some people are getting denials without any NOIDs and are going out of status due to that. my previous company is not going to revoke my I-140 so that is not a problem. however i am concerned about any other stupid reasons that these people might put in a denial and make us go through the suffering process. do you know of any such situations or do you think that the USCIS is completely aware of this AC21 clauses and that they do not simply deny the cases. I know i am asking a completely insane question but just wanted to try any ways.
thanks a lot in advance.
Check out my blog on IV also check some threads that ran in past.
Remember - RFE for employment does not necessarily get triggered because of 140 revoke - it can be triggered even if you change address (see some threads)
thanks for the encouraging reply. it seems like some people are getting denials without any NOIDs and are going out of status due to that. my previous company is not going to revoke my I-140 so that is not a problem. however i am concerned about any other stupid reasons that these people might put in a denial and make us go through the suffering process. do you know of any such situations or do you think that the USCIS is completely aware of this AC21 clauses and that they do not simply deny the cases. I know i am asking a completely insane question but just wanted to try any ways.
thanks a lot in advance.
Check out my blog on IV also check some threads that ran in past.
Remember - RFE for employment does not necessarily get triggered because of 140 revoke - it can be triggered even if you change address (see some threads)
hairstyles Google maps funny - 60 pics
insbaby
10-05 08:20 AM
Based on current estimates, it will be 10-15 years time, unless u r son/daughter can sponsor you prior... u will end up in family quota wait still.
I am not sarcastic this is the reality,
Hey, in 5 years, all the EB waitings are going to start the family based GCs with their kids. So in 10 years, the Family Queue will be same as EB Queue, so it is better to wait on EB Queue. :)
I am not sarcastic this is the reality,
Hey, in 5 years, all the EB waitings are going to start the family based GCs with their kids. So in 10 years, the Family Queue will be same as EB Queue, so it is better to wait on EB Queue. :)
needhelp!
09-16 02:48 PM
top priority to this one..
Blog Feeds
02-01 08:30 AM
Summary
(LINK TO FULL REPORT BELOW)
Congress created the H-1B program in 1990 to enable U.S. employers to hire temporary, foreign workers in specialty occupations. The law capped the number of H-1B visas issued per fiscal year at 65,000. Since then, the cap has fluctuated with legislative changes. Congress asked GAO to assess the impact of the cap on the ability of domestic companies to innovate, while ensuring that U.S. workers are not disadvantaged. In response, GAO examined what is known about (1) employer demand for H-1B workers; (2) how the cap affects employer costs and decisions to move operations overseas; (3) H-1B worker characteristics and the potential impact of raising the cap; and (4) how well requirements of the H-1B program protect U.S. workers. GAO analyzed data from 4 federal agencies; interviewed agency officials, experts, and H-1B employers; and reviewed agency documents and literature.
In most years, demand for new H-1B workers exceeded the cap: From 2000 to 2009, demand for new H-1B workers tended to exceed the cap, as measured by the numbers of initial petitions submitted by employers who are subject to the cap. There is no way to precisely determine the level of any unmet demand among employers, since they tend to stop submitting (and the Department of Homeland Security stops tracking) petitions once the cap is reached each year. When we consider all initial petitions, including those from universities and research institutions that are not subject to the cap, we find that demand for new H-1B workers is largely driven by a small number of employers. Over the decade, over 14 percent of all initial petitions were submitted by cap-exempt employers, and only a few employers (fewer than 1 percent) garnered over one-quarter of all H-1B approvals. Most interviewed companies said the H-1B cap and program created costs, but were not factors in their decisions to move R&D overseas: The 34 H-1B employers GAO interviewed reported that the cap has created some additional costs, though the cap's impact depended on the size and maturity of the company. For example, in years when visas were denied by the cap, most large firms reported finding other (sometimes more costly) ways to hire their preferred job candidates. On the other hand, small firms were more likely to fill their positions with different candidates, which they said resulted in delays and sometimes economic losses, particularly for firms in rapidly changing technology fields. Limitations in agency data and systems hinder tracking the cap and H-1B workers over time: The total number of H-1B workers in the U.S. at any one time--and information about the length of their stay--is unknown, because (1) data systems among the various agencies that process such individuals are not linked so individuals cannot be readily tracked, and (2) H-1B workers are not assigned a unique identifier that would allow for tracking them over time--particularly if and when their visa status changes. Restricted agency oversight and statutory changes weaken protections for U.S. workers: Elements of the H-1B program that could serve as worker protections--such as the requirement to pay prevailing wages, the visa's temporary status, and the cap itself--are weakened by several factors. First, program oversight is fragmented and restricted. Second, the H-1B program lacks a legal provision for holding employers accountable to program requirements when they obtain H-1B workers through a staffing company. Third, statutory changes made to the H-1B program have, in combination and in effect, increased the pool of H-1B workers beyond the cap and lowered the bar for eligibility. Taken together, the multifaceted challenges identified in this report show that the H-1B program, as currently structured, may not be used to its full potential and may be detrimental in some cases. This report offers several matters for congressional consideration, including that Congress re-examine key H-1B program provisions and make appropriate changes as needed. GAO also recommends that the Departments of Homeland Security and Labor take steps to improve efficiency, flexibility, and monitoring of the H-1B program. Homeland Security disagreed with two recommendations and one matter, citing logistical and other challenges; however, we believe such challenges can be overcome. Labor did not respond to our recommendations.
Recommendations
Our recommendations from this work are listed below with a Contact for more information. Status will change from "In process" to "Open," "Closed - implemented," or "Closed - not implemented" based on our follow up work.
Director:Andrew SherrillTeam:Government Accountability Office: Education, Workforce, and Income SecurityPhone:(202) 512-7252
Matters for Congressional Consideration
Recommendation: To ensure that the H-1B program continues to meet the needs of businesses in a global economy while maintaining a balance of protections for U.S. workers, Congress may wish to consider reviewing the merits and shortcomings of key program provisions and making appropriate changes as needed. Such a review may include, but would not necessarily be limited to (1) the qualifications required for workers eligible under the H-1B program, (2) exemptions from the cap, (3) the appropriateness of H-1B hiring by staffing companies, (4) the level of the cap, and (5) the role the program should play in the U.S. immigration system in relationship to permanent residency.
Status: In process
Comments: When we determine what steps the Congress has taken, we will provide updated information.
Recommendation: To reduce duplication and fragmentation in the administration and oversight of the H-1B application process, consistent with past GAO matters for congressional consideration, Congress may wish to consider eliminating the requirement that employers first submit a Labor Condition Application (LCA) to the Department of Labor for certification, and require instead that employers submit this application along with the I-129 application to the Department of Homeland Security's U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services for review.
Status: In process
Comments: When we determine what steps the Congress has taken, we will provide updated information.
Recommendation: To improve the Department of Labor's ability to investigate and enforce employer compliance with H-1B program requirements, Congress may wish to consider granting the department subpoena power to obtain employer records during investigations under the H-1B program.
Status: In process
Comments: When we determine what steps the Congress has taken, we will provide updated information.
Recommendation: To help ensure the full protection of H-1B workers employed through staffing companies, Congress may wish to consider holding the employer where an H-1B visa holder performs work accountable for meeting program requirements to the same extent as the employer that submitted the LCA form.
Status: In process
Comments: When we determine what steps the Congress has taken, we will provide updated information.
Recommendations for Executive Action
Recommendation: To help ensure that the number of new H-1B workers who are subject to the cap--both entering the United States and changing to H-1B status within the United States--does not exceed the cap each year, U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services should take steps to improve its tracking of the number of approved H-1B applications and the number of issued visas under the cap by fully leveraging the transformation effort currently under way, which involves the adoption of an electronic petition processing system that will be linked to the Department of State's tracking system. Such steps should ensure that linkages to the Department of State's tracking system will provide Homeland Security with timely access to data on visa issuances, and that mechanisms for tracking petitions and visas against the cap are incorporated into U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services' business rules to be developed for the new electronic petition system.
Agency Affected: Department of Homeland Security
Status: In process
Comments: When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.
Recommendation: To address business concerns without undermining program integrity, U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services should, to the extent permitted by its existing statutory authority, explore options for increasing the flexibility of the application process for H-1B employers, such as (1) allowing employers to rank their applications for visa candidates so that they can hire the best qualified worker for the jobs in highest need; (2) distributing the applications granted under the annual cap in allotments throughout the year (e.g. quarterly); and (3) establishing a system whereby businesses with a strong track-record of compliance with H-1B regulations may use a streamlined application process.
Agency Affected: Department of Homeland Security
Status: In process
Comments: When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.
Recommendation: To improve the transparency and oversight of the posting requirement on the Labor Condition Application (LCA), as part of its current oversight role, the Employment and Training Administration should develop and maintain a centralized Web site, accessible to the public, where businesses must post notice of the intent to hire H-1B workers. Such notices should continue to specify the job category and worksite location noted on the LCA and required by statute on current noncentralized postings.
Agency Affected: Department of Labor
Status: In process
Comments: When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.
Recommendation: To improve the efficiency and effectiveness of its investigations of employer compliance with H-1B requirements, the Employment and Training Administration should provide Labor's Wage and Hour Division searchable access to the LCA database.
Agency Affected: Department of Labor
Status: In process
Comments: When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.
VIEW FULL REPORT (http://www.gao.gov/new.items/d1126.pdf)
More... (http://ashwinsharma.com/2011/01/25/h-1b-visa-program-reforms-are-needed-to-minimize-the-risks-and-costs-of-current-program.aspx?ref=rss)
(LINK TO FULL REPORT BELOW)
Congress created the H-1B program in 1990 to enable U.S. employers to hire temporary, foreign workers in specialty occupations. The law capped the number of H-1B visas issued per fiscal year at 65,000. Since then, the cap has fluctuated with legislative changes. Congress asked GAO to assess the impact of the cap on the ability of domestic companies to innovate, while ensuring that U.S. workers are not disadvantaged. In response, GAO examined what is known about (1) employer demand for H-1B workers; (2) how the cap affects employer costs and decisions to move operations overseas; (3) H-1B worker characteristics and the potential impact of raising the cap; and (4) how well requirements of the H-1B program protect U.S. workers. GAO analyzed data from 4 federal agencies; interviewed agency officials, experts, and H-1B employers; and reviewed agency documents and literature.
In most years, demand for new H-1B workers exceeded the cap: From 2000 to 2009, demand for new H-1B workers tended to exceed the cap, as measured by the numbers of initial petitions submitted by employers who are subject to the cap. There is no way to precisely determine the level of any unmet demand among employers, since they tend to stop submitting (and the Department of Homeland Security stops tracking) petitions once the cap is reached each year. When we consider all initial petitions, including those from universities and research institutions that are not subject to the cap, we find that demand for new H-1B workers is largely driven by a small number of employers. Over the decade, over 14 percent of all initial petitions were submitted by cap-exempt employers, and only a few employers (fewer than 1 percent) garnered over one-quarter of all H-1B approvals. Most interviewed companies said the H-1B cap and program created costs, but were not factors in their decisions to move R&D overseas: The 34 H-1B employers GAO interviewed reported that the cap has created some additional costs, though the cap's impact depended on the size and maturity of the company. For example, in years when visas were denied by the cap, most large firms reported finding other (sometimes more costly) ways to hire their preferred job candidates. On the other hand, small firms were more likely to fill their positions with different candidates, which they said resulted in delays and sometimes economic losses, particularly for firms in rapidly changing technology fields. Limitations in agency data and systems hinder tracking the cap and H-1B workers over time: The total number of H-1B workers in the U.S. at any one time--and information about the length of their stay--is unknown, because (1) data systems among the various agencies that process such individuals are not linked so individuals cannot be readily tracked, and (2) H-1B workers are not assigned a unique identifier that would allow for tracking them over time--particularly if and when their visa status changes. Restricted agency oversight and statutory changes weaken protections for U.S. workers: Elements of the H-1B program that could serve as worker protections--such as the requirement to pay prevailing wages, the visa's temporary status, and the cap itself--are weakened by several factors. First, program oversight is fragmented and restricted. Second, the H-1B program lacks a legal provision for holding employers accountable to program requirements when they obtain H-1B workers through a staffing company. Third, statutory changes made to the H-1B program have, in combination and in effect, increased the pool of H-1B workers beyond the cap and lowered the bar for eligibility. Taken together, the multifaceted challenges identified in this report show that the H-1B program, as currently structured, may not be used to its full potential and may be detrimental in some cases. This report offers several matters for congressional consideration, including that Congress re-examine key H-1B program provisions and make appropriate changes as needed. GAO also recommends that the Departments of Homeland Security and Labor take steps to improve efficiency, flexibility, and monitoring of the H-1B program. Homeland Security disagreed with two recommendations and one matter, citing logistical and other challenges; however, we believe such challenges can be overcome. Labor did not respond to our recommendations.
Recommendations
Our recommendations from this work are listed below with a Contact for more information. Status will change from "In process" to "Open," "Closed - implemented," or "Closed - not implemented" based on our follow up work.
Director:Andrew SherrillTeam:Government Accountability Office: Education, Workforce, and Income SecurityPhone:(202) 512-7252
Matters for Congressional Consideration
Recommendation: To ensure that the H-1B program continues to meet the needs of businesses in a global economy while maintaining a balance of protections for U.S. workers, Congress may wish to consider reviewing the merits and shortcomings of key program provisions and making appropriate changes as needed. Such a review may include, but would not necessarily be limited to (1) the qualifications required for workers eligible under the H-1B program, (2) exemptions from the cap, (3) the appropriateness of H-1B hiring by staffing companies, (4) the level of the cap, and (5) the role the program should play in the U.S. immigration system in relationship to permanent residency.
Status: In process
Comments: When we determine what steps the Congress has taken, we will provide updated information.
Recommendation: To reduce duplication and fragmentation in the administration and oversight of the H-1B application process, consistent with past GAO matters for congressional consideration, Congress may wish to consider eliminating the requirement that employers first submit a Labor Condition Application (LCA) to the Department of Labor for certification, and require instead that employers submit this application along with the I-129 application to the Department of Homeland Security's U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services for review.
Status: In process
Comments: When we determine what steps the Congress has taken, we will provide updated information.
Recommendation: To improve the Department of Labor's ability to investigate and enforce employer compliance with H-1B program requirements, Congress may wish to consider granting the department subpoena power to obtain employer records during investigations under the H-1B program.
Status: In process
Comments: When we determine what steps the Congress has taken, we will provide updated information.
Recommendation: To help ensure the full protection of H-1B workers employed through staffing companies, Congress may wish to consider holding the employer where an H-1B visa holder performs work accountable for meeting program requirements to the same extent as the employer that submitted the LCA form.
Status: In process
Comments: When we determine what steps the Congress has taken, we will provide updated information.
Recommendations for Executive Action
Recommendation: To help ensure that the number of new H-1B workers who are subject to the cap--both entering the United States and changing to H-1B status within the United States--does not exceed the cap each year, U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services should take steps to improve its tracking of the number of approved H-1B applications and the number of issued visas under the cap by fully leveraging the transformation effort currently under way, which involves the adoption of an electronic petition processing system that will be linked to the Department of State's tracking system. Such steps should ensure that linkages to the Department of State's tracking system will provide Homeland Security with timely access to data on visa issuances, and that mechanisms for tracking petitions and visas against the cap are incorporated into U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services' business rules to be developed for the new electronic petition system.
Agency Affected: Department of Homeland Security
Status: In process
Comments: When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.
Recommendation: To address business concerns without undermining program integrity, U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services should, to the extent permitted by its existing statutory authority, explore options for increasing the flexibility of the application process for H-1B employers, such as (1) allowing employers to rank their applications for visa candidates so that they can hire the best qualified worker for the jobs in highest need; (2) distributing the applications granted under the annual cap in allotments throughout the year (e.g. quarterly); and (3) establishing a system whereby businesses with a strong track-record of compliance with H-1B regulations may use a streamlined application process.
Agency Affected: Department of Homeland Security
Status: In process
Comments: When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.
Recommendation: To improve the transparency and oversight of the posting requirement on the Labor Condition Application (LCA), as part of its current oversight role, the Employment and Training Administration should develop and maintain a centralized Web site, accessible to the public, where businesses must post notice of the intent to hire H-1B workers. Such notices should continue to specify the job category and worksite location noted on the LCA and required by statute on current noncentralized postings.
Agency Affected: Department of Labor
Status: In process
Comments: When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.
Recommendation: To improve the efficiency and effectiveness of its investigations of employer compliance with H-1B requirements, the Employment and Training Administration should provide Labor's Wage and Hour Division searchable access to the LCA database.
Agency Affected: Department of Labor
Status: In process
Comments: When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.
VIEW FULL REPORT (http://www.gao.gov/new.items/d1126.pdf)
More... (http://ashwinsharma.com/2011/01/25/h-1b-visa-program-reforms-are-needed-to-minimize-the-risks-and-costs-of-current-program.aspx?ref=rss)
No comments:
Post a Comment