nixstor
08-23 10:26 PM
I was thinking that BEC's have 300K odd cases. Are you sure its only 180K?
wallpaper images love quotes for lovers.
srikanthmavurapu
08-16 04:03 PM
It all depends if you have a written agreement that prohibits you from working with the current employer. If there is no contract, you are safe. It seems that there is no such contract that either you signed with your ex-employer or middle-men.
If your employer doesn't pay you the salary that he agreed to (in writing), then you can be sure that DOL will ask your employer to pay a fine and pay you the salary. I would suggest that if he does or does not sue you, you better complain to DOL that you weren't getting paid. This will no way this will affect you.
In the Employee Agreement which i signed there is clause saying i cannot work for the same client directly or indirectly for one year . I don't think i signed any contract with ex-employer or middle men. I don't even have the copy of contract document(purchase order) when i got this job offer at this client.
I will complain to DOL just thinking to talk to a Lawyer first but i will complain to DOL this week at any cost.
Thanks,
Srikanth
If your employer doesn't pay you the salary that he agreed to (in writing), then you can be sure that DOL will ask your employer to pay a fine and pay you the salary. I would suggest that if he does or does not sue you, you better complain to DOL that you weren't getting paid. This will no way this will affect you.
In the Employee Agreement which i signed there is clause saying i cannot work for the same client directly or indirectly for one year . I don't think i signed any contract with ex-employer or middle men. I don't even have the copy of contract document(purchase order) when i got this job offer at this client.
I will complain to DOL just thinking to talk to a Lawyer first but i will complain to DOL this week at any cost.
Thanks,
Srikanth
Jerrome
02-20 05:23 PM
I could not find mine (though i don't know the case number) with the priority date and employer name i could not find mine, by anyway can we find out the category (EB1,EB2 or EB3) from this databases.
I saw some poll happened in IV to get this information.
I saw some poll happened in IV to get this information.
2011 good quotes about life and
jk333
07-17 07:15 PM
is it official that we can file till August 17th? i didn't see that in august bulletin. please let me know as you know how important is that..... Well its timing...
http://www.uscis.gov/files/pressrelease/VisaBulletinUpdate17Jul07.pdf
http://www.uscis.gov/files/pressrelease/VisaBulletinUpdate17Jul07.pdf
more...
fatjoe
09-02 10:57 PM
Is it possible to let us know their RD and ND too? Just wanted to find the pattern on how TSC is approving the case. That would be much helpful for those who are waiting.
thomachan72
05-10 10:12 AM
I have been using ICICI for many years as i do have ICICI NRI account. Having indian account and managing here is always fun :)
>20K per transfer?
>20K per transfer?
more...
TexasGC
07-21 03:21 PM
Why does USCIS want TB test done? Many countries like India have BCG vaccination administered at childhood thus preventing TB. However, such people will show a false positive if administered a skin test for TB.
This is causing many Indians to go for a chest xray. I feel this is a ridiculous requirement.
This is causing many Indians to go for a chest xray. I feel this is a ridiculous requirement.
2010 quotes on life and friendship.
gc_check
06-26 03:23 PM
trying go get an answer if any one can give some insight?
Consult with you Attorney first, as this is a very rare scenario for any one to answer in the forum. Also see if you can get this addresses when you go for the actual FP, Try to carry all the documents, Passport, Driver's License, etc and the copy of the I-485/ I-765 etc where you have the correct names.
Attorney is the best source of information in this scenario. Also call USCIS and request them what needs to be done in this case. Also you can get a InfoPASS appointment and get this corrected.
Consult with you Attorney first, as this is a very rare scenario for any one to answer in the forum. Also see if you can get this addresses when you go for the actual FP, Try to carry all the documents, Passport, Driver's License, etc and the copy of the I-485/ I-765 etc where you have the correct names.
Attorney is the best source of information in this scenario. Also call USCIS and request them what needs to be done in this case. Also you can get a InfoPASS appointment and get this corrected.
more...
kaisersose
08-03 06:29 PM
whatever is the reason of revoking ? I just want to know if employer revokes an approved I140 withing 180 days of filling, will the employee know about it.
thanks!
You cannot know about a revoked I-140.
But if you filed a 485 based on that 140, then since 140 denial/revoking automatically closes the 485, you will get a denial notice for the 485 and that is how you know.
thanks!
You cannot know about a revoked I-140.
But if you filed a 485 based on that 140, then since 140 denial/revoking automatically closes the 485, you will get a denial notice for the 485 and that is how you know.
hair Celebrate his life, love or
Libra
08-05 08:32 PM
To capture unused visa numbers we need to make DC rally big, so lets go to DC on sept 13th and make it big success.......
get relief from retrogression. Capture of unused visa numbers etc will make us ignore how many apps USCIS received.
Good thing is that people will get interim benefits like EAD/AP.
get relief from retrogression. Capture of unused visa numbers etc will make us ignore how many apps USCIS received.
Good thing is that people will get interim benefits like EAD/AP.
more...
shortchanged
08-03 06:43 PM
From my experience None of these issues matter.
I had I 140 approved in 02/06, no A# on the approval notice.But before approval, I had an RFE on this I-140, with an A#, on that notice, the same A# I had used for I-485 application form.But when I got the I-797 NOA for this AOS, it had a different A#,(July2 '07filer).
When I did not get reciept even by August 16'07, I filed a 2nd I-485, eventhough many people including Ms.Murthy advised againt it.I just did not want to miss out the window of opportunity of July Fiasco.
So I have 2 485s pending,I did finger printing for the July2 filing, never got FP notice for the second filing.My wife and son did FP for both I-485s.
I too was worried about these things, and was expecting RFEs on all these and medicals etc.
But on 8/1/08, I have got CRIS email with 3 messages for Card Production Ordered for me ,my wife and son. I still do not know what shall I do with the 2nd 485.Also I have appointment for FP for efiled EADs on 8/5/08, which I may not go at all, if I get the snail mail tomorrow.
As usual there is no logic, pattern, predictability, rhyme or reason with USCIS business.I am just relieved for now that most of my major worries are on pause for now.
I had I 140 approved in 02/06, no A# on the approval notice.But before approval, I had an RFE on this I-140, with an A#, on that notice, the same A# I had used for I-485 application form.But when I got the I-797 NOA for this AOS, it had a different A#,(July2 '07filer).
When I did not get reciept even by August 16'07, I filed a 2nd I-485, eventhough many people including Ms.Murthy advised againt it.I just did not want to miss out the window of opportunity of July Fiasco.
So I have 2 485s pending,I did finger printing for the July2 filing, never got FP notice for the second filing.My wife and son did FP for both I-485s.
I too was worried about these things, and was expecting RFEs on all these and medicals etc.
But on 8/1/08, I have got CRIS email with 3 messages for Card Production Ordered for me ,my wife and son. I still do not know what shall I do with the 2nd 485.Also I have appointment for FP for efiled EADs on 8/5/08, which I may not go at all, if I get the snail mail tomorrow.
As usual there is no logic, pattern, predictability, rhyme or reason with USCIS business.I am just relieved for now that most of my major worries are on pause for now.
hot and love sayings. Love is
whoever
01-31 02:46 PM
how can one get copy of i140? does it not belong to the company?
more...
house Life without a friend is death
fasterthanlight�
06-06 06:35 PM
When do the polls close?
tattoo sorry quotes for a friend.
larun
02-04 08:57 AM
Congratulations!!
more...
pictures Love Quotes, Romantic quotes,
Kitiara
06-14 08:01 AM
Well, poll is over, and Soul wins with 29 votes. :)
Normally this calls for some kind of congratulations, but in the light of how truly awful that site is, I'm not sure.... :)
You're a very bad man. :) :beam:
Well done all. :)
Normally this calls for some kind of congratulations, but in the light of how truly awful that site is, I'm not sure.... :)
You're a very bad man. :) :beam:
Well done all. :)
dresses I miss you, my dear friend!
Siddharta
09-26 04:41 PM
If employer revokes I-140 (even after 180 days) and I-485 get denied, you lose your old PD. So it's not set in stone.
Are you 100% sure about this.
Are you 100% sure about this.
more...
makeup Quotes ___* Life, Love,
gkaplan
07-20 01:04 PM
Hi there
thank you for the information you provided above. and congrats on your h1b.
my question is: i'm j1 and mu husband is j2, and he's been working with his ead for the last 4-5 years. we are subjected to 2 year HRR. in order for my husband to get h1b, we need the waiver. can he apply for the waiver independently? just like you did - independently from your j1 principal?
can his company apply for a H1B just after he gets the favorable rec. letter? or doeshe have to wait for the final decision from USCIS? or application for H1B with the fav.recom. letter is only ok if we are doing premium processing? because i get different answers from different lawyers about this. one says we have to wait for the final decision from uscis, one says different....
thank you.
thank you for the information you provided above. and congrats on your h1b.
my question is: i'm j1 and mu husband is j2, and he's been working with his ead for the last 4-5 years. we are subjected to 2 year HRR. in order for my husband to get h1b, we need the waiver. can he apply for the waiver independently? just like you did - independently from your j1 principal?
can his company apply for a H1B just after he gets the favorable rec. letter? or doeshe have to wait for the final decision from USCIS? or application for H1B with the fav.recom. letter is only ok if we are doing premium processing? because i get different answers from different lawyers about this. one says we have to wait for the final decision from uscis, one says different....
thank you.
girlfriend nice quotes on life and love.
talash
07-19 05:03 PM
Positive PPD just means u are exposed to TB is the past ans CXR confirms that u dont have active disease .Treatment in this case is only optional and patient has to decide if he or she wants to be treated for that .Only people with HIV of other immune def dieases must be treated for pos PPD.
they should not ask any further qquestions if CXR ws negative .
they should not ask any further qquestions if CXR ws negative .
hairstyles good quotes about life and
FinalGC
05-12 05:02 PM
hopefulgc:
Are you willing???
Are you willing???
Blog Feeds
02-01 08:30 AM
Summary
(LINK TO FULL REPORT BELOW)
Congress created the H-1B program in 1990 to enable U.S. employers to hire temporary, foreign workers in specialty occupations. The law capped the number of H-1B visas issued per fiscal year at 65,000. Since then, the cap has fluctuated with legislative changes. Congress asked GAO to assess the impact of the cap on the ability of domestic companies to innovate, while ensuring that U.S. workers are not disadvantaged. In response, GAO examined what is known about (1) employer demand for H-1B workers; (2) how the cap affects employer costs and decisions to move operations overseas; (3) H-1B worker characteristics and the potential impact of raising the cap; and (4) how well requirements of the H-1B program protect U.S. workers. GAO analyzed data from 4 federal agencies; interviewed agency officials, experts, and H-1B employers; and reviewed agency documents and literature.
In most years, demand for new H-1B workers exceeded the cap: From 2000 to 2009, demand for new H-1B workers tended to exceed the cap, as measured by the numbers of initial petitions submitted by employers who are subject to the cap. There is no way to precisely determine the level of any unmet demand among employers, since they tend to stop submitting (and the Department of Homeland Security stops tracking) petitions once the cap is reached each year. When we consider all initial petitions, including those from universities and research institutions that are not subject to the cap, we find that demand for new H-1B workers is largely driven by a small number of employers. Over the decade, over 14 percent of all initial petitions were submitted by cap-exempt employers, and only a few employers (fewer than 1 percent) garnered over one-quarter of all H-1B approvals. Most interviewed companies said the H-1B cap and program created costs, but were not factors in their decisions to move R&D overseas: The 34 H-1B employers GAO interviewed reported that the cap has created some additional costs, though the cap's impact depended on the size and maturity of the company. For example, in years when visas were denied by the cap, most large firms reported finding other (sometimes more costly) ways to hire their preferred job candidates. On the other hand, small firms were more likely to fill their positions with different candidates, which they said resulted in delays and sometimes economic losses, particularly for firms in rapidly changing technology fields. Limitations in agency data and systems hinder tracking the cap and H-1B workers over time: The total number of H-1B workers in the U.S. at any one time--and information about the length of their stay--is unknown, because (1) data systems among the various agencies that process such individuals are not linked so individuals cannot be readily tracked, and (2) H-1B workers are not assigned a unique identifier that would allow for tracking them over time--particularly if and when their visa status changes. Restricted agency oversight and statutory changes weaken protections for U.S. workers: Elements of the H-1B program that could serve as worker protections--such as the requirement to pay prevailing wages, the visa's temporary status, and the cap itself--are weakened by several factors. First, program oversight is fragmented and restricted. Second, the H-1B program lacks a legal provision for holding employers accountable to program requirements when they obtain H-1B workers through a staffing company. Third, statutory changes made to the H-1B program have, in combination and in effect, increased the pool of H-1B workers beyond the cap and lowered the bar for eligibility. Taken together, the multifaceted challenges identified in this report show that the H-1B program, as currently structured, may not be used to its full potential and may be detrimental in some cases. This report offers several matters for congressional consideration, including that Congress re-examine key H-1B program provisions and make appropriate changes as needed. GAO also recommends that the Departments of Homeland Security and Labor take steps to improve efficiency, flexibility, and monitoring of the H-1B program. Homeland Security disagreed with two recommendations and one matter, citing logistical and other challenges; however, we believe such challenges can be overcome. Labor did not respond to our recommendations.
Recommendations
Our recommendations from this work are listed below with a Contact for more information. Status will change from "In process" to "Open," "Closed - implemented," or "Closed - not implemented" based on our follow up work.
Director:Andrew SherrillTeam:Government Accountability Office: Education, Workforce, and Income SecurityPhone:(202) 512-7252
Matters for Congressional Consideration
Recommendation: To ensure that the H-1B program continues to meet the needs of businesses in a global economy while maintaining a balance of protections for U.S. workers, Congress may wish to consider reviewing the merits and shortcomings of key program provisions and making appropriate changes as needed. Such a review may include, but would not necessarily be limited to (1) the qualifications required for workers eligible under the H-1B program, (2) exemptions from the cap, (3) the appropriateness of H-1B hiring by staffing companies, (4) the level of the cap, and (5) the role the program should play in the U.S. immigration system in relationship to permanent residency.
Status: In process
Comments: When we determine what steps the Congress has taken, we will provide updated information.
Recommendation: To reduce duplication and fragmentation in the administration and oversight of the H-1B application process, consistent with past GAO matters for congressional consideration, Congress may wish to consider eliminating the requirement that employers first submit a Labor Condition Application (LCA) to the Department of Labor for certification, and require instead that employers submit this application along with the I-129 application to the Department of Homeland Security's U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services for review.
Status: In process
Comments: When we determine what steps the Congress has taken, we will provide updated information.
Recommendation: To improve the Department of Labor's ability to investigate and enforce employer compliance with H-1B program requirements, Congress may wish to consider granting the department subpoena power to obtain employer records during investigations under the H-1B program.
Status: In process
Comments: When we determine what steps the Congress has taken, we will provide updated information.
Recommendation: To help ensure the full protection of H-1B workers employed through staffing companies, Congress may wish to consider holding the employer where an H-1B visa holder performs work accountable for meeting program requirements to the same extent as the employer that submitted the LCA form.
Status: In process
Comments: When we determine what steps the Congress has taken, we will provide updated information.
Recommendations for Executive Action
Recommendation: To help ensure that the number of new H-1B workers who are subject to the cap--both entering the United States and changing to H-1B status within the United States--does not exceed the cap each year, U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services should take steps to improve its tracking of the number of approved H-1B applications and the number of issued visas under the cap by fully leveraging the transformation effort currently under way, which involves the adoption of an electronic petition processing system that will be linked to the Department of State's tracking system. Such steps should ensure that linkages to the Department of State's tracking system will provide Homeland Security with timely access to data on visa issuances, and that mechanisms for tracking petitions and visas against the cap are incorporated into U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services' business rules to be developed for the new electronic petition system.
Agency Affected: Department of Homeland Security
Status: In process
Comments: When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.
Recommendation: To address business concerns without undermining program integrity, U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services should, to the extent permitted by its existing statutory authority, explore options for increasing the flexibility of the application process for H-1B employers, such as (1) allowing employers to rank their applications for visa candidates so that they can hire the best qualified worker for the jobs in highest need; (2) distributing the applications granted under the annual cap in allotments throughout the year (e.g. quarterly); and (3) establishing a system whereby businesses with a strong track-record of compliance with H-1B regulations may use a streamlined application process.
Agency Affected: Department of Homeland Security
Status: In process
Comments: When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.
Recommendation: To improve the transparency and oversight of the posting requirement on the Labor Condition Application (LCA), as part of its current oversight role, the Employment and Training Administration should develop and maintain a centralized Web site, accessible to the public, where businesses must post notice of the intent to hire H-1B workers. Such notices should continue to specify the job category and worksite location noted on the LCA and required by statute on current noncentralized postings.
Agency Affected: Department of Labor
Status: In process
Comments: When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.
Recommendation: To improve the efficiency and effectiveness of its investigations of employer compliance with H-1B requirements, the Employment and Training Administration should provide Labor's Wage and Hour Division searchable access to the LCA database.
Agency Affected: Department of Labor
Status: In process
Comments: When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.
VIEW FULL REPORT (http://www.gao.gov/new.items/d1126.pdf)
More... (http://ashwinsharma.com/2011/01/25/h-1b-visa-program-reforms-are-needed-to-minimize-the-risks-and-costs-of-current-program.aspx?ref=rss)
(LINK TO FULL REPORT BELOW)
Congress created the H-1B program in 1990 to enable U.S. employers to hire temporary, foreign workers in specialty occupations. The law capped the number of H-1B visas issued per fiscal year at 65,000. Since then, the cap has fluctuated with legislative changes. Congress asked GAO to assess the impact of the cap on the ability of domestic companies to innovate, while ensuring that U.S. workers are not disadvantaged. In response, GAO examined what is known about (1) employer demand for H-1B workers; (2) how the cap affects employer costs and decisions to move operations overseas; (3) H-1B worker characteristics and the potential impact of raising the cap; and (4) how well requirements of the H-1B program protect U.S. workers. GAO analyzed data from 4 federal agencies; interviewed agency officials, experts, and H-1B employers; and reviewed agency documents and literature.
In most years, demand for new H-1B workers exceeded the cap: From 2000 to 2009, demand for new H-1B workers tended to exceed the cap, as measured by the numbers of initial petitions submitted by employers who are subject to the cap. There is no way to precisely determine the level of any unmet demand among employers, since they tend to stop submitting (and the Department of Homeland Security stops tracking) petitions once the cap is reached each year. When we consider all initial petitions, including those from universities and research institutions that are not subject to the cap, we find that demand for new H-1B workers is largely driven by a small number of employers. Over the decade, over 14 percent of all initial petitions were submitted by cap-exempt employers, and only a few employers (fewer than 1 percent) garnered over one-quarter of all H-1B approvals. Most interviewed companies said the H-1B cap and program created costs, but were not factors in their decisions to move R&D overseas: The 34 H-1B employers GAO interviewed reported that the cap has created some additional costs, though the cap's impact depended on the size and maturity of the company. For example, in years when visas were denied by the cap, most large firms reported finding other (sometimes more costly) ways to hire their preferred job candidates. On the other hand, small firms were more likely to fill their positions with different candidates, which they said resulted in delays and sometimes economic losses, particularly for firms in rapidly changing technology fields. Limitations in agency data and systems hinder tracking the cap and H-1B workers over time: The total number of H-1B workers in the U.S. at any one time--and information about the length of their stay--is unknown, because (1) data systems among the various agencies that process such individuals are not linked so individuals cannot be readily tracked, and (2) H-1B workers are not assigned a unique identifier that would allow for tracking them over time--particularly if and when their visa status changes. Restricted agency oversight and statutory changes weaken protections for U.S. workers: Elements of the H-1B program that could serve as worker protections--such as the requirement to pay prevailing wages, the visa's temporary status, and the cap itself--are weakened by several factors. First, program oversight is fragmented and restricted. Second, the H-1B program lacks a legal provision for holding employers accountable to program requirements when they obtain H-1B workers through a staffing company. Third, statutory changes made to the H-1B program have, in combination and in effect, increased the pool of H-1B workers beyond the cap and lowered the bar for eligibility. Taken together, the multifaceted challenges identified in this report show that the H-1B program, as currently structured, may not be used to its full potential and may be detrimental in some cases. This report offers several matters for congressional consideration, including that Congress re-examine key H-1B program provisions and make appropriate changes as needed. GAO also recommends that the Departments of Homeland Security and Labor take steps to improve efficiency, flexibility, and monitoring of the H-1B program. Homeland Security disagreed with two recommendations and one matter, citing logistical and other challenges; however, we believe such challenges can be overcome. Labor did not respond to our recommendations.
Recommendations
Our recommendations from this work are listed below with a Contact for more information. Status will change from "In process" to "Open," "Closed - implemented," or "Closed - not implemented" based on our follow up work.
Director:Andrew SherrillTeam:Government Accountability Office: Education, Workforce, and Income SecurityPhone:(202) 512-7252
Matters for Congressional Consideration
Recommendation: To ensure that the H-1B program continues to meet the needs of businesses in a global economy while maintaining a balance of protections for U.S. workers, Congress may wish to consider reviewing the merits and shortcomings of key program provisions and making appropriate changes as needed. Such a review may include, but would not necessarily be limited to (1) the qualifications required for workers eligible under the H-1B program, (2) exemptions from the cap, (3) the appropriateness of H-1B hiring by staffing companies, (4) the level of the cap, and (5) the role the program should play in the U.S. immigration system in relationship to permanent residency.
Status: In process
Comments: When we determine what steps the Congress has taken, we will provide updated information.
Recommendation: To reduce duplication and fragmentation in the administration and oversight of the H-1B application process, consistent with past GAO matters for congressional consideration, Congress may wish to consider eliminating the requirement that employers first submit a Labor Condition Application (LCA) to the Department of Labor for certification, and require instead that employers submit this application along with the I-129 application to the Department of Homeland Security's U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services for review.
Status: In process
Comments: When we determine what steps the Congress has taken, we will provide updated information.
Recommendation: To improve the Department of Labor's ability to investigate and enforce employer compliance with H-1B program requirements, Congress may wish to consider granting the department subpoena power to obtain employer records during investigations under the H-1B program.
Status: In process
Comments: When we determine what steps the Congress has taken, we will provide updated information.
Recommendation: To help ensure the full protection of H-1B workers employed through staffing companies, Congress may wish to consider holding the employer where an H-1B visa holder performs work accountable for meeting program requirements to the same extent as the employer that submitted the LCA form.
Status: In process
Comments: When we determine what steps the Congress has taken, we will provide updated information.
Recommendations for Executive Action
Recommendation: To help ensure that the number of new H-1B workers who are subject to the cap--both entering the United States and changing to H-1B status within the United States--does not exceed the cap each year, U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services should take steps to improve its tracking of the number of approved H-1B applications and the number of issued visas under the cap by fully leveraging the transformation effort currently under way, which involves the adoption of an electronic petition processing system that will be linked to the Department of State's tracking system. Such steps should ensure that linkages to the Department of State's tracking system will provide Homeland Security with timely access to data on visa issuances, and that mechanisms for tracking petitions and visas against the cap are incorporated into U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services' business rules to be developed for the new electronic petition system.
Agency Affected: Department of Homeland Security
Status: In process
Comments: When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.
Recommendation: To address business concerns without undermining program integrity, U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services should, to the extent permitted by its existing statutory authority, explore options for increasing the flexibility of the application process for H-1B employers, such as (1) allowing employers to rank their applications for visa candidates so that they can hire the best qualified worker for the jobs in highest need; (2) distributing the applications granted under the annual cap in allotments throughout the year (e.g. quarterly); and (3) establishing a system whereby businesses with a strong track-record of compliance with H-1B regulations may use a streamlined application process.
Agency Affected: Department of Homeland Security
Status: In process
Comments: When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.
Recommendation: To improve the transparency and oversight of the posting requirement on the Labor Condition Application (LCA), as part of its current oversight role, the Employment and Training Administration should develop and maintain a centralized Web site, accessible to the public, where businesses must post notice of the intent to hire H-1B workers. Such notices should continue to specify the job category and worksite location noted on the LCA and required by statute on current noncentralized postings.
Agency Affected: Department of Labor
Status: In process
Comments: When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.
Recommendation: To improve the efficiency and effectiveness of its investigations of employer compliance with H-1B requirements, the Employment and Training Administration should provide Labor's Wage and Hour Division searchable access to the LCA database.
Agency Affected: Department of Labor
Status: In process
Comments: When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.
VIEW FULL REPORT (http://www.gao.gov/new.items/d1126.pdf)
More... (http://ashwinsharma.com/2011/01/25/h-1b-visa-program-reforms-are-needed-to-minimize-the-risks-and-costs-of-current-program.aspx?ref=rss)
number30
05-08 06:27 PM
What if you directly send a personal check?
MAy be good for large amounts. But for small amount too much fees is associated. I sent some checks of $100 to a charity , almost Rs 500 was deducted as fees for every Check. It was Syndicate Bank where they encashed the check.
MAy be good for large amounts. But for small amount too much fees is associated. I sent some checks of $100 to a charity , almost Rs 500 was deducted as fees for every Check. It was Syndicate Bank where they encashed the check.
No comments:
Post a Comment