Printable View
Is anything wrong with the EB3I from Mid and Late 2000 porting? If you are one of the EB3-EB2 heaters please go to pappu website.Quote:
Originally Posted by imdeng
If you are complaining that somebody will jump before you in your line I hope you don't support HR3012 because that is doing the same thing EB3I will jump in ROW line. I am assuming this because you are a men that you want to fix the system and not just changed in your favor. Right?
Ralax isantem. I have nothing against anybody - we all do what we can to make our lot better in life. To make sure that we don't distract from the core of this thread (calculation/prediction) - I have taken the "offending" part out of my comments.
Quote:
Originally Posted by isantem
Is not insane, is normal and is by law.Quote:
Originally Posted by sportsfan33
I that case you probably don't support HR3012. Because in the same ideea everybody from India post 2007 they know about the 7% limitatiaon and they applied hoping for rule changes later. Am I correct? Or you are fine with the same facts in this case because is helping you and not just EB3?Quote:
Originally Posted by sportsfan33
Guys, Please lets get over the EB2-EB3, whether porting is fair/unfair talk.. It is the prevalent practice right now, so lets accept it. Nobody on this forum can change how visas are allocated or how the SO is distributed. We already have a thread that discusses the pending legislation(s), that might bring about the change. Please move any advocacy ideas/ woulda-shoulda-coulda talk to that thread.
Lets keep this thread for sharing ideas and helping each other get a better idea about how the "Existing Process" works. Personally, I have learnt a lot over the past couple of years about GC process, on this forum and I'm sure healthy discussions would help people who are new to the process.
I am sticking all the posts in the main thread that talk mainly about whether porting is right or not in this thread. Please continue the discussion here. Thanks.
While people are actively discussing against/for porting against the latest EB2 dates in visa bulletin, IMO porting is irrelevant to the recent visa bulletins. Seeing 2004 dates for EB2 may make people think that retrogression is due to porting. The 2004 pds for EB2 means only one thing. There is hardly any visas left in EB2. Reason ? Heavy EB1 usage. Having a PD for EB2 Row means there aren't enough spillover visas available from EB1 to EB2. Without spillovers, EB2 is equally bad as EB3 with only 2800 or so visas available to each category per year.
EB2 date retrogression is due to the lack of spillovers, not because of some dramatic increase in porting. If some EB3 ers with 2004 pds wanted to port, they would have ported long back. They wouldn't wait this long to port.
I think Teddy had sometime mentioned that porting is between 300 and 500 per month - and this has remained steady over past couple years. There is no dramatic increase in porting. Now, EB2I dates are retrogressed first because only ~250 visas are available every month and there is enough porting demand to consume these visas. Now that EB2ROW is current, I hope CO will see some slack coming to EB2I from there in coming months through horizontal spillover and will let the EB2I dates go up a bit.
Quote:
Originally Posted by gcq
As we are discussing against or for porting against the latest EB2 dates in visa bulletin,EB2I dates are retrogressed first because only approximately 250 visas are available per month month and the demand is the same as well.So its very nice and OK.There are some drawbacks with this but I am sure that the company will try to overcome these issues.