pa_arora
03-11 12:27 PM
I am sorry if this is a re-post.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/03/06/AR2009030601926.html
----
They're Taking Their Brains and Going Home
By Vivek Wadhwa
Sunday, March 8, 2009; Page B02
Seven years ago, Sandeep Nijsure left his home in Mumbai to study computer science at the University of North Texas. Master's degree in hand, he went to work for Microsoft. He valued his education and enjoyed the job, but he worried about his aging parents. He missed watching cricket, celebrating Hindu festivals and following the twists of Indian politics. His wife was homesick, too, and her visa didn't allow her to work.
Not long ago, Sandeep would have faced a tough choice: either go home and give up opportunities for wealth and U.S. citizenship, or stay and bide his time until his application for a green card goes through. But last year, Sandeep returned to India and landed a software development position with Amazon.com in Hyderabad. He and his wife live a few blocks from their families in a spacious, air-conditioned house. No longer at the mercy of the American employer sponsoring his visa, Sandeep can more easily determine the course of his career. "We are very happy with our move," he told me in an e-mail.
The United States has always been the country to which the world's best and brightest -- people like Sandeep -- have flocked in pursuit of education and to seek their fortunes. Over the past four decades, India and China suffered a major "brain drain" as tens of thousands of talented people made their way here, dreaming the American dream.
But burgeoning new economies abroad and flagging prospects in the United States have changed everything. And as opportunities pull immigrants home, the lumbering U.S. immigration bureaucracy helps push them away.
When I started teaching at Duke University in 2005, almost all the international students graduating from our Master of Engineering Management program said that they planned to stay in the United States for at least a few years. In the class of 2009, most of our 80 international students are buying one-way tickets home. It's the same at Harvard. Senior economics major Meijie Tang, from China, isn't even bothering to look for a job in the United States. After hearing from other students that it's "impossible" to get an H-1B visa -- the kind given to highly-skilled workers in fields such as engineering and science -- she teamed up with a classmate to start a technology company in Shanghai. Investors in China offered to put up millions even before 23-year-old Meijie and her 21-year-old colleague completed their business plan.
When smart young foreigners leave these shores, they take with them the seeds of tomorrow's innovation. Almost 25 percent of all international patent applications filed from the United States in 2006 named foreign nationals as inventors. Immigrants founded a quarter of all U.S. engineering and technology companies started between 1995 and 2005, including half of those in Silicon Valley. In 2005 alone, immigrants' businesses generated $52 billion in sales and employed 450,000 workers.
Yet rather than welcome these entrepreneurs, the U.S. government is confining many of them to a painful purgatory. As of Sept. 30, 2006, more than a million people were waiting for the 120,000 permanent-resident visas granted each year to skilled workers and their family members. No nation may claim more than 7 percent, so years may pass before immigrants from populous countries such as India and China are even considered.
Like many Indians, Girija Subramaniam is fed up. After earning a master's in electrical engineering from the University of Virginia in 1998, she joined Texas Instruments as a test engineer. She wanted to stay in the United States, applied for permanent residency in 2002 and has been trapped in immigration limbo ever since. If she so much as accepts a promotion or, heaven forbid, starts her own company, she will lose her place in line. Frustrated, she has applied for fast-track Canadian permanent residency and expects to move north of the border by the end of the year.
For the Kaufmann Foundation, I recently surveyed 1,200 Indians and Chinese who worked or studied in the United States and then returned home. Most were in their 30s, and 80 percent held master's degrees or doctorates in management, technology or science -- precisely the kind of people who could make the greatest contribution to the U.S. economy. A sizable number said that they had advanced significantly in their careers since leaving the United States. They were more optimistic about opportunities for entrepreneurship, and more than half planned to start their own businesses, if they had not done so already. Only a quarter said that they were likely to return to the United States.
Why does all this matter? Because just as the United States has relied on foreigners to underwrite its deficit, it has also depended on smart immigrants to staff its laboratories, engineering design studios and tech firms. An analysis of the 2000 Census showed that although immigrants accounted for only 12 percent of the U.S. workforce, they made up 47 percent of all scientists and engineers with doctorates. What's more, 67 percent of all those who entered the fields of science and engineering between 1995 and 2006 were immigrants. What will happen to America's competitive edge when these people go home?
Immigrants who leave the United States will launch companies, file patents and fill the intellectual coffers of other countries. Their talents will benefit nations such as India, China and Canada, not the United States. America's loss will be the world's gain.
wadhwa@duke.edu
Vivek Wadhwa is a senior research associate at Harvard Law School and executive in residence at Duke University.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/03/06/AR2009030601926.html
----
They're Taking Their Brains and Going Home
By Vivek Wadhwa
Sunday, March 8, 2009; Page B02
Seven years ago, Sandeep Nijsure left his home in Mumbai to study computer science at the University of North Texas. Master's degree in hand, he went to work for Microsoft. He valued his education and enjoyed the job, but he worried about his aging parents. He missed watching cricket, celebrating Hindu festivals and following the twists of Indian politics. His wife was homesick, too, and her visa didn't allow her to work.
Not long ago, Sandeep would have faced a tough choice: either go home and give up opportunities for wealth and U.S. citizenship, or stay and bide his time until his application for a green card goes through. But last year, Sandeep returned to India and landed a software development position with Amazon.com in Hyderabad. He and his wife live a few blocks from their families in a spacious, air-conditioned house. No longer at the mercy of the American employer sponsoring his visa, Sandeep can more easily determine the course of his career. "We are very happy with our move," he told me in an e-mail.
The United States has always been the country to which the world's best and brightest -- people like Sandeep -- have flocked in pursuit of education and to seek their fortunes. Over the past four decades, India and China suffered a major "brain drain" as tens of thousands of talented people made their way here, dreaming the American dream.
But burgeoning new economies abroad and flagging prospects in the United States have changed everything. And as opportunities pull immigrants home, the lumbering U.S. immigration bureaucracy helps push them away.
When I started teaching at Duke University in 2005, almost all the international students graduating from our Master of Engineering Management program said that they planned to stay in the United States for at least a few years. In the class of 2009, most of our 80 international students are buying one-way tickets home. It's the same at Harvard. Senior economics major Meijie Tang, from China, isn't even bothering to look for a job in the United States. After hearing from other students that it's "impossible" to get an H-1B visa -- the kind given to highly-skilled workers in fields such as engineering and science -- she teamed up with a classmate to start a technology company in Shanghai. Investors in China offered to put up millions even before 23-year-old Meijie and her 21-year-old colleague completed their business plan.
When smart young foreigners leave these shores, they take with them the seeds of tomorrow's innovation. Almost 25 percent of all international patent applications filed from the United States in 2006 named foreign nationals as inventors. Immigrants founded a quarter of all U.S. engineering and technology companies started between 1995 and 2005, including half of those in Silicon Valley. In 2005 alone, immigrants' businesses generated $52 billion in sales and employed 450,000 workers.
Yet rather than welcome these entrepreneurs, the U.S. government is confining many of them to a painful purgatory. As of Sept. 30, 2006, more than a million people were waiting for the 120,000 permanent-resident visas granted each year to skilled workers and their family members. No nation may claim more than 7 percent, so years may pass before immigrants from populous countries such as India and China are even considered.
Like many Indians, Girija Subramaniam is fed up. After earning a master's in electrical engineering from the University of Virginia in 1998, she joined Texas Instruments as a test engineer. She wanted to stay in the United States, applied for permanent residency in 2002 and has been trapped in immigration limbo ever since. If she so much as accepts a promotion or, heaven forbid, starts her own company, she will lose her place in line. Frustrated, she has applied for fast-track Canadian permanent residency and expects to move north of the border by the end of the year.
For the Kaufmann Foundation, I recently surveyed 1,200 Indians and Chinese who worked or studied in the United States and then returned home. Most were in their 30s, and 80 percent held master's degrees or doctorates in management, technology or science -- precisely the kind of people who could make the greatest contribution to the U.S. economy. A sizable number said that they had advanced significantly in their careers since leaving the United States. They were more optimistic about opportunities for entrepreneurship, and more than half planned to start their own businesses, if they had not done so already. Only a quarter said that they were likely to return to the United States.
Why does all this matter? Because just as the United States has relied on foreigners to underwrite its deficit, it has also depended on smart immigrants to staff its laboratories, engineering design studios and tech firms. An analysis of the 2000 Census showed that although immigrants accounted for only 12 percent of the U.S. workforce, they made up 47 percent of all scientists and engineers with doctorates. What's more, 67 percent of all those who entered the fields of science and engineering between 1995 and 2006 were immigrants. What will happen to America's competitive edge when these people go home?
Immigrants who leave the United States will launch companies, file patents and fill the intellectual coffers of other countries. Their talents will benefit nations such as India, China and Canada, not the United States. America's loss will be the world's gain.
wadhwa@duke.edu
Vivek Wadhwa is a senior research associate at Harvard Law School and executive in residence at Duke University.
wallpaper Best Sprinkles red velvet
pom
04-28 04:47 PM
I changed it, but all it does for me is reload the page (???).
Picasa
01-22 02:40 PM
Thakur saa'b & Oil Twist thanks for the suggestions.
Rajiv did you have a loan with ICICI bank and would you please explain how big part of the payment you made that drastically reduced your payment to Rs 1200.
Please check your messages I have sent you PM as well.
Thanks,
This is an option. I did one more trick. Made big part payment and asked them to reduce my EMI. Now I have EMI of Rs. 1200 for next 13 months. No penalty.
Rajiv did you have a loan with ICICI bank and would you please explain how big part of the payment you made that drastically reduced your payment to Rs 1200.
Please check your messages I have sent you PM as well.
Thanks,
This is an option. I did one more trick. Made big part payment and asked them to reduce my EMI. Now I have EMI of Rs. 1200 for next 13 months. No penalty.
2011 Sprinkles Red Velvet Relief
snathan
02-17 11:28 PM
You are in H-1 status now as you applied for COS from H4 to H-1. So I am not sure if going for H4 stamping is still an option for you. I will let others weighin on this one.
Do you have AP instead? You can always come back on AP, doing so will not invalidate your H-1
I am not sure, if this is true. I knew couple of people got H1 approved and never start working. They remained only in status H4.
So check with attorney.
Do you have AP instead? You can always come back on AP, doing so will not invalidate your H-1
I am not sure, if this is true. I knew couple of people got H1 approved and never start working. They remained only in status H4.
So check with attorney.
more...
solaris27
12-20 08:36 AM
submit AR-11 form online and also send it by post also .
gccovet
06-12 05:30 PM
Hi All,
I was sponsored by Company A. Also they are sponsoring my GC. I have a pending i-485 since my PD is Nov2006.
Company B has bought Company A. What should I do now?
1) Do I have to ask them to file a fresh H1?
2) how would the GC process be transfered to the new company that took over?
I asked the greedy owner of company A (my so called sponsorer, but as usual I paid for all the expenses), he said there is no problem with regards to my immigration status.
Can someone shed some light on this scenario?
Thanks,
RC:o
No need of new H1 if company 'B's' HR has agreed to continue with 'A''s employees.
1. Get a EVL letter from company 'B'. (This is assuming name of 'A' will change to 'B' or new name.
2. You need to get a "Letter of Acquirement" from HR of new company (I am assuming that the name of the company is changing as well). If name does not change then you should be fine. If you have to travel out of US, you need to carry latest copy of EVL(of new company) and "Letter of Acquirement" along with you. (I went thru these few years back, PwCC bought over by IBM, immediately after the takeover I travelled out of US and came back without any problems(on H1)) this was quite a while back though, you may want to check with your company attorney though.
Note:
"Letter of Acquirement� would state that your 'A' company was bought over by 'B' company on Date and name has now changed to 'B'.
Good luck.
GCCovet
I was sponsored by Company A. Also they are sponsoring my GC. I have a pending i-485 since my PD is Nov2006.
Company B has bought Company A. What should I do now?
1) Do I have to ask them to file a fresh H1?
2) how would the GC process be transfered to the new company that took over?
I asked the greedy owner of company A (my so called sponsorer, but as usual I paid for all the expenses), he said there is no problem with regards to my immigration status.
Can someone shed some light on this scenario?
Thanks,
RC:o
No need of new H1 if company 'B's' HR has agreed to continue with 'A''s employees.
1. Get a EVL letter from company 'B'. (This is assuming name of 'A' will change to 'B' or new name.
2. You need to get a "Letter of Acquirement" from HR of new company (I am assuming that the name of the company is changing as well). If name does not change then you should be fine. If you have to travel out of US, you need to carry latest copy of EVL(of new company) and "Letter of Acquirement" along with you. (I went thru these few years back, PwCC bought over by IBM, immediately after the takeover I travelled out of US and came back without any problems(on H1)) this was quite a while back though, you may want to check with your company attorney though.
Note:
"Letter of Acquirement� would state that your 'A' company was bought over by 'B' company on Date and name has now changed to 'B'.
Good luck.
GCCovet
more...
glus
02-15 09:17 AM
Thank you very much. do you know suppose if we go for stamping our visa and for some reason they reject it, can we still enter USA? I am just trying to evaluate different options and the risks in each of them so that we can choose the best that works for us....
What you are talking about is an automatic visa revalidation. You can re-enter the US from Canada on an expired visa if you have a valid I-94 and h1 extension. However, if you visa stamping is denied for any reason while being in Canada, you will NOT be able to re-enter anymore. Usually, the consular officer takes away your I94 or makes a note that a visa was not issued. At that point, you need a valid, unexpired visa to re-enter the US, or you have to go to your home country for visa stamping.
G
What you are talking about is an automatic visa revalidation. You can re-enter the US from Canada on an expired visa if you have a valid I-94 and h1 extension. However, if you visa stamping is denied for any reason while being in Canada, you will NOT be able to re-enter anymore. Usually, the consular officer takes away your I94 or makes a note that a visa was not issued. At that point, you need a valid, unexpired visa to re-enter the US, or you have to go to your home country for visa stamping.
G
2010 of Red Velvet Sprinkles
Bogdan
10-22 01:15 PM
I signed a I-9 form in 2005. At that time, I indeed was on a marriage based EAD because I had an I-485 pending, which later I withdrew and went for H1B. Since then, nobody talked to me about changing the I-9 (I should have thought about it though). However, I provided them with a H1B copy when it was issued.
Since HR mentioned that my EAD expired and they needed a new one, it is clear that they were not refering to the old EAD (marriage based I-485), since that one expired in 2006. So somehow the lawyers, to whom I gave a copy of the EAD last year (they requested it), forwarded the EAD to HR.
Of course HR can change my status in their records now (by renewing the I-9?), but I am worried about the damage is done already and my H1B is invalidated. I don't know how I can find that out.
However, as I said, I did not sign any I-9 to confirm the H1B status, neither I did for the EAD (employment based I-485 pending). Given this circumstance, do I need to re-validate my H1B? I guess HR should have asked me to complete a new I-9 for the H1B. I am thinking USCIS colects the I-9's periodically so that they know how I worked, am I correct?
Since HR mentioned that my EAD expired and they needed a new one, it is clear that they were not refering to the old EAD (marriage based I-485), since that one expired in 2006. So somehow the lawyers, to whom I gave a copy of the EAD last year (they requested it), forwarded the EAD to HR.
Of course HR can change my status in their records now (by renewing the I-9?), but I am worried about the damage is done already and my H1B is invalidated. I don't know how I can find that out.
However, as I said, I did not sign any I-9 to confirm the H1B status, neither I did for the EAD (employment based I-485 pending). Given this circumstance, do I need to re-validate my H1B? I guess HR should have asked me to complete a new I-9 for the H1B. I am thinking USCIS colects the I-9's periodically so that they know how I worked, am I correct?
more...
Desertfox
08-14 12:45 PM
I gave you a green..:)
hair red velvet, and Vanilla.
Kitiara
10-18 05:35 AM
When you use Fireworks to make your animation, try converting to a symbol and using a tween, as in Flash...
I don't know if these things are tweenable... Alright, look I've attached one of the animated gifs to this post, so you can see what I mean. I've got this one down to 20K, but I need to make it lower. I haven't got much knowledge of Fireworks (at least not on the animating side), - I've found the Convert To Symbol thing, but it doesn't seem to reduce the file size. Each frame was originally a .psd, which was then Saved For Web as a gif, opened into Fireworks, then pasted into the animation.
Any ideas, bright spark? :)
I don't know if these things are tweenable... Alright, look I've attached one of the animated gifs to this post, so you can see what I mean. I've got this one down to 20K, but I need to make it lower. I haven't got much knowledge of Fireworks (at least not on the animating side), - I've found the Convert To Symbol thing, but it doesn't seem to reduce the file size. Each frame was originally a .psd, which was then Saved For Web as a gif, opened into Fireworks, then pasted into the animation.
Any ideas, bright spark? :)
more...
Saralayar
06-04 12:19 PM
http://www.mercurynews.com/topstories/ci_12514065?nclick_check=1
FTA:
"...
The law would also increase numerical caps on the number of visas for countries such as Mexico, the Philippines, China and India. People from those countries hoping to immigrate to the U.S. routinely face waits of more than a decade in a system with a backlog of 5.8 million people.
..."
The URL link do not work.
FTA:
"...
The law would also increase numerical caps on the number of visas for countries such as Mexico, the Philippines, China and India. People from those countries hoping to immigrate to the U.S. routinely face waits of more than a decade in a system with a backlog of 5.8 million people.
..."
The URL link do not work.
hot Red Cross Red Velvet Cupcakes
dreamgc_real
01-06 09:30 AM
CIR is impossible with the current Congress, any legislator thinking it is a possibility is only misleading!
more...
house Annie W » Sprinkles Red Cross Red Velvet Cupcakes
scorpion00
05-19 03:23 PM
Just voted. I didn't file I485 during July'07. This idea is very good and I'm willing to donate and work for this campaign. AP and EAD will be a massive help.
tattoo and Red Velvet Cupcakes
nixstor
09-23 04:46 PM
You might get soft LUD's or hard LUD's. Even if CIS wanted to approve your application and requested for a visa number from DOS, DOS systems are not going to assign any visa number because DOS made them U and the case will have a pending visa number status. If there was any chance for overflow, we would have seen some date rather than U.
more...
pictures Red Velvet Cupcakes are one of
GCNaseeb
10-12 04:42 PM
See signature
dresses Sprinkles Red Velvet for Maria#39;s Birthday
thesparky007
04-22 09:37 PM
here you go kirupa
i put a price for it
i put a price for it
more...
makeup Sprinkles Cupcakes Red Velvet
willIWill
06-16 12:54 PM
Vinzak, You have to take into consideration the recaptured visas of the 90's applied in the period 00-06. If I remember correctly the earlier recapture was signed in 2000 by Pres. Clinton . If we exclude those recaptured numbers the actuals are much lesser. Hope this helps.
girlfriend The Red Velvet cupcake has
amoljak
03-22 11:13 AM
I think he was talking about s1932... the immigration related provisions were removed from that in the conference. You need inform them that they should at least get behind the Frist bill or Spector bill and request them to support removing the hard limits on the country quotas.
Some talking points may be:
Ask them if they support quotas for college admissions, and then ask if they support country quotas for immigration...
Explain how quotas that are not tied to population are punishing countries like India and China with larger population.
Also explain how government is dictating to the companies where they can get the talent from and how that harms businesses as it punishes countries with good education system and large talent pools.
Some talking points may be:
Ask them if they support quotas for college admissions, and then ask if they support country quotas for immigration...
Explain how quotas that are not tied to population are punishing countries like India and China with larger population.
Also explain how government is dictating to the companies where they can get the talent from and how that harms businesses as it punishes countries with good education system and large talent pools.
hairstyles Red HOT Velvet Cupcakes
Blog Feeds
01-14 08:20 AM
https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjAIrqz2E9YSo5Zw8qA5EOg9vmnPQjWwF19p_XxP01iZvcY04L1ZXGac2i9A61BCyZHJCYDS9cWibpPDOHUzRUilSR5XZYfH8dr6Ys3A9_5W3G6It5c6INx_LrYT53Xg-_Lzx8YtzyJRdP-/s200/uscisLogo.gif (https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjAIrqz2E9YSo5Zw8qA5EOg9vmnPQjWwF19p_XxP01iZvcY04L1ZXGac2i9A61BCyZHJCYDS9cWibpPDOHUzRUilSR5XZYfH8dr6Ys3A9_5W3G6It5c6INx_LrYT53Xg-_Lzx8YtzyJRdP-/s1600-h/uscisLogo.gif)
The US Citizenship and Immigration Service has issued a long memorandum (http://www.uscis.gov/USCIS/Laws/Memoranda/2010/H1B%20Employer-Employee%20Memo010810.pdf) on what constitutes an "employer-employee" relationship for H-1B purposes. This should be especially interesting to H-1B workers and employers with consulting or contracting arrangements.
US immigration regulations (8 C.F.R. 214.2(h)(4)(ii)) require, among other things, that a H-1B petitioner "Has an employer-employee relationship with respect to employees under this part, as indicated by the fact that it may hire, pay, fire, supervise, or otherwise control the work of any such employee"
CIS acknowledges that the lack of guidance defining what constitutes a valid employer-employee relationship has caused problems, especially when employees such as consultants or contractors are placed at 3rd-party sites. In these situations, the petitioner might not be able to show the required control over the employee's work. CIS considers that the "right to control" the employee's work is critical. The memo stresses that the right to control is different to actual control. To analyze the control, CIS looks at:
Does the petitioner supervise the beneficiary and is such supervision off-site or on-site?
If the supervision is off-site, how does the petitioner maintain such supervision, i. e. weekly calls, reporting back to main office routinely, or site visits by the petitioner?
Does the petitioner have the right to control the work of the beneficiary on a day-to-day basis if such control is required?
Does the petitioner provide the tools or instrumentalities needed for the beneficiary to perform the duties of employment?
Does the petitioner hire, pay, and have the ability to fire the beneficiary?
Does the petitioner evaluate the work-product of the beneficiary, i.e. progress/performance reviews?
Does the petitioner claim the beneficiary for tax purposes?
Does the petitioner provide the beneficiary with any type of employee benefits?
Does the beneficiary use proprietary information of the petitioner in order to perform the duties of employment?
Does the beneficiary produce an end-product that is directly linked to the petitioner's line of business?
Can the petitioner control the manner and means in which the work product of the beneficiary is accomplished?
The CIS Memo describes various different employment relationships, and states whether they meet the regulatory requirements. Those which CIS considers do not comply with regulations include:
Self employment;
Independent contractors;
"Job shops".
The memo describes, in detail, the evidence that can be submitted to prove an employer-employee relationship, especially where the employee will be working off-site.
The memo also notes that petitions must show compliance with 8 C.F.R. 214.2(h)(2)(i)(B) which states:
Service or training in more than one location. A petition that requires services to be performed or training to be received in more than one location must include an itinerary with the dates and locations of the services or training and must be filed with USCIS as provided in the form instructions. The address that the petitioner specifies as its location on the Form I-129 shall be where the petitioner is located for purposes of this paragraph.
The memo notes that to satisfy the requirements of 8 C.F.R. 214.2(h)(2)(i)(B), the petitioner must "submit a complete itinerary of services or engagements that specifies the dates of each service or engagement, the names and addresses of the actual employers, and the names and addresses of the establishment, venues, or locations where the services will be performed for the period of time requested. Compliance with 8 C.F.R. 214.2(h)(2)(i)(B) assists USCIS in determining that the petitioner has concrete plans in place for a particular beneficiary, that the beneficiary is performing duties in a specialty occupation, and that the beneficiary is not being "benched" without pay between assignments." Submitting a detailed itinerary for the next 3 years will be very difficult for many employers who place employees out on contracts.
This memo has just been published today, and there will undoubtedly be many more rticles published that analyze the provisions.
https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/tracker/2893395975825897727-2453679137512034994?l=martinvisalaw.blogspot.com
More... (http://martinvisalaw.blogspot.com/2010/01/cis-issues-memo-on-employer-employee.html)
The US Citizenship and Immigration Service has issued a long memorandum (http://www.uscis.gov/USCIS/Laws/Memoranda/2010/H1B%20Employer-Employee%20Memo010810.pdf) on what constitutes an "employer-employee" relationship for H-1B purposes. This should be especially interesting to H-1B workers and employers with consulting or contracting arrangements.
US immigration regulations (8 C.F.R. 214.2(h)(4)(ii)) require, among other things, that a H-1B petitioner "Has an employer-employee relationship with respect to employees under this part, as indicated by the fact that it may hire, pay, fire, supervise, or otherwise control the work of any such employee"
CIS acknowledges that the lack of guidance defining what constitutes a valid employer-employee relationship has caused problems, especially when employees such as consultants or contractors are placed at 3rd-party sites. In these situations, the petitioner might not be able to show the required control over the employee's work. CIS considers that the "right to control" the employee's work is critical. The memo stresses that the right to control is different to actual control. To analyze the control, CIS looks at:
Does the petitioner supervise the beneficiary and is such supervision off-site or on-site?
If the supervision is off-site, how does the petitioner maintain such supervision, i. e. weekly calls, reporting back to main office routinely, or site visits by the petitioner?
Does the petitioner have the right to control the work of the beneficiary on a day-to-day basis if such control is required?
Does the petitioner provide the tools or instrumentalities needed for the beneficiary to perform the duties of employment?
Does the petitioner hire, pay, and have the ability to fire the beneficiary?
Does the petitioner evaluate the work-product of the beneficiary, i.e. progress/performance reviews?
Does the petitioner claim the beneficiary for tax purposes?
Does the petitioner provide the beneficiary with any type of employee benefits?
Does the beneficiary use proprietary information of the petitioner in order to perform the duties of employment?
Does the beneficiary produce an end-product that is directly linked to the petitioner's line of business?
Can the petitioner control the manner and means in which the work product of the beneficiary is accomplished?
The CIS Memo describes various different employment relationships, and states whether they meet the regulatory requirements. Those which CIS considers do not comply with regulations include:
Self employment;
Independent contractors;
"Job shops".
The memo describes, in detail, the evidence that can be submitted to prove an employer-employee relationship, especially where the employee will be working off-site.
The memo also notes that petitions must show compliance with 8 C.F.R. 214.2(h)(2)(i)(B) which states:
Service or training in more than one location. A petition that requires services to be performed or training to be received in more than one location must include an itinerary with the dates and locations of the services or training and must be filed with USCIS as provided in the form instructions. The address that the petitioner specifies as its location on the Form I-129 shall be where the petitioner is located for purposes of this paragraph.
The memo notes that to satisfy the requirements of 8 C.F.R. 214.2(h)(2)(i)(B), the petitioner must "submit a complete itinerary of services or engagements that specifies the dates of each service or engagement, the names and addresses of the actual employers, and the names and addresses of the establishment, venues, or locations where the services will be performed for the period of time requested. Compliance with 8 C.F.R. 214.2(h)(2)(i)(B) assists USCIS in determining that the petitioner has concrete plans in place for a particular beneficiary, that the beneficiary is performing duties in a specialty occupation, and that the beneficiary is not being "benched" without pay between assignments." Submitting a detailed itinerary for the next 3 years will be very difficult for many employers who place employees out on contracts.
This memo has just been published today, and there will undoubtedly be many more rticles published that analyze the provisions.
https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/tracker/2893395975825897727-2453679137512034994?l=martinvisalaw.blogspot.com
More... (http://martinvisalaw.blogspot.com/2010/01/cis-issues-memo-on-employer-employee.html)
bp333
11-26 09:21 AM
That is GREAT!
I can understand what you have gone through and it must be a big relief for you !
Can you tell us when did you resubmit your application and what fee did they accept..old or new. A friend of mine resubmitted his application a few days ago with new fee... his original app was rejected earlier because his attorney sent thre wrong fee amount...(neither new nor old..)
Good luck and enjoy the feleing now
We submitted the application with checks covering the old fee, also included an additional check to make up the difference for new fee. USCIS has cashed in all the checks (new fee).
I can understand what you have gone through and it must be a big relief for you !
Can you tell us when did you resubmit your application and what fee did they accept..old or new. A friend of mine resubmitted his application a few days ago with new fee... his original app was rejected earlier because his attorney sent thre wrong fee amount...(neither new nor old..)
Good luck and enjoy the feleing now
We submitted the application with checks covering the old fee, also included an additional check to make up the difference for new fee. USCIS has cashed in all the checks (new fee).
countdrak
11-01 01:01 AM
I just received my H1B starting Oct 1st. My desi (cheap) employer first decided to not pay me till Oct 15th because I didn't have a SSN. Then after my SSN came they decided that they wanted to reduce my salary, the reason being that the company's economic situation has changed since Jan filing.
I am concerned because I am going for my visa stamping in March and the last thing I want is to be out of status! When I mentioned this to my boss his answer was -- We will give you a letter stating that you are working reduced number of hours, and we cannot afford the salary promised on I-129.
Can somebody help? What are my options? I was on H4 and moved to H1. I am really frustrated with their attitude and in this economy it is really hard to find a job.
Any help would be great.
I am concerned because I am going for my visa stamping in March and the last thing I want is to be out of status! When I mentioned this to my boss his answer was -- We will give you a letter stating that you are working reduced number of hours, and we cannot afford the salary promised on I-129.
Can somebody help? What are my options? I was on H4 and moved to H1. I am really frustrated with their attitude and in this economy it is really hard to find a job.
Any help would be great.