Blog Feeds
10-23 09:20 AM
While some may find it a slight to the �big picture� to discuss the plight of a laid-off H-1B worker (given the relatively small percentage of such workers when compared with the unemployment rate of all U.S. workers), it�s worth taking a glimpse at the unique circumstances confronting such an H-1B worker and his/her family upon receiving notice of termination from employment. Especially since this dilemma, unlike most others, has a simple fix�a regulatory grace period. The underlying problem is that employers rarely give ample notice in circumstances involving a reduction in force. Instead, a two week �severance� is commonly...
More... (http://blogs.ilw.com/h1bvisablog/2009/08/a-partial-solution-to-the-plight-of-h-1b-workers-in-a-struggling-economy---a-grace-period.html)
More... (http://blogs.ilw.com/h1bvisablog/2009/08/a-partial-solution-to-the-plight-of-h-1b-workers-in-a-struggling-economy---a-grace-period.html)
wallpaper prom hairstyles for long hair
JainQ
03-13 12:14 PM
Hello:
I'm Canadian who've worked in US for the same employer under L1 Blanket for almost 3 years, my current L1B will expire at July 2011. I heard a lot of L1 extension get rejected recently, I wonder if I can have a fresh L1B petition (I-129) with another 2 year, then go to US-Canada border and turn around with the fresh L1B petition, so I can stay in US for anther 2 years.
My only concern is that, do I qualify the '1 year working at foreign branch within 3 years prior to admission to US' requirement? considering I've been in US almost 3 years already.
Thank you for your help.
I'm Canadian who've worked in US for the same employer under L1 Blanket for almost 3 years, my current L1B will expire at July 2011. I heard a lot of L1 extension get rejected recently, I wonder if I can have a fresh L1B petition (I-129) with another 2 year, then go to US-Canada border and turn around with the fresh L1B petition, so I can stay in US for anther 2 years.
My only concern is that, do I qualify the '1 year working at foreign branch within 3 years prior to admission to US' requirement? considering I've been in US almost 3 years already.
Thank you for your help.
gsk1010
03-13 02:24 PM
Hi,
I graduated with Masters in Dec 2008. We have 29 month OPT. My OPT ends in June 2011.
So, I believe we have 3 chances for applying for H1
April 2009
April 2010
April 2011
I have not applied in 2009 and will not apply in 2010.
If I apply for April 2011, will I have any trouble, as my F1 ends in June 2011. I guess H1 starts in October. So, in between June and October , will I need to travel out of country . My University says, it will not be trouble. Please explain.
Thanks
Santosh
I graduated with Masters in Dec 2008. We have 29 month OPT. My OPT ends in June 2011.
So, I believe we have 3 chances for applying for H1
April 2009
April 2010
April 2011
I have not applied in 2009 and will not apply in 2010.
If I apply for April 2011, will I have any trouble, as my F1 ends in June 2011. I guess H1 starts in October. So, in between June and October , will I need to travel out of country . My University says, it will not be trouble. Please explain.
Thanks
Santosh
2011 short choppy hairstyles
txh1b
08-22 10:54 AM
Not necessarily an RFE. Read the hundreds of posts on pre-adjudication.
more...
Adityaps
02-02 09:03 AM
Hi,
I am in the US on H-4 Visa.
I have MBA(marketing) Degree from India and 90 Hour Early Childhood Certification and CPR Certificate.
I have been offered a job for the position of LEAD KINDERGARTEN TEACHER in a private CHILD CARE CENTER in MD.
Query :
A) Does the above JOB qualify as H1B?
B) I checked on FLCDATACENTER to determine the prevailing wage for this job - All Industries Database has a higher preveiling wage than what I am offered. Can I use any other wage source?
Appreciate, If someone could reply to my query.
Thanks.
I am in the US on H-4 Visa.
I have MBA(marketing) Degree from India and 90 Hour Early Childhood Certification and CPR Certificate.
I have been offered a job for the position of LEAD KINDERGARTEN TEACHER in a private CHILD CARE CENTER in MD.
Query :
A) Does the above JOB qualify as H1B?
B) I checked on FLCDATACENTER to determine the prevailing wage for this job - All Industries Database has a higher preveiling wage than what I am offered. Can I use any other wage source?
Appreciate, If someone could reply to my query.
Thanks.
lokeymd
04-01 07:37 AM
I had already gotten my USDOS approval and my USCIS approval for my J waiver. The whole process took less than a month which surprised us! But it was stated on the I-797 that I should start working for my employer within 90days from March 19, which will be June 19. The problem is my training program does not end until June 30. Even if I wait until June 19 to file for my H1B, and if I don't go for premium processing, once they approve it and retro-date it, there will be an overlap from June 19-30. Can I apply for the H1 on June 30 instead (when my J expires) but that will be more than 90 days from March 19? I will appreciate any suggestions. Thanks!
more...
valuablehurdle
07-24 10:19 PM
I am ready to support your move in any way possible. I live in PA. Let nme know how I should move forward.
2010 Nicole Richie Bob Hairstyles
Macaca
05-19 07:54 AM
3 Months of Tense Talks Led to Immigration Deal (http://www.nytimes.com/2007/05/19/washington/19immig.html?_r=1&oref=slogin) By CARL HULSE (http://www.nytimes.com/gst/emailus.html) and ROBERT PEAR (http://www.nytimes.com/gst/emailus.html), May 19, 2007
WASHINGTON, May 18 � Hours before a bipartisan deal on immigration policy was to be announced Thursday, a tenuous compromise was threatening to unravel, and tempers flared once again.
Just off the Senate floor, Senators John McCain of Arizona and John Cornyn of Texas, both Republicans, exchanged sharp words, with Mr. McCain accusing his colleague of raising arcane legal issues to scuttle the deal. Mr. Cornyn retorted that he was entitled to his view and noted that Mr. McCain had spent more time campaigning for president than negotiating in recent weeks.
The senatorial dust-up, described by witnesses, was just one of the tense moments in remarkable negotiations over the last three months that resulted in this week�s accord. Senator Arlen Specter, the Pennsylvania Republican who oversaw the talks, compared them to a floating craps game, with a changing cast of characters and shifting sites.
Lawmakers and staff members who participated said passions occasionally ran high in the dozens of meetings, with Senator Edward M. Kennedy, Democrat of Massachusetts, sometimes using his temper as a negotiating tactic. Senators who had spent hours anguishing over the smallest details had little patience for colleagues who made brief appearances to offer their views.
�New people came in and wanted to revisit the whole deal,� Mr. Specter said. �That happened all the time. It was very frustrating.�
In the end, negotiators overcame political divisions and some level of distrust to produce the agreement that will be debated in the Senate beginning next week. Lawmakers said they forged bonds partly through the telling of personal stories about their own family roots, as well as long hours spent together and the prospect that the bill might be a last chance at reaching consensus on a major national problem.
�It was like waiting for a baby to be born,� said Senator Lindsey Graham, Republican of South Carolina, about the negotiations. �On occasion, it was like being in mediation with a divorced couple. It was like being at camp with your buddies. It was feeling like a part of history.�
As difficult as the negotiations were, they might ultimately seem tame compared with the fight the authors of the plan now face. Before the language of the bill was even published, the proposal � a major domestic objective of the Bush administration � was under attack from the right for allowing illegal immigrants to earn citizenship and from the left for dividing families. The offices of the negotiators were under siege from critics who had the phones ringing endlessly.
�It is real easy to demagogue this thing, and some people probably won�t be able to help themselves,� said Senator Mel Martinez, Republican of Florida and another key participant in the talks. �We are going to have to stick together on the fundamentals of this agreement.�
The talks had their genesis in last year�s failure on immigration after House Republicans essentially chose to ignore a bill passed by the Senate that conservatives derided as amnesty since it would have allowed some of the 12 million illegal immigrants in the United States to remain and eventually qualify to be citizens.
President Bush helped plant the seeds of this year�s negotiations on Jan. 8, at a White House event celebrating the fifth anniversary of the No Child Left Behind Act. Mr. Bush pulled aside Senator Kennedy, and they went into a room off the Oval Office to talk about immigration.
A month later, Senator Jon Kyl, a conservative Republican from Arizona who would become an important figure in striking the deal, began meeting with other Republicans and administration officials to explore ways to find a legislative response to an issue with potent political and humanitarian ramifications.
When those talks progressed far enough, the Republicans on March 28 invited in Democrats like Mr. Kennedy, a longtime advocate of immigration changes, and Senators Ken Salazar of Colorado and Robert Menendez of New Jersey. What followed was a series of meetings around the Capitol, typically on Tuesday, Wednesday and Thursday nights, as the lawmakers, staff members, White House officials and two or three cabinet secretaries immersed themselves in immigration rules as part of unusually direct high-level negotiations.
�To take an issue and basically start from scratch and write it from the bottom up is something I haven�t seen done in a really long time,� said Candida Wolff, chief of Congressional relations for the White House.
The first big hurdle was cleared a few weeks ago when the negotiators settled on what they called the grand bargain, the main outlines of the issues they were going to address. Major elements included border security improvements and other measures that would have to be undertaken before new citizenship programs were put in place; potential legal status for millions of illegal immigrants; new visas for hundreds of thousands of temporary workers; and clearing a backlog of family applicants for residency.
Republicans also won support for a new �merit-based system of immigration,� which would give more weight to job skills and education and less to family ties. The negotiators decided to adopt a point system to evaluate the qualifications of foreign citizens seeking permission to immigrate to the United States.
No question was too small for the senators. They asked: How many points should be awarded to a refrigerator mechanic with a certificate from a community college?
The negotiations were a roller coaster ride that continued until the deal was announced Thursday, with negotiators expressing despair one day and optimism the next.
�Wednesday evening was one of the most important moments,� Mr. Kennedy said in an interview. �The mood and the atmosphere were good. You got a feeling that maybe this would all be possible. But on Thursday morning, it suddenly deteriorated again.� He told his colleagues that �it�s imperative that we announce an agreement� on Thursday afternoon, or else they could lose momentum. The announcement was made.
In some respects, the lawmakers benefited from the Congressional focus on the Iraq war as they were able to negotiate below the radar, avoiding the disclosure of every twist and turn in the talks and pressure from influential interest groups. Those involved also said the deep participation of Homeland Security Secretary Michael Chertoff was vital.
The senators who put together the bill say they have their own reservations about aspects of it. And some of the regular participants, including Senators Cornyn and Menendez, have backed away from endorsing it. But those who have embraced the bill say they intend to see it through.
�We made a pact,� said Mr. Specter, who was referred to as Mr. Chairman even though Democrats control Congress. �We will stick together even on provisions we don�t like. We are a long way from home in getting this through the Senate.�
WASHINGTON, May 18 � Hours before a bipartisan deal on immigration policy was to be announced Thursday, a tenuous compromise was threatening to unravel, and tempers flared once again.
Just off the Senate floor, Senators John McCain of Arizona and John Cornyn of Texas, both Republicans, exchanged sharp words, with Mr. McCain accusing his colleague of raising arcane legal issues to scuttle the deal. Mr. Cornyn retorted that he was entitled to his view and noted that Mr. McCain had spent more time campaigning for president than negotiating in recent weeks.
The senatorial dust-up, described by witnesses, was just one of the tense moments in remarkable negotiations over the last three months that resulted in this week�s accord. Senator Arlen Specter, the Pennsylvania Republican who oversaw the talks, compared them to a floating craps game, with a changing cast of characters and shifting sites.
Lawmakers and staff members who participated said passions occasionally ran high in the dozens of meetings, with Senator Edward M. Kennedy, Democrat of Massachusetts, sometimes using his temper as a negotiating tactic. Senators who had spent hours anguishing over the smallest details had little patience for colleagues who made brief appearances to offer their views.
�New people came in and wanted to revisit the whole deal,� Mr. Specter said. �That happened all the time. It was very frustrating.�
In the end, negotiators overcame political divisions and some level of distrust to produce the agreement that will be debated in the Senate beginning next week. Lawmakers said they forged bonds partly through the telling of personal stories about their own family roots, as well as long hours spent together and the prospect that the bill might be a last chance at reaching consensus on a major national problem.
�It was like waiting for a baby to be born,� said Senator Lindsey Graham, Republican of South Carolina, about the negotiations. �On occasion, it was like being in mediation with a divorced couple. It was like being at camp with your buddies. It was feeling like a part of history.�
As difficult as the negotiations were, they might ultimately seem tame compared with the fight the authors of the plan now face. Before the language of the bill was even published, the proposal � a major domestic objective of the Bush administration � was under attack from the right for allowing illegal immigrants to earn citizenship and from the left for dividing families. The offices of the negotiators were under siege from critics who had the phones ringing endlessly.
�It is real easy to demagogue this thing, and some people probably won�t be able to help themselves,� said Senator Mel Martinez, Republican of Florida and another key participant in the talks. �We are going to have to stick together on the fundamentals of this agreement.�
The talks had their genesis in last year�s failure on immigration after House Republicans essentially chose to ignore a bill passed by the Senate that conservatives derided as amnesty since it would have allowed some of the 12 million illegal immigrants in the United States to remain and eventually qualify to be citizens.
President Bush helped plant the seeds of this year�s negotiations on Jan. 8, at a White House event celebrating the fifth anniversary of the No Child Left Behind Act. Mr. Bush pulled aside Senator Kennedy, and they went into a room off the Oval Office to talk about immigration.
A month later, Senator Jon Kyl, a conservative Republican from Arizona who would become an important figure in striking the deal, began meeting with other Republicans and administration officials to explore ways to find a legislative response to an issue with potent political and humanitarian ramifications.
When those talks progressed far enough, the Republicans on March 28 invited in Democrats like Mr. Kennedy, a longtime advocate of immigration changes, and Senators Ken Salazar of Colorado and Robert Menendez of New Jersey. What followed was a series of meetings around the Capitol, typically on Tuesday, Wednesday and Thursday nights, as the lawmakers, staff members, White House officials and two or three cabinet secretaries immersed themselves in immigration rules as part of unusually direct high-level negotiations.
�To take an issue and basically start from scratch and write it from the bottom up is something I haven�t seen done in a really long time,� said Candida Wolff, chief of Congressional relations for the White House.
The first big hurdle was cleared a few weeks ago when the negotiators settled on what they called the grand bargain, the main outlines of the issues they were going to address. Major elements included border security improvements and other measures that would have to be undertaken before new citizenship programs were put in place; potential legal status for millions of illegal immigrants; new visas for hundreds of thousands of temporary workers; and clearing a backlog of family applicants for residency.
Republicans also won support for a new �merit-based system of immigration,� which would give more weight to job skills and education and less to family ties. The negotiators decided to adopt a point system to evaluate the qualifications of foreign citizens seeking permission to immigrate to the United States.
No question was too small for the senators. They asked: How many points should be awarded to a refrigerator mechanic with a certificate from a community college?
The negotiations were a roller coaster ride that continued until the deal was announced Thursday, with negotiators expressing despair one day and optimism the next.
�Wednesday evening was one of the most important moments,� Mr. Kennedy said in an interview. �The mood and the atmosphere were good. You got a feeling that maybe this would all be possible. But on Thursday morning, it suddenly deteriorated again.� He told his colleagues that �it�s imperative that we announce an agreement� on Thursday afternoon, or else they could lose momentum. The announcement was made.
In some respects, the lawmakers benefited from the Congressional focus on the Iraq war as they were able to negotiate below the radar, avoiding the disclosure of every twist and turn in the talks and pressure from influential interest groups. Those involved also said the deep participation of Homeland Security Secretary Michael Chertoff was vital.
The senators who put together the bill say they have their own reservations about aspects of it. And some of the regular participants, including Senators Cornyn and Menendez, have backed away from endorsing it. But those who have embraced the bill say they intend to see it through.
�We made a pact,� said Mr. Specter, who was referred to as Mr. Chairman even though Democrats control Congress. �We will stick together even on provisions we don�t like. We are a long way from home in getting this through the Senate.�
more...
vallabhu
07-18 09:07 AM
Did Amit(WaldenPond) get his GC , I have not seen any posts from him in recent past
I think we should remember and thank him for starting this effort.
Sorry for creating new thread for asking this question I tried asking in other thread which totally got lost and never answered.
I think we should remember and thank him for starting this effort.
Sorry for creating new thread for asking this question I tried asking in other thread which totally got lost and never answered.
hair During a ook signing at
aeroterp
07-28 12:27 PM
We will probably hear more about this soon: http://thehill.com/leading-the-news/specter-has-new-immigration-package-2007-07-27.html
Good find! We need to get behind this measure!!
Good find! We need to get behind this measure!!
more...
dbevis
October 29th, 2004, 06:56 AM
Hi, Cled. You got a good shadow in there, but it's opposing the direction of sunlight (note the flower's stamen which has a shadow coming towards the camera).
The person appears to have been caught in "mid leap" although intended to be kneeling. I'm not sure how you'd really do something about that. Perhaps by making the shadow appear darker and less blurred near knees and shoes?
As far as blending the person over the flower, looks good - no funny edges or outlines.
The person appears to have been caught in "mid leap" although intended to be kneeling. I'm not sure how you'd really do something about that. Perhaps by making the shadow appear darker and less blurred near knees and shoes?
As far as blending the person over the flower, looks good - no funny edges or outlines.