BrazilianCitizen
06-07 01:26 AM
It is better to take your time and make sure everything is sound, then hurry and miss something.
Can you guys let me know whether your checks payable to "Department of Homeland Security" has been canceled? They received my application on June/4 but my check has not been cashed yet. I heard your priority date is the date they actually get your money. Is this true?
Can you guys let me know whether your checks payable to "Department of Homeland Security" has been canceled? They received my application on June/4 but my check has not been cashed yet. I heard your priority date is the date they actually get your money. Is this true?
wallpaper Transformers - Dark of the
chmur
07-28 12:23 AM
I never said we should keep quiet about it. I was only responding to an earlier post reagarding 'EB2 - elitist protectionism'. Just like you are within your rights to look after yourself, so is everybody else - welcome to capitalism. I have always maintained that going down the road of EB3 versus EB2 is detrimental to this group. Your post only adds to this.
In anycase I dont know how splitting visas equally between EB2I and EB3I can pass the smell test even if DOS were to implement it - there is a categorization that is already established AFTER the initial handout is made on an equal basis. The split completely negates it - at least to the extent any EB2ROW spill over is directed to EB3 when EB2 I and C are already retrogressed.
Lets not swear by capitalism but selectively resort to socialism.
Yes, you quoted Visa bulletin which says DOS "may" not to adhere to country limits in distributing spill overs .
is there anything that says that distribution further has to be done in a particular way ??
I have not found any . Probably there is none otherwise DOS could not have gotten away with "vertical" and "Horizontal" flip flops.
In that light every comment about EB*->EB? , failing smell tests are speculative at best.
You are yet to respond to my question of why EB3-I and recapture lobbying efforts cannot proceed simultaneously and How EB3-I lobbying undermines recapture effort.
In anycase I dont know how splitting visas equally between EB2I and EB3I can pass the smell test even if DOS were to implement it - there is a categorization that is already established AFTER the initial handout is made on an equal basis. The split completely negates it - at least to the extent any EB2ROW spill over is directed to EB3 when EB2 I and C are already retrogressed.
Lets not swear by capitalism but selectively resort to socialism.
Yes, you quoted Visa bulletin which says DOS "may" not to adhere to country limits in distributing spill overs .
is there anything that says that distribution further has to be done in a particular way ??
I have not found any . Probably there is none otherwise DOS could not have gotten away with "vertical" and "Horizontal" flip flops.
In that light every comment about EB*->EB? , failing smell tests are speculative at best.
You are yet to respond to my question of why EB3-I and recapture lobbying efforts cannot proceed simultaneously and How EB3-I lobbying undermines recapture effort.
EkAurAaya
10-30 03:46 PM
Sorry if this has already been posted
_____________________________
(c) Validity after Revocation or Withdrawal . Pursuant to the provisions of section 106(c) of the American Competitiveness in the Twenty-First Century Act (AC21), Public Law 106-313, the approval of a Form I-140 employment-based (EB) immigrant petition shall remain valid when an alien changes jobs, if:
� A Form I-485, Application to Adjust Status, on the basis of the EB immigrant petition has been filed and remained unadjudicated for 180 days or more; and
� The new job is in the same or similar occupational classification as the job for which the certification or approval was initially made.
If the Form I-140 has been approved and the Form I-485 has been filed and remained unadjudicated for 180 days or more (as measured from the form I-485 receipt date), the approved Form I-140 will remain valid even if the alien changes jobs or employers as long as the new offer of employment is in the same or similar occupation. If the Form I-485 has been pending for less than 180 days, then the approved Form I-140 shall not remain valid with respect to a new offer of employment.
Accordingly, if the employer withdraws the approved Form I-140 on or after the date that the Form I-485 has been pending 180 days, the approved Form I-140 shall remain valid under the provisions of �106(c) of AC21. It is expected that the alien will have submitted evidence to the office having jurisdiction over the pending Form I-485 that the new offer of employment is in the same or similar occupational classification as the offer of employment for which the petition was filed. Accordingly, if the underlying approved Form I-140 is withdrawn, and the alien has not submitted evidence of a new qualifying offer of employment, the adjudicating officer must issue a Notice of Intent to Deny the pending Form I-485. See 8 CFR 103.2(b)(16)(i). If the evidence of a new qualifying offer of employment submitted in response to the Notice of Intent to Deny is timely filed and it appears that the alien has a new offer of employment in the same or similar occupation, the USCIS may consider the approved Form I-140 to remain valid with respect to the new offer of employment and may continue regular processing of the Form I-485. If the applicant responds to the Notice of Intent to Deny, but has not established that the new offer o f employment is in the same or similar occupation, the adjudicating officer may immediately deny the Form I-485. If the alien does not respond or fails to timely respond to the Notice of Intent to Deny, the adjudicating officer may immediately deny the Form I-485.
If approval of the Form I-140 is revoked or the Form I-140 is withdrawn before the alien’s Form I-485 has been pending 180 days, the approved Form I-140 is no longer valid with respect to a new offer of employment and the Form I-485 may be denied. If at any time the USCIS revokes approval of the Form I-140 based on fraud, the alien will not be eligible for the job flexibility provisions of �106(c) of AC21 and the adjudicating officer may, in his or her discretion, deny the attached Form I-485 immediately. In all cases an offer of employment must have been bona fide, and the employer must have had the intent, at the time the Form I-140 was approved, to employ the beneficiary upon adjustment. It should be noted that there is no requirement in statute or regulations that a beneficiary of a Form I-140 actually be in the underlying employment until permanent residence is authorized. Therefore, it is possible for an alien to qualify for the provisions of �106(c) of AC21 even if he or she has never been employed by the prior petitioning employer or the subsequent employer under section 204(j) of the Act.
Source: http://www.uscis.gov/propub/ProPubVAP.jsp?dockey=3b9e27203295497d6f67778ecf8a4 0f9
_____________________________
(c) Validity after Revocation or Withdrawal . Pursuant to the provisions of section 106(c) of the American Competitiveness in the Twenty-First Century Act (AC21), Public Law 106-313, the approval of a Form I-140 employment-based (EB) immigrant petition shall remain valid when an alien changes jobs, if:
� A Form I-485, Application to Adjust Status, on the basis of the EB immigrant petition has been filed and remained unadjudicated for 180 days or more; and
� The new job is in the same or similar occupational classification as the job for which the certification or approval was initially made.
If the Form I-140 has been approved and the Form I-485 has been filed and remained unadjudicated for 180 days or more (as measured from the form I-485 receipt date), the approved Form I-140 will remain valid even if the alien changes jobs or employers as long as the new offer of employment is in the same or similar occupation. If the Form I-485 has been pending for less than 180 days, then the approved Form I-140 shall not remain valid with respect to a new offer of employment.
Accordingly, if the employer withdraws the approved Form I-140 on or after the date that the Form I-485 has been pending 180 days, the approved Form I-140 shall remain valid under the provisions of �106(c) of AC21. It is expected that the alien will have submitted evidence to the office having jurisdiction over the pending Form I-485 that the new offer of employment is in the same or similar occupational classification as the offer of employment for which the petition was filed. Accordingly, if the underlying approved Form I-140 is withdrawn, and the alien has not submitted evidence of a new qualifying offer of employment, the adjudicating officer must issue a Notice of Intent to Deny the pending Form I-485. See 8 CFR 103.2(b)(16)(i). If the evidence of a new qualifying offer of employment submitted in response to the Notice of Intent to Deny is timely filed and it appears that the alien has a new offer of employment in the same or similar occupation, the USCIS may consider the approved Form I-140 to remain valid with respect to the new offer of employment and may continue regular processing of the Form I-485. If the applicant responds to the Notice of Intent to Deny, but has not established that the new offer o f employment is in the same or similar occupation, the adjudicating officer may immediately deny the Form I-485. If the alien does not respond or fails to timely respond to the Notice of Intent to Deny, the adjudicating officer may immediately deny the Form I-485.
If approval of the Form I-140 is revoked or the Form I-140 is withdrawn before the alien’s Form I-485 has been pending 180 days, the approved Form I-140 is no longer valid with respect to a new offer of employment and the Form I-485 may be denied. If at any time the USCIS revokes approval of the Form I-140 based on fraud, the alien will not be eligible for the job flexibility provisions of �106(c) of AC21 and the adjudicating officer may, in his or her discretion, deny the attached Form I-485 immediately. In all cases an offer of employment must have been bona fide, and the employer must have had the intent, at the time the Form I-140 was approved, to employ the beneficiary upon adjustment. It should be noted that there is no requirement in statute or regulations that a beneficiary of a Form I-140 actually be in the underlying employment until permanent residence is authorized. Therefore, it is possible for an alien to qualify for the provisions of �106(c) of AC21 even if he or she has never been employed by the prior petitioning employer or the subsequent employer under section 204(j) of the Act.
Source: http://www.uscis.gov/propub/ProPubVAP.jsp?dockey=3b9e27203295497d6f67778ecf8a4 0f9
2011 transformers dark of the moon
EB3RESTOFWORLD
09-26 02:03 PM
WE FILED 19 JULY AND RECEIVED NOTICE SEPTEMBER 11 AND eEAD APPROVED SEPTEMBER 24 VWE FILED NCS BUT IT WAS TRANSFERED TO TEXAS
more...
snhn
08-26 04:24 PM
I read this as moste h1 extensions are being denied, and think to myself, why are we so sruprised. The body shoppers abuse the system for such a long time, they had it coming to them. But so what, people who are being affected by this are the poor consultants themselves, who put all their trust in these body shoppers and in some cases paid high amounts to come to US. BOdy shoppers are not being affected by this in anyways. They should be fined if the US rejects an H1 for illegal hire. I just hope that consultants are given enough time to apply at other places.
I was also denied h1 extension some 3 years ago. Mine was because of criminal record. i appelaed and denial was approved and USCSI admitted to the the fact that they made a mistake. I was lucky and I knew what the law stated about my criminal record. You can search the forum and will find out what I am talking about. so to all who have been rejected, please research the if the denial is wrong then please file appeal. In most cases, the appeal will be reviewd the driector of the district. So please dont give up.
I was also denied h1 extension some 3 years ago. Mine was because of criminal record. i appelaed and denial was approved and USCSI admitted to the the fact that they made a mistake. I was lucky and I knew what the law stated about my criminal record. You can search the forum and will find out what I am talking about. so to all who have been rejected, please research the if the denial is wrong then please file appeal. In most cases, the appeal will be reviewd the driector of the district. So please dont give up.
CADude
08-28 01:36 PM
It's very frustrating.. TSC is sitting on our application or what? Approx 30K applications are there for July 2nd filer including NSC->TSC transfer(per old NYT report). We see reporting of 1 or 2 receipting a day then few quite days. :mad:
It will approx 60 days since filing and still waiting for check encash/Receipt. What a heck.. :mad:
I have only seen just one or two cases so far with receipts I mean filed on Jul 2. I myself am a Jul 2 filer NSC filer with TSC approved 140 and haven't gotten anything yet....I also had the LUd on 7/28/07.
It will approx 60 days since filing and still waiting for check encash/Receipt. What a heck.. :mad:
I have only seen just one or two cases so far with receipts I mean filed on Jul 2. I myself am a Jul 2 filer NSC filer with TSC approved 140 and haven't gotten anything yet....I also had the LUd on 7/28/07.
more...
jindhal
09-24 03:36 PM
rightly said... Here is a simple analogy... compare the porting scenario to someone who just joins a new company with 10 yrs experience and someone who has been with the same company for 10 years. If one of them has to be promoted, who will it be ? Or if the company is now going under, who will get fired first ?
The fact that a person has been with a company for 10 yrs holds enough merit when the company decides who gets promoted or who gets fired. So my friend stand in line like everyone else based on your priority date. That is your place in the line as per law.
A person has been with a company for 10 years as a Test Lead and is promoted to a position of a manager and the Lead expects that on the first day of being a manager he wants all the rights and benefits of being a manager for 10 years even though he has been a lead for all of those 10 years.
The fact that a person has been with a company for 10 yrs holds enough merit when the company decides who gets promoted or who gets fired. So my friend stand in line like everyone else based on your priority date. That is your place in the line as per law.
A person has been with a company for 10 years as a Test Lead and is promoted to a position of a manager and the Lead expects that on the first day of being a manager he wants all the rights and benefits of being a manager for 10 years even though he has been a lead for all of those 10 years.
2010 Transformers: Dark of the Moon
land of dreams
02-10 08:24 PM
To the Gurus,
I have a couple of questions regarding my AC21 portability, please post your thoughts on this
1) My 140 is approved and 485 is pending more than 180 days and I am planning to change my job. If my old employer does not cancel the approved 140, do I need to inform USCIS about the change of job??
2) Can I change multiple jobs??
3) Has anyone done that??
Please comment on this.
I have a couple of questions regarding my AC21 portability, please post your thoughts on this
1) My 140 is approved and 485 is pending more than 180 days and I am planning to change my job. If my old employer does not cancel the approved 140, do I need to inform USCIS about the change of job??
2) Can I change multiple jobs??
3) Has anyone done that??
Please comment on this.
more...
desi3933
07-10 10:57 AM
Link to EB-1 case where I-140 was denied because job offered was not "permanent".
Link
http://www.uscis.gov/err/B3%20-%20Outstanding%20Professors%20and%20Researchers/Decisions_Issued_in_2004/MAR232004_01B3203.pdf
As per this document
Pursuant to regulations at 8 C.F.R. 9 204.5(i)(2), "permanent," in reference to a research position, means either tenured, tenure-track, or for a term of indefinite or unlimited duration, and in which the employee will ordinarily have an expectation of continued employment unless there is good cause for termination..
Link
http://www.uscis.gov/err/B3%20-%20Outstanding%20Professors%20and%20Researchers/Decisions_Issued_in_2004/MAR232004_01B3203.pdf
As per this document
Pursuant to regulations at 8 C.F.R. 9 204.5(i)(2), "permanent," in reference to a research position, means either tenured, tenure-track, or for a term of indefinite or unlimited duration, and in which the employee will ordinarily have an expectation of continued employment unless there is good cause for termination..
hair Transformers: Dark of the Moon
snathan
02-01 11:12 PM
If I am lucky enough I can make upto 70-80years of my age maximum, considering my age now, I might live another 30-35yrs. Just imagine what life we want, I completely agree what points you mentioned below. But you are forgetting the insidents we read in news media every day. I almost find atleast one incident where people are killed just for money........what if our fate is not good, and we encounter such situation???
So there is are many factors that effect our life on both sides of the globe !
So your point is...?:confused:
So there is are many factors that effect our life on both sides of the globe !
So your point is...?:confused:
more...
camarasa
07-09 06:06 PM
Guys and gals when you email people and talk to people of the media etc please stress "LEGAL IMMIGRATION". I've been reading a few messages of late that open with "immigration" but only start talking about legal immigration a few paragraphs later. Please stress "LEGAL" everytime you mention the word "immigration". Thanks.
hot transformers dark of the moon
test101
07-10 11:05 AM
what media is covering this ? will you inform us ?
thanks
thanks
more...
house Transformers Dark of the Moon
man-woman-and-gc
09-15 12:41 PM
Hi,
Thank You for taking initiation. Please add my name in the spreadsheet.
Chandrasekhar Nachu, . My contribution is $100.
Thanks buddy..can u please send me ur email ID too? I guess in the future when we have # of pledges grow, we will use email as the way to communicate the status on this effort.
Thank You for taking initiation. Please add my name in the spreadsheet.
Chandrasekhar Nachu, . My contribution is $100.
Thanks buddy..can u please send me ur email ID too? I guess in the future when we have # of pledges grow, we will use email as the way to communicate the status on this effort.
tattoo transformers-dark-of-the-moon-
simple1
05-01 03:14 PM
exactly, spouse/derivate doesn�t get affected at all (other than a shorter or longer delay, depending on calculations).
Anyways, regardless EAD/AP or green card the derivate cant leave the country longer time. There will be no diff for her.
They have no strings attached EAD. Look at ours/primary? Can a programmer-EAD take up Project manager Job? Categorically No.
If the primary gets greencard earlier both (primary with GC, spouse with open-ead) can work/move any place they want.
Plus it is fair this way for some primary waiting in the queue and there is no law tying EBdependent with EBquota.
Again, I am waiting to hear a forum-Attorney or IV-core�s interpretation.
I support finding the fact...
Following two concerns were raised but the answers should satisfy....
1) Spouse may not get EAD/AP?
The document clearly states that if the primary's priority date is current then the primary can file I-485 and the spouse can file I-485 as dependent.
Once spouse files his/her I-485 he/she becomes eligible for EAD/AP and there are no restrictions on what and where the spouse can work on EAD/AP.
The document only says that the visa must be used from family quota and not from employment quota.
How does it then matter whether the spouse gets green card even after 10 years if he/she can work anywhere, any occupation and full time/part time?
2) Spouse may get GC long after?
Look at it this way currently we have pool of 140K to share among primary and dependents. What if this pool becomes 200K (if we assume 60K from family quota for illustration purpose)? Which one will be faster. It has to be 200K pool.
In any case let the correct rules be followed.
Anyways, regardless EAD/AP or green card the derivate cant leave the country longer time. There will be no diff for her.
They have no strings attached EAD. Look at ours/primary? Can a programmer-EAD take up Project manager Job? Categorically No.
If the primary gets greencard earlier both (primary with GC, spouse with open-ead) can work/move any place they want.
Plus it is fair this way for some primary waiting in the queue and there is no law tying EBdependent with EBquota.
Again, I am waiting to hear a forum-Attorney or IV-core�s interpretation.
I support finding the fact...
Following two concerns were raised but the answers should satisfy....
1) Spouse may not get EAD/AP?
The document clearly states that if the primary's priority date is current then the primary can file I-485 and the spouse can file I-485 as dependent.
Once spouse files his/her I-485 he/she becomes eligible for EAD/AP and there are no restrictions on what and where the spouse can work on EAD/AP.
The document only says that the visa must be used from family quota and not from employment quota.
How does it then matter whether the spouse gets green card even after 10 years if he/she can work anywhere, any occupation and full time/part time?
2) Spouse may get GC long after?
Look at it this way currently we have pool of 140K to share among primary and dependents. What if this pool becomes 200K (if we assume 60K from family quota for illustration purpose)? Which one will be faster. It has to be 200K pool.
In any case let the correct rules be followed.
more...
pictures iTunes Movie Trailer has just
gc28262
06-26 01:42 PM
Discriminating based on Immigration status is not considered violation of EEO laws.
EEO protects from discrimination on the basis of race, sex, creed, religion, color, or national origin.
EEO does not protect immigration status based discrimination. However Immigration Reform and Control Act of 1986 does protect against discrimination based on immigration status.
https://www.oig.lsc.gov/legis/irca86.htm
SEC. 102. UNFAIR IMMIGRATION-RELATED EMPLOYMENT PRACTICES.
EEO protects from discrimination on the basis of race, sex, creed, religion, color, or national origin.
EEO does not protect immigration status based discrimination. However Immigration Reform and Control Act of 1986 does protect against discrimination based on immigration status.
https://www.oig.lsc.gov/legis/irca86.htm
SEC. 102. UNFAIR IMMIGRATION-RELATED EMPLOYMENT PRACTICES.
dresses #39;Transformers Dark of the
sankap
07-10 02:00 PM
@supreet:
Desi/Sankap,
I am not planning to open a company for this. If possible, I would rather work as an independent contractor on 1099.
Please read IRS links I posted above re independent contractor vs. worker. Since you'll be filing your taxes as an independent contractor/sole proprietor on 1099, you'll be considered "self-employed." AC21 allows self-employment. You may not be formally opening a company, but you'll be self-employed.
Now, after reading the last few posts, it looks like there are three things I need to worry about in case of a RFE -
1. Job should be bona fide (without going into the definition of the word).
My project is going to be with a large Bank through a big, wellknown consulting/outsourcing company. That should take care of the 'bonafide' part.
All self-employment is legitimate--so no need to worry. Another option is o get the EVL from the staffing company in case of RFE. Your subcontract with the bank is immaterial.
2. Should have similar/same job duties/responsibilities.
I am still waiting for the contract, however I can have my job duties/responsibilities listed out in my contract with the company. I am sure I can get a letter from the client too if it comes to that.
Your self-employment under AC21 has to be same or similar job. If the contracting co can give you an EVL (in case of an RFE), good enough. If not, you can create one for your self-employed "Sole Proprietorship." I wouldn't bother the staffing company*now* for an EVL.
3. Job should be permanent - This is something I may not be able to prove. Since the project is short term, I am sure my contract will mention that. I am trying to convince the company to at least include "contract-to-hire" in the language of the contract. Since this project has potential of becoming long term, company is not averse to this idea.
Will having 'contract-to-hire' in the contract take care of this question (if a RFE comes).
All self-employment is "permanent." The staffing co may be able to write that on EVL. I wouldn't talk with the staffing co about that now: worry about that only in case of an RFE.
Thanks!!
- S
Desi/Sankap,
I am not planning to open a company for this. If possible, I would rather work as an independent contractor on 1099.
Please read IRS links I posted above re independent contractor vs. worker. Since you'll be filing your taxes as an independent contractor/sole proprietor on 1099, you'll be considered "self-employed." AC21 allows self-employment. You may not be formally opening a company, but you'll be self-employed.
Now, after reading the last few posts, it looks like there are three things I need to worry about in case of a RFE -
1. Job should be bona fide (without going into the definition of the word).
My project is going to be with a large Bank through a big, wellknown consulting/outsourcing company. That should take care of the 'bonafide' part.
All self-employment is legitimate--so no need to worry. Another option is o get the EVL from the staffing company in case of RFE. Your subcontract with the bank is immaterial.
2. Should have similar/same job duties/responsibilities.
I am still waiting for the contract, however I can have my job duties/responsibilities listed out in my contract with the company. I am sure I can get a letter from the client too if it comes to that.
Your self-employment under AC21 has to be same or similar job. If the contracting co can give you an EVL (in case of an RFE), good enough. If not, you can create one for your self-employed "Sole Proprietorship." I wouldn't bother the staffing company*now* for an EVL.
3. Job should be permanent - This is something I may not be able to prove. Since the project is short term, I am sure my contract will mention that. I am trying to convince the company to at least include "contract-to-hire" in the language of the contract. Since this project has potential of becoming long term, company is not averse to this idea.
Will having 'contract-to-hire' in the contract take care of this question (if a RFE comes).
All self-employment is "permanent." The staffing co may be able to write that on EVL. I wouldn't talk with the staffing co about that now: worry about that only in case of an RFE.
Thanks!!
- S
more...
makeup Moon Optimus Prime figure
a1b2c3
06-28 03:30 PM
like desi*3* pointed out, its good to get a lawyers' opinion. if this was illegal it is unlikely that corps would do such postings in such numbers.
unfortunately, H1B is often the last choice in tough economic times (of course the job skills will continue to be an overriding factor) which hurt some H1B workers the most. Personally, holding a job was very difficult for me during the dot com bust so I understand the pain.
But there is very little to be gained by copy-pasting dice ads in IV forums . we have also seen such ads during the the dot com bust when software industry was down. what's so new here?
and by going to the media, you are going to incite more anti-indian feeling. an indian gets equated to a job stealer in these times. people don't bother to instrospect over what exactly has ruined the job market.
at times its good to lie low instead of making impotent noises. just my opinion.
choose wisely. finally, each to his/her own.
unfortunately, H1B is often the last choice in tough economic times (of course the job skills will continue to be an overriding factor) which hurt some H1B workers the most. Personally, holding a job was very difficult for me during the dot com bust so I understand the pain.
But there is very little to be gained by copy-pasting dice ads in IV forums . we have also seen such ads during the the dot com bust when software industry was down. what's so new here?
and by going to the media, you are going to incite more anti-indian feeling. an indian gets equated to a job stealer in these times. people don't bother to instrospect over what exactly has ruined the job market.
at times its good to lie low instead of making impotent noises. just my opinion.
choose wisely. finally, each to his/her own.
girlfriend Optimus Prime
asanghi
07-05 01:35 PM
I think you have already decided to send flowers to make more impact change the message from "Get well soon" which I don't think anybody is going to get, send something "You have screwed my life, I hope you have a good day".
hairstyles Optimus Prime: “You#39;ve made a
gc28262
06-27 09:53 PM
Could you please show us, where in the link you provided, H-1B applicant needs to treated equally for job hiring as compared to GC and EAD workers.
EOE deals with equality (i.e. equal opportunities) for hiring, job promotion, and firing.
IRC Act 1985 deals with unlawful employment of aliens, unfair immigration-related employment practices, and fraud & misuse of certain immigration-related documents.
Two different things.
However, once H-1B applicant is hired, he/she is protected just like any other worker, for job promotions, training, and other work conditions. But employer is under no obligation to extend H-1B beyond any initial H-1B petition date. And, yes, H-1B can also be fired at will*, just like any other worker.
_________________________
Not a legal advice
US citizen of Indian origin
desi3933,
Here is the part of the law that says a job aspirant should not be discriminated by his/her immigration status as long as he/she has a valid work permit( H1B/GC/EAD/Citizenship).
"(1) GENERAL RULE. -- It is an unfair immigration-related employment practice for a person or other entity to discriminate against any individual (other than an unauthorized alien) with respect to the hiring, or recruitment or referral for a fee, of the individual for employment or the discharging of the individual from employment --
The only individual that can be discriminated against is an unauthorized alien. H1B/GC/EAD/Citizen does not fall in this category.
Walking dude's effort will at least highlight the fact that H1Bs are not preferred over GCs/Citizens. In fact it is the other way around. One of my colleague who recently got his GC, was surprised to see so many job offers opening up for him just because he was a GC hoder.
EOE deals with equality (i.e. equal opportunities) for hiring, job promotion, and firing.
IRC Act 1985 deals with unlawful employment of aliens, unfair immigration-related employment practices, and fraud & misuse of certain immigration-related documents.
Two different things.
However, once H-1B applicant is hired, he/she is protected just like any other worker, for job promotions, training, and other work conditions. But employer is under no obligation to extend H-1B beyond any initial H-1B petition date. And, yes, H-1B can also be fired at will*, just like any other worker.
_________________________
Not a legal advice
US citizen of Indian origin
desi3933,
Here is the part of the law that says a job aspirant should not be discriminated by his/her immigration status as long as he/she has a valid work permit( H1B/GC/EAD/Citizenship).
"(1) GENERAL RULE. -- It is an unfair immigration-related employment practice for a person or other entity to discriminate against any individual (other than an unauthorized alien) with respect to the hiring, or recruitment or referral for a fee, of the individual for employment or the discharging of the individual from employment --
The only individual that can be discriminated against is an unauthorized alien. H1B/GC/EAD/Citizen does not fall in this category.
Walking dude's effort will at least highlight the fact that H1Bs are not preferred over GCs/Citizens. In fact it is the other way around. One of my colleague who recently got his GC, was surprised to see so many job offers opening up for him just because he was a GC hoder.
ilikekilo
03-07 06:52 PM
not sure UN where U get this info but appreciate the insight..
indigo10
02-14 01:47 PM
Contributed 50$ through Paypal.
Transaction ID for this payment is: 1D504889D3935344T.
Transaction ID for this payment is: 1D504889D3935344T.
No comments:
Post a Comment