LegalIndianInUSA
08-02 11:43 PM
Although they promise a lot of things on paper, we generally skip reading the fine print. Fine print generally would include this clause (language will be a bit different)...
"Although these are our policies, these might change at any time, with or without written notice".
End of story to all 'You promised me gold in your agreement' arguments.
There was no fine print on the appointment letter. There wasn't even fuzzy wording (like "we may" or "in most circumstances" etc).
Although I'm clearly educated about how the system works now, back then, at age 24, I wasn't. I was foolish enough to trust and believe that they would keep their word; they are after all, big multinational companies.
I don't want other young Indian/foreign immigrants to fall into the same predicament.
The sooner they realize that Human Resources is the most inhuman department in a company, the better.
Practically speaking, if you think from a company's perspective also, I don't blame them. Would you (Mr OP sir) be willing to invest in something that you are not sure that you will get profit from it? Like, you give me 100$, I may give it back+10%interest or may not give it back. If I want to give it back, I may give it back in 2yrs or even 30yrs, 100 yrs its upto me, depending on some citing of random comet I choose.
Same thing in company's point of view, if they invest in endless lawyer fees, filing fees, humongous paperwork and easily these days GC process take 5-35 years and during/after this time, What is the guarantee that you will still stick with the company - after all this investment of time & money? Companies need visible & predictable ROIs.
In large companies, the Legal department doesnt exist solely for GCs and Immigration related matters. The cost of immigration is barely a drop in the overall cost of maintaining such a department, and hence your logic is wrong.
It is an unfortunate truth we all need to get accustomed to live with.
No, we dont need to get accustomed to being lied to, or being treated as skilled slaves.
If you side with the law and say that the companies are not obligated to process GCs, then they should not be offering the same. Also, the law as it currently stands, is unjust and I'd much sooner see the law be changed to something like "if you've worked here for 6 years, paid taxes etc, then you can apply for a GC yourself based on just that"
I guess it is in our Indian blood to expect freebies/extra perks from government, from employers (being socialist, a bit communist country and what not), and we forget it is the FREE MARKET that rules here.
lol. Firstly, there is no such thing as a "free market". Wake up already.
Secondly, the US is more socialist than India is.
Thirdly, A GC is not a freebie/extra perk. A GC is a good-faith agreement between the company, the future employee and the governing body(USCIS), and companies should understand the ethical meaning of "good faith".
If your skills are in high demand, they will make you the king. If supply is high for your skills, they will go for someone cheaper..
Yea sure, I'd like to see all the high skilled kings that have been made by companies.
It is a fallacy that skill, intellect or IQ has meaning/importance in the US.
At the end of the day, you are just another desk jockey.
"Although these are our policies, these might change at any time, with or without written notice".
End of story to all 'You promised me gold in your agreement' arguments.
There was no fine print on the appointment letter. There wasn't even fuzzy wording (like "we may" or "in most circumstances" etc).
Although I'm clearly educated about how the system works now, back then, at age 24, I wasn't. I was foolish enough to trust and believe that they would keep their word; they are after all, big multinational companies.
I don't want other young Indian/foreign immigrants to fall into the same predicament.
The sooner they realize that Human Resources is the most inhuman department in a company, the better.
Practically speaking, if you think from a company's perspective also, I don't blame them. Would you (Mr OP sir) be willing to invest in something that you are not sure that you will get profit from it? Like, you give me 100$, I may give it back+10%interest or may not give it back. If I want to give it back, I may give it back in 2yrs or even 30yrs, 100 yrs its upto me, depending on some citing of random comet I choose.
Same thing in company's point of view, if they invest in endless lawyer fees, filing fees, humongous paperwork and easily these days GC process take 5-35 years and during/after this time, What is the guarantee that you will still stick with the company - after all this investment of time & money? Companies need visible & predictable ROIs.
In large companies, the Legal department doesnt exist solely for GCs and Immigration related matters. The cost of immigration is barely a drop in the overall cost of maintaining such a department, and hence your logic is wrong.
It is an unfortunate truth we all need to get accustomed to live with.
No, we dont need to get accustomed to being lied to, or being treated as skilled slaves.
If you side with the law and say that the companies are not obligated to process GCs, then they should not be offering the same. Also, the law as it currently stands, is unjust and I'd much sooner see the law be changed to something like "if you've worked here for 6 years, paid taxes etc, then you can apply for a GC yourself based on just that"
I guess it is in our Indian blood to expect freebies/extra perks from government, from employers (being socialist, a bit communist country and what not), and we forget it is the FREE MARKET that rules here.
lol. Firstly, there is no such thing as a "free market". Wake up already.
Secondly, the US is more socialist than India is.
Thirdly, A GC is not a freebie/extra perk. A GC is a good-faith agreement between the company, the future employee and the governing body(USCIS), and companies should understand the ethical meaning of "good faith".
If your skills are in high demand, they will make you the king. If supply is high for your skills, they will go for someone cheaper..
Yea sure, I'd like to see all the high skilled kings that have been made by companies.
It is a fallacy that skill, intellect or IQ has meaning/importance in the US.
At the end of the day, you are just another desk jockey.
wallpaper Gabrielle Giffords began
Dipika
04-24 10:15 AM
All,
Opened my email this morning to see the card production ordered email (time stamp in my inbox reads 2:15 am PST 4/23/08); the approval date was 4/23/08.
Been in meetings all day so not even a chance to call anyone about it.
Yay!
Good luck to all my fellow sufferers!
Googler
Congratulations. Enjoy your freedom.
I have question, how do you get email? i mean do we mention email address in 485 apps. sorry it's not on my head what i have filled in 485. Just need to know where and how we provides email address. And help us with more information.
Opened my email this morning to see the card production ordered email (time stamp in my inbox reads 2:15 am PST 4/23/08); the approval date was 4/23/08.
Been in meetings all day so not even a chance to call anyone about it.
Yay!
Good luck to all my fellow sufferers!
Googler
Congratulations. Enjoy your freedom.
I have question, how do you get email? i mean do we mention email address in 485 apps. sorry it's not on my head what i have filled in 485. Just need to know where and how we provides email address. And help us with more information.
andycool
03-16 02:04 PM
141,020 visa numbers used in FY2009
http://www.travel.state.gov/pdf/FY09AnnualReport_TableV.pdf
Look at the last page.
The worldwide level for annual employment-based preference immigrants is 140,000. So the usage was actually more.
__________________
Not a legal advice.
Hello Desi,
"Applicability of Section 202(e): When visa demand by documentarily qualified applicants from a particular country exceeds the amount of numbers available under the annual numerical limitation, that country is considered to be oversubscribed. Oversubscription may require the establishment of an earlier cut-off date than that which applies to a particular visa category on a worldwide basis. The prorating of numbers for an oversubscribed country follows the same percentages specified for the division of the worldwide annual limitation among the preferences. (Note that visa availability cut-off dates for oversubscribed areas may not be later than worldwide cut-off dates, if any, for the respective preferences.)
Furthermore, Section 202(a)(2) reads, �2) Per country levels for family-sponsored and employment-based immigrants. Subject to paragraphs (3), (4), and (5), the total number of immigrant visas made available to natives of any single foreign state or dependent area under subsections (a) and (b) of section 203 in any fiscal year may not exceed seven percent (in the case of a single foreign state) or two percent (in the case of a dependent area) of the total number of such visas made available under such subsections in that fiscal year.� The seven percent per-country limit specified in INA 202(a)(2) is considered to be for both Family-sponsored and Employment-based numbers combined.
Allocation of visa numbers under Section 202(e) is accomplished as follows:
1. If based on historical patterns or current demand it appears that during a fiscal year number use by aliens chargeable to a particular country will exceed the per-country numerical limit for both the Family and Employment preferences combined, that country would be considered oversubscribed. Both the Family and Employment preferences would be subject to the prorating provisions of INA 202(e)(1).
2. Sometimes during a fiscal year it may become apparent that because of a lack of demand in the Family preferences, number use by aliens chargeable to an oversubscribed country will be well within the per-country numerical limit. In such case the excess Family numbers would be made available to the Employment preferences subject to the prorating provisions of INA 202(e)(1). Each of the first three Employment categories would receive 28.6% of the excess numbers, and each of the Fourth and Fifth preference categories 7.1%. (Fall-across would likewise apply if an oversubscribed country lacked sufficient demand in the Employment preferences but had excess demand in the Family preferences.)
If a foreign state other than an oversubscribed country has little Family preference demand but considerable Employment preference demand, the otherwise unused Family numbers fall across to Employment (and vice versa) for purposes of that foreign state�s annual numerical limit. For example, in FY-2009 South Korea used a grand total of 15,899 Family and Employment preference numbers, of which 1,688 were Family numbers and 14,211 were Employment numbers. This grand total was well within the FY-2009 per-country numerical limit of 25,620 Family and Employment numbers combined, so South Korea was not oversubscribed. The unused Family numbers were distributed within the Employment categories, allowing South Korea to be considerably over the 9,800 Employment limit which would have been in effect had it been an oversubscribed country.
This is from April Visa Bulletin , according to this S korea got 14,211 visas from FB ( spill over from FB - EB) then dont you think the total EB visas issued in 2009 should be around 150000 instead of 141000....
I am little confused...
your comment will be greatly appreciated ;)
http://www.travel.state.gov/pdf/FY09AnnualReport_TableV.pdf
Look at the last page.
The worldwide level for annual employment-based preference immigrants is 140,000. So the usage was actually more.
__________________
Not a legal advice.
Hello Desi,
"Applicability of Section 202(e): When visa demand by documentarily qualified applicants from a particular country exceeds the amount of numbers available under the annual numerical limitation, that country is considered to be oversubscribed. Oversubscription may require the establishment of an earlier cut-off date than that which applies to a particular visa category on a worldwide basis. The prorating of numbers for an oversubscribed country follows the same percentages specified for the division of the worldwide annual limitation among the preferences. (Note that visa availability cut-off dates for oversubscribed areas may not be later than worldwide cut-off dates, if any, for the respective preferences.)
Furthermore, Section 202(a)(2) reads, �2) Per country levels for family-sponsored and employment-based immigrants. Subject to paragraphs (3), (4), and (5), the total number of immigrant visas made available to natives of any single foreign state or dependent area under subsections (a) and (b) of section 203 in any fiscal year may not exceed seven percent (in the case of a single foreign state) or two percent (in the case of a dependent area) of the total number of such visas made available under such subsections in that fiscal year.� The seven percent per-country limit specified in INA 202(a)(2) is considered to be for both Family-sponsored and Employment-based numbers combined.
Allocation of visa numbers under Section 202(e) is accomplished as follows:
1. If based on historical patterns or current demand it appears that during a fiscal year number use by aliens chargeable to a particular country will exceed the per-country numerical limit for both the Family and Employment preferences combined, that country would be considered oversubscribed. Both the Family and Employment preferences would be subject to the prorating provisions of INA 202(e)(1).
2. Sometimes during a fiscal year it may become apparent that because of a lack of demand in the Family preferences, number use by aliens chargeable to an oversubscribed country will be well within the per-country numerical limit. In such case the excess Family numbers would be made available to the Employment preferences subject to the prorating provisions of INA 202(e)(1). Each of the first three Employment categories would receive 28.6% of the excess numbers, and each of the Fourth and Fifth preference categories 7.1%. (Fall-across would likewise apply if an oversubscribed country lacked sufficient demand in the Employment preferences but had excess demand in the Family preferences.)
If a foreign state other than an oversubscribed country has little Family preference demand but considerable Employment preference demand, the otherwise unused Family numbers fall across to Employment (and vice versa) for purposes of that foreign state�s annual numerical limit. For example, in FY-2009 South Korea used a grand total of 15,899 Family and Employment preference numbers, of which 1,688 were Family numbers and 14,211 were Employment numbers. This grand total was well within the FY-2009 per-country numerical limit of 25,620 Family and Employment numbers combined, so South Korea was not oversubscribed. The unused Family numbers were distributed within the Employment categories, allowing South Korea to be considerably over the 9,800 Employment limit which would have been in effect had it been an oversubscribed country.
This is from April Visa Bulletin , according to this S korea got 14,211 visas from FB ( spill over from FB - EB) then dont you think the total EB visas issued in 2009 should be around 150000 instead of 141000....
I am little confused...
your comment will be greatly appreciated ;)
2011 Gabrielle Giffords.jpg
agaudi
11-13 12:10 PM
The are playing with all of us, At this point after almost 10 years of following the law in order to get a GC I guess that is better to be undocumented. They at least can swith jobs or do other things, not paying lawyers USICS fees taxes etc etc. We are prisoners in this broken immigration system. the other day I called USCIS to see why my and my family's apps haven't been processed yet. They said they will review my case. 5 days later I got three identical e mails telling me they are ACTIVELY working on our cases! Can you believe that? I'm tired of all of this and I want to do whatever it takes to finish with this, I think I can produce more for me, my family and this country, but I'm loosing my youth in this battle. Tell me what to do and I'll do it.
more...
pappu
12-21 10:56 AM
Conference Details
Date: Wednesday, December 20, 2006
Start Time: 9:00 PM Eastern Std Time
End Time: 10:55 PM Eastern Std Time
Participants: 25
Type of Conference Web-Scheduled Standard
Dial-in Number: 1-605-725-1900 (South Dakota)
Organizer Access Code: *938581 (you must include the leading star key)
Participant Access Code 22558
Hello Varsha,
How was the conf call. pls post some brief notes. All NJ and NY members are invited for the meeting this sunday in CT
http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/showthread.php?t=2645
Date: Wednesday, December 20, 2006
Start Time: 9:00 PM Eastern Std Time
End Time: 10:55 PM Eastern Std Time
Participants: 25
Type of Conference Web-Scheduled Standard
Dial-in Number: 1-605-725-1900 (South Dakota)
Organizer Access Code: *938581 (you must include the leading star key)
Participant Access Code 22558
Hello Varsha,
How was the conf call. pls post some brief notes. All NJ and NY members are invited for the meeting this sunday in CT
http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/showthread.php?t=2645
stldude
07-24 11:53 AM
I see that USCIS release a press release on 7/20 and it says the time complaince for Nebraska Center is 8/1. Does it mean that July 2nd filers will get receipt by 8/1 ( i know i'm expecting too much from USCIS)... When can we expect the receipt notices.. I guess i'm a bit nervous now..
more...
feedfront
09-20 12:06 PM
Does anyone know, how much attorney gonna charge to reply RFE?
2010 Gabrielle Giffords
cableching
07-11 03:02 PM
I think movement in EB-3 for India nad Chine will be difficult, as most of the folks from ROW apply under EB3 and most of the applicants in EB2 are from India and Chine?
As a result EB-3 quota is used up easily and the per country limits apply for Indians and Chinese. Where as for EB-2, the per country limits do not apply as the ROW applicants are not that many.
As a result EB-3 quota is used up easily and the per country limits apply for Indians and Chinese. Where as for EB-2, the per country limits do not apply as the ROW applicants are not that many.
more...
Madhuri
04-23 08:50 PM
as Always logiclife rocks.....so precise and neat. Core members like him is the ultimate reason I have full faith and confidence in IV leadership.
Its not like you are going to threaten to vote against them. YOU HAVE NO VOTING power for next 15 years.[/QUOTE]
Logic Life -- YOU ROCK MAN !![/QUOTE]
Its not like you are going to threaten to vote against them. YOU HAVE NO VOTING power for next 15 years.[/QUOTE]
Logic Life -- YOU ROCK MAN !![/QUOTE]
hair Gabrielle Giffords, an Arizona
cyberstar79
03-09 12:37 PM
Disappointing.
more...
zen
03-29 10:32 PM
Please pardon me for my ignorance but why is that every admin fix will work with money in this country?
Does this mean we have to pay money to fix something in the system that will be useful to this country (eg: Senetors take the money and introduce the bills. Do you guys think it is equvalent to Bribe in other countries?)
I could recall that July '07 fiasco has been fixed without we donate anything.
Yes, I know that nothing is free in this country however I am not sure why should we pay bribe (or whatever you call) to fix something in the system?
These senetrors should have minimum knowledge that if they give GCs to us then we will flourish the economy in return. That is my point...
very good point and I agree 100 percent ..sad part is that such a good post gets buried under 20 posts which ask for more donations.
as far as I know FOIA campaign was for 5000 dollars ..then it was increased to 10,000. will it increase again ?
Does this mean we have to pay money to fix something in the system that will be useful to this country (eg: Senetors take the money and introduce the bills. Do you guys think it is equvalent to Bribe in other countries?)
I could recall that July '07 fiasco has been fixed without we donate anything.
Yes, I know that nothing is free in this country however I am not sure why should we pay bribe (or whatever you call) to fix something in the system?
These senetrors should have minimum knowledge that if they give GCs to us then we will flourish the economy in return. That is my point...
very good point and I agree 100 percent ..sad part is that such a good post gets buried under 20 posts which ask for more donations.
as far as I know FOIA campaign was for 5000 dollars ..then it was increased to 10,000. will it increase again ?
hot Giffords Shot in Head, Fed.
satyasrd
09-09 12:48 PM
Thanks for this post. I was about to post something similar myself.
Seriously what is EB3 I thinking ?!? Pretty soon it will only be them stuck in this mess.
I know several who have literally substituted their EAD for their GC and settled down comfortably. Absolutely ridiculous !
EB3 seriously needs to wake up.
Seriously what is EB3 I thinking ?!? Pretty soon it will only be them stuck in this mess.
I know several who have literally substituted their EAD for their GC and settled down comfortably. Absolutely ridiculous !
EB3 seriously needs to wake up.
more...
house gabrielle giffords after
gc_on_demand
11-14 10:52 AM
Totally agree, very nicely put. They will hear - listen if we present ideas that are pertinent to the existing situation. Nothing more pertinent than the housing mess. No one cares about old jaded ideas like "high talent" etc.
Can people in California approach Zoe Lofergens office with the idea?
On my part I will start sending letters and emails to the law makers.
Some one in the core has to take the lead and give some direction to this effort......
Do not regret if six months from now the housing crisis has cooled a little, no one will listen to us then. We would have wasted another chance. Do not take it for granted that now Obama is in office, he will do smoething about our problems.
If you are from california plz make a call. Or if you know some one have him/her call to her office.
We need to keep moving ahead on this one.
Can people in California approach Zoe Lofergens office with the idea?
On my part I will start sending letters and emails to the law makers.
Some one in the core has to take the lead and give some direction to this effort......
Do not regret if six months from now the housing crisis has cooled a little, no one will listen to us then. We would have wasted another chance. Do not take it for granted that now Obama is in office, he will do smoething about our problems.
If you are from california plz make a call. Or if you know some one have him/her call to her office.
We need to keep moving ahead on this one.
tattoo Giffords#39; Condition Upgraded
piyu7444
01-30 04:15 PM
Good. That means you were in-status at the I-485 filing. Submit documents mentioned in RFE and you should be good.
>> My question is - Is the time I haven't been working considered as Out of Status?
No you are not. Like I said out of status UNTIL date of I-485 application is most important.
____________________
Not a legal advice.
US Citizen of Indian Origin
I read the thread and have a question for Desi3933 as he seems to have knowledge about how this works..........
I am on h1b with employer B.
Employer A had my h1b and had processed my GC. I applied for 485 in Jul 07 and then in Jun 08 I transfered my h1b to Employer B. I did not notify USCIS about this job change so I did not invoke AC21. (Lawyer suggested to leave it in case we get a RFE)
Now my wife's 485 application is tied with mine. She is on h1b with employer C. Employer C is a consulting agency and her contract will end today Jan 30 2009. Also we are expecting hence she will take a 3 month time off / vacation for the baby (permissible under law) starting End of April 2009. Further she will travel to India on Aug 1 2009 and will return around Nov 15 09.
She has worked only 1 month in 2009 this will be reflected on 2009 w-2. I have couple of questions:
Will she be considered as "out of status" from Feb 1 to April end?
She has h1b valid till 2010 so when she returns back to US in Nov 09 shall she use h1b or enter US on AP given the fact that 485 is pending?
Will you recommend getting paid from Feb thru May to cover the gap? (this could be done with as the employer is willing to help)
Thanks
>> My question is - Is the time I haven't been working considered as Out of Status?
No you are not. Like I said out of status UNTIL date of I-485 application is most important.
____________________
Not a legal advice.
US Citizen of Indian Origin
I read the thread and have a question for Desi3933 as he seems to have knowledge about how this works..........
I am on h1b with employer B.
Employer A had my h1b and had processed my GC. I applied for 485 in Jul 07 and then in Jun 08 I transfered my h1b to Employer B. I did not notify USCIS about this job change so I did not invoke AC21. (Lawyer suggested to leave it in case we get a RFE)
Now my wife's 485 application is tied with mine. She is on h1b with employer C. Employer C is a consulting agency and her contract will end today Jan 30 2009. Also we are expecting hence she will take a 3 month time off / vacation for the baby (permissible under law) starting End of April 2009. Further she will travel to India on Aug 1 2009 and will return around Nov 15 09.
She has worked only 1 month in 2009 this will be reflected on 2009 w-2. I have couple of questions:
Will she be considered as "out of status" from Feb 1 to April end?
She has h1b valid till 2010 so when she returns back to US in Nov 09 shall she use h1b or enter US on AP given the fact that 485 is pending?
Will you recommend getting paid from Feb thru May to cover the gap? (this could be done with as the employer is willing to help)
Thanks
more...
pictures Gabrielle Giffords, who was
mhathi
06-11 11:52 AM
Sent early this morning, then resent after Pappu's message.
dresses Gabrielle Giffords may attend
nandakumar
10-22 05:37 PM
I faxed the FOIA request.
more...
makeup Gabrielle Giffords wounded and
feedfront
09-17 02:02 PM
Attorney will contact us as soon as they get letter. They are not going to respond w/o service fee.
Chillax, it's Friday. We'll definitely get it by next week.
Chillax, it's Friday. We'll definitely get it by next week.
girlfriend Head gabrielle giffords
Hassan11
03-18 01:00 PM
Link is here: http://immigration-information.com/forums/showthread.php?t=4285&page=26
Ron Gotcher said on his reply to some readers questions:
The mystery is solved. I have corresponded with Charlie Oppenheim in the Visa Office. He confirmed that the 27% limit does apply. He explained that during this fiscal year, the CIS consumed an unusually large number of Indian EB2 visas, thus making the category unavailable despite a retrogression in the cuoff date which was intended to hold number use within the limit.
He said that based on his discussions with the CIS, he was informed that the CIS did not feel that the current amount of pending Indian first preference demand would be insufficient to use all available numbers under the limit. Therefore, he allowed some of those numbers to fall down into Indian second preference.
So, the Indian second preference numbers used to establish a cutoff date for April are coming from left over Indian first preference, not worldwide numbers.
__________________
Ron Gotcher said on his reply to some readers questions:
The mystery is solved. I have corresponded with Charlie Oppenheim in the Visa Office. He confirmed that the 27% limit does apply. He explained that during this fiscal year, the CIS consumed an unusually large number of Indian EB2 visas, thus making the category unavailable despite a retrogression in the cuoff date which was intended to hold number use within the limit.
He said that based on his discussions with the CIS, he was informed that the CIS did not feel that the current amount of pending Indian first preference demand would be insufficient to use all available numbers under the limit. Therefore, he allowed some of those numbers to fall down into Indian second preference.
So, the Indian second preference numbers used to establish a cutoff date for April are coming from left over Indian first preference, not worldwide numbers.
__________________
hairstyles Gabrielle Giffords shot in
ghost
08-12 07:30 AM
I feel frustrated at some peoples' unwillingness to admit that EB3 needs IV's help now more than ever. They are saying that nothing much can be done for EB3, as INS merely corrected its wrong interpretation in visa allocation
But, if we are all willing to put our hearts and minds to it we can surely come up with new ideas that will help our cause. Surely, laws are written so that justice can happen. So if justice is not happening, the law would have some answer, somewhere.
Let me put forward my idea.
The INA language says that until EB2 is not current, there will be no spillover to EB3. Agreed. But I would contend that this statement is on a year to year basis. That is, if in the year 2002 (for example) all EB2 has been satisfied, then the spillovers should go to year 2002 EB3.
Is this something IV can point out and fight for? Can EB3 members put their money and efforts in this direction? Let me know if this sounds worthwhile
Unsolicited advice - Let's put a small amount as a deposit before we begin these efforts - 6 USD per week for 6 months (signing up for 25 USD per month for 6 months)...I did it and took me 5 minutes, now I am more dedicated to this effort than ever before and am sure that this dedication will have a positive impact on our future efforts...thanks for reading!
But, if we are all willing to put our hearts and minds to it we can surely come up with new ideas that will help our cause. Surely, laws are written so that justice can happen. So if justice is not happening, the law would have some answer, somewhere.
Let me put forward my idea.
The INA language says that until EB2 is not current, there will be no spillover to EB3. Agreed. But I would contend that this statement is on a year to year basis. That is, if in the year 2002 (for example) all EB2 has been satisfied, then the spillovers should go to year 2002 EB3.
Is this something IV can point out and fight for? Can EB3 members put their money and efforts in this direction? Let me know if this sounds worthwhile
Unsolicited advice - Let's put a small amount as a deposit before we begin these efforts - 6 USD per week for 6 months (signing up for 25 USD per month for 6 months)...I did it and took me 5 minutes, now I am more dedicated to this effort than ever before and am sure that this dedication will have a positive impact on our future efforts...thanks for reading!
chanduv23
02-13 10:55 PM
Dear friends,
I am appalled and disgusted by the mudslinging going on between ROW and India-born applicants. If any of you remember your history lessons from high school, the English used this exact policy of "Divide and Rule" to keep control over their colonies.
For example, in India, they would go into Moslem dominated cities, discriminate against them for jobs, and put Hindus in more prestigious positions, and vice-versa. They did this after the first war for independence in 1857 where Hindus, Moslems, rich and poor fought to overthrow the British occupation.
The very same policy is used by the U.S. government to control their population:
1) Per country quotas in EB immigration cause infighting
2) Infighting causes immigrant activists like IV to lose focus and weaken the agenda
3) Infighting results in racism between ROW, India, and China, which causes Americans to watch the circus, shake their heads and lobby for more immigration control
4) Poor regulation in the H1B program cause Americans to lose their jobs and blame the Indians and Chinese
...and the elite sit back, sip their martinis, and watch the fun.
So you have two choices before you:
1) Keep fighting, achieve none of the 3 main IV objectives, and continue your bonded slavery or
2) Unite as one to achieve all 3 objectives, and throw off your shackles
Remember, "Injustice Anywhere is a Threat to Justice Everywhere" - Martin Luther King
I am a strong advocate of Unity and I appreciate your post. Infighting exists everywhere, it is not created but exists in us and our thought process. Let us not say that USCIS or US govt creates the "infighting" by divide and rule. We fight among ourselves because we are unorganized and do not have a platform. IV has provided one of the biggest platforms that caters to all highly skilled immigrants which covers a broad range of issues and is a wonderful platform for all of us to unite.
United we stand, divided we fall - if people find reasons not to be united, then they can expect Lou Dobbs accusing them even after they become US citizens
I am appalled and disgusted by the mudslinging going on between ROW and India-born applicants. If any of you remember your history lessons from high school, the English used this exact policy of "Divide and Rule" to keep control over their colonies.
For example, in India, they would go into Moslem dominated cities, discriminate against them for jobs, and put Hindus in more prestigious positions, and vice-versa. They did this after the first war for independence in 1857 where Hindus, Moslems, rich and poor fought to overthrow the British occupation.
The very same policy is used by the U.S. government to control their population:
1) Per country quotas in EB immigration cause infighting
2) Infighting causes immigrant activists like IV to lose focus and weaken the agenda
3) Infighting results in racism between ROW, India, and China, which causes Americans to watch the circus, shake their heads and lobby for more immigration control
4) Poor regulation in the H1B program cause Americans to lose their jobs and blame the Indians and Chinese
...and the elite sit back, sip their martinis, and watch the fun.
So you have two choices before you:
1) Keep fighting, achieve none of the 3 main IV objectives, and continue your bonded slavery or
2) Unite as one to achieve all 3 objectives, and throw off your shackles
Remember, "Injustice Anywhere is a Threat to Justice Everywhere" - Martin Luther King
I am a strong advocate of Unity and I appreciate your post. Infighting exists everywhere, it is not created but exists in us and our thought process. Let us not say that USCIS or US govt creates the "infighting" by divide and rule. We fight among ourselves because we are unorganized and do not have a platform. IV has provided one of the biggest platforms that caters to all highly skilled immigrants which covers a broad range of issues and is a wonderful platform for all of us to unite.
United we stand, divided we fall - if people find reasons not to be united, then they can expect Lou Dobbs accusing them even after they become US citizens
alias
09-10 01:20 PM
Most of you either have a firewall or a proxy server to go out to the internet at your work locations, which allows for only TCP port 80. So if you are unsuccessful in getting the real player to work, try this:
when real player opens do the following:
click on tools->preferences->network transport->
then check the "manually configure connection settings"
click on RTSP settings and uncheck everything except "Attempt to use HTTP for all contents" click OK.
Next
click on PNA settings and uncheck everything except "Attempt to use HTTP for all contents" click OK.
Enjoy!!
when real player opens do the following:
click on tools->preferences->network transport->
then check the "manually configure connection settings"
click on RTSP settings and uncheck everything except "Attempt to use HTTP for all contents" click OK.
Next
click on PNA settings and uncheck everything except "Attempt to use HTTP for all contents" click OK.
Enjoy!!