Printable View
It seem GS business depends upon FB immigration and that is the reason he is jumping up and down! Its kinda sad to see the gullible desi folks believing that he is going to be one on their saviors! Make no mistake, he is a wolf in sheep's clothingQuote:
Originally Posted by delguy
H1b amendments, extensions, transfers, H4s, H4-EADs ahh and not to forget the RFEs etc etc....they are all cash cows for immigration attorneys. Why in any right sense of mind they would advocate for folks to get GC. Its a several billion dollar industry at the end of the day. While they truly advocate for pro non-immigrant visa policies which is a common interest, meaningful long term GC reforms become competing interests so we get pitted against each other. Its like friends with benefits in the short/medium term but a marriage of sorts is out of question... ;)Quote:
Originally Posted by NJMavarick
Q - This makes sense. But one question. You said - "The only problem is - there is no law that states that DOS must allocate the visas....." If that's true they can simply carryover unused FB visas this year to EB as required by the congressional mandate but choose not to give it to anyone in EB in the next fiscal because allocation is not required. Almost like operation is a success but patient died! Did I interpret this correctly?Quote:
Originally Posted by qesehmk
Theoretically they can do that. But realistically, in EB, there are hundreds of thousands of ready to go backlogged cases (unlike in FB). They are all processed and nothing is waiting other than a visa number. So the chances of all spillover visas going waste is a remote possibility. That is why DoS can control VB dates by 2 5 10 days in case of EB-I. Don't look at it as something sinister. It's just that they are operating within their bounds.Quote:
Originally Posted by Zenzone
p.s. There is injustice - don't get me wrong. But I am saying DoS and most of US agencies are very very professional and methodical in what they do and how they do it.
Thanks! This is helpful context.Quote:
Originally Posted by qesehmk
H1-B - New potential rule for H1-B Visa holders that can cause a lot of heartache to 60-70% of the people. We should really ramp up our change/activist efforts
https://www.forbes.com/sites/stuarta...250000-a-year/
I know its too early to ask, based on FB spillover, any chance EB2I will reach first quarter of 2011 coming October or November?Quote:
Originally Posted by qesehmk
This maybe administrations efforts in response to court order restricting USCIS.Quote:
Originally Posted by bloddy1
I don't think this can be done without the rule making process. Moreover this looks more like election propaganda than an actual policy position. The big companies will lobby heavily against it, to protect their financial interests. Nevertheless we need to be on the alert.Quote:
Originally Posted by bloddy1
Looks like it aims to target primarily junior folks in every industry/profession. In my opinion, they would need to amend the INA for this and hence the congress. In many ways, this wage levels have already been significantly scrutinized since 2017 and this will memorialize the practice rather.Quote:
Originally Posted by bloddy1
When you look at how it take 10 years to file someone a lawsuit against it, it is kind of unbelievable. You have these tens of thousands of lawyers who were busy satisfying this memo rather than questioning it in courts. Same happened with when denials skyrocketed, it took these shady consilting companirs to come together and file a lawsuit while biggies were simply accepting the rejections without questiioning uscis.Quote:
Originally Posted by vsivarama
when filing lawsuit, there has to be caution. if for some reason the ruling goes against them and it becomes a precedent, then it is not good. in case of uscis memos, companies should have gone to court much earlier as the memo was invalid against current law on which it was based.Quote:
Originally Posted by delguy
as iong as anti-immigrants are driving administration agenda, they will try to put as many road blocks as possible.
It depends upon 2 things:Quote:
Originally Posted by GC-Immigrant
- # of Spillover from FB to EB
- Willingness of CO to apply the spill over.
Its hard to say but Q1 2011 could be a stretch but possible
I am not denying what you say. But there is a difference here though. The memo was pushed as an interpretation to the existing law and so no rule making was required. Here they cannot push it as an interpretation to the existing law. Even though the memo was in effect for 10 years there was not necessarily much change in the denial rates and hence no one took much notice until 2018 when the rates rose up sharply as per the new addendum. I have also seen companies which never shared any client letters or project specific details, change their policies to provide them (including SOW details) to their contractors. While the biggies were simply accepting the rejections without questioning uscis, they were also actively making policy changes within their organization to make sure they could retain their workforce. Plus the one being proposed would have a broad reaching implications across every sector regardless of FTE or Contractors etc. This potentially could see a wave of outsourcing. Counting on the free market capitalism core principles to save the day.Quote:
Originally Posted by delguy
Not sure Q1 2011 is possible this October, but by next Q3 fiscal it can be. If other things mentioned happen.Quote:
Originally Posted by NJMavarick
If the spill over number is BIG and its a big IF, there is an outside chance that filing dates can move to Q1 2011. There are plethora of possibilities and simulations for us to run :)Quote:
Originally Posted by Zenzone
What if we get 70K FB spill over? What if EB3 ROW is current this fiscal? What if CO decides to go aggressive in anticipation of spill over?
No one can accurately predict, however in all probability EB1 folks are poised to reap the benefits
Thank You :)Quote:
Originally Posted by NJMavarick
Since we are discussing FB -> EB spillovers. I think it is worth posting what INS language says:Quote:
Originally Posted by NJMavarick
https://uscode.house.gov/view.xhtml?...edition=prelim
relevant section below:
8 USC 1151: Worldwide level of immigration
(d) Worldwide level of employment-based immigrants
(1) The worldwide level of employment-based immigrants under this subsection for a fiscal year is equal to-
(A) 140,000, plus
(B) the number computed under paragraph (2).
(2)(A) The number computed under this paragraph for fiscal year 1992 is zero.
(B) The number computed under this paragraph for fiscal year 1993 is the difference (if any) between the worldwide level established under paragraph (1) for the previous fiscal year and the number of visas issued under section 1153(b) of this title during that fiscal year.
(C) The number computed under this paragraph for a subsequent fiscal year is the difference (if any) between the maximum number of visas which may be issued under section 1153(a) of this title (relating to family-sponsored immigrants) during the previous fiscal year and the number of visas issued under that section during that year.
As you see above, the language is very clear. In my opinion doesnt leave any scope for alteration using EO or any other method except a change via congress sneaked in one of the stimulus/budget bills.
You mean to file this October 2020??Quote:
Originally Posted by NJMavarick
Yes. That's true. Good you shared the actual language.Quote:
Originally Posted by delguy
FB spillover applies to EB 1/2/3 equally. Why you say EB1 will reap in particular. Yes. they may get more vertical SO. I see that advantage but otherwise every category is set to benefit from FB SO and horizontal SO within that category both from AOS and CP cases.Quote:
Originally Posted by NJMavarick
Also if as per the law the numbers would be 140K plus say 70K - then 210K - so that’s about 50 percent more. So if EB2 earlier moved by 2 months in year, now it would move 3 months. Big whoop ?!!Quote:
Originally Posted by Zenzone
Not exactly - the demand for ROW would stay the same, so impact will be bigger. For example, assume EB2 quota goes up from 40K to 65K (Extra 25K). Assuming ROW demand stays at about 30K-35K, EB2-I will get the bulk of the extra visas. The key variable is how big the spillover will be.Quote:
Originally Posted by excalibur123
Quite respectfully, bring us data and not your opinions. Spec and others have done enough analysis on the SO scenarios. I would suggest you reading it. There will be substantial movements across all three categories if SO and allocations materialize.Quote:
Originally Posted by excalibur123