prdgl
07-07 09:31 PM
Hi,
I will be applying for LC in a few days. So, I want to clarify something.
My ad says MS + 1 yr of experience.
Question 1: My 1 yr will be prior to my MS so can i use this experience ?
Question 2: If so Can I show that experience worked back in my country from my very close freind who runs a small software company ?
He is willing to give me any kind of experince letter and if USCSI calls ready to answer them.
But just wondering what will be the consequences of doing this. Obviously I can't show any paystubs or W2 forms for that 1 yr.
What are the other evidences that I may require for this other than employer verification letters ?Please reply, emergency !
In which stage in GC will they look sriously (does in conitnue till i-485 stage ?)
I will be applying for LC in a few days. So, I want to clarify something.
My ad says MS + 1 yr of experience.
Question 1: My 1 yr will be prior to my MS so can i use this experience ?
Question 2: If so Can I show that experience worked back in my country from my very close freind who runs a small software company ?
He is willing to give me any kind of experince letter and if USCSI calls ready to answer them.
But just wondering what will be the consequences of doing this. Obviously I can't show any paystubs or W2 forms for that 1 yr.
What are the other evidences that I may require for this other than employer verification letters ?Please reply, emergency !
In which stage in GC will they look sriously (does in conitnue till i-485 stage ?)
wallpaper Robert Pattinson Poses For
gsc999
09-11 01:32 PM
-----------
This is just USCIS backlogs, DOL is a separate agency and the labor backlogs do not count in this.
--
Yes you are correct.
I have noticed fast I-140 processing during last four months, so there is truth to this statement. As always website updates usually lag. We should give USCIS credit where its due.
Good work USCIS, hopefully this same level of service will be available to other
steps of legal immigration in near future
This is just USCIS backlogs, DOL is a separate agency and the labor backlogs do not count in this.
--
Yes you are correct.
I have noticed fast I-140 processing during last four months, so there is truth to this statement. As always website updates usually lag. We should give USCIS credit where its due.
Good work USCIS, hopefully this same level of service will be available to other
steps of legal immigration in near future
softcrowd
04-23 09:35 AM
Yes, that means your I-140 is "filed" under EB2...But note that USCIS can always comeback & say it "can" or "can not" be approved under Eb2 based on the job description in Labor.
In rare scenarios, USCIS comes back with a "NO" to Eb2, especially if the JOB description in Labor does not suit an Eb2 requirement. But in 99% of the cases, its fine (because, attorneys normally don't file it under Eb2 if its not one).
All the best!!
In rare scenarios, USCIS comes back with a "NO" to Eb2, especially if the JOB description in Labor does not suit an Eb2 requirement. But in 99% of the cases, its fine (because, attorneys normally don't file it under Eb2 if its not one).
All the best!!
2011 Wallpapers Robert Pattinson
seaken75
10-31 09:07 PM
Hi all,
Need your help and experience in this!
I received an RFE for my EAD and AP a few days ago. This has to do with me not registering myself during the NSEERS Special Registration. They want to know why i did not register for the NSEERS.
I visited an attorney around March 2003 regarding the Special Registration and was adviced that I dont have to register because my last entry to the U.S. was in January 2003. That was when return for school after going back home for my Christmas holiday. I have been an F-1 student since September 1998.
Reading the NSEERS requirement (http://www.ice.gov/doclib/pi/specialregistration/Call_In_Group4.pdf), my interpretation is that i should be exempted since my last entry to the U.S. is AFTER September 30, 2002. Is my interpretation right or wrong?
Please advice.
Thanks!
Need your help and experience in this!
I received an RFE for my EAD and AP a few days ago. This has to do with me not registering myself during the NSEERS Special Registration. They want to know why i did not register for the NSEERS.
I visited an attorney around March 2003 regarding the Special Registration and was adviced that I dont have to register because my last entry to the U.S. was in January 2003. That was when return for school after going back home for my Christmas holiday. I have been an F-1 student since September 1998.
Reading the NSEERS requirement (http://www.ice.gov/doclib/pi/specialregistration/Call_In_Group4.pdf), my interpretation is that i should be exempted since my last entry to the U.S. is AFTER September 30, 2002. Is my interpretation right or wrong?
Please advice.
Thanks!
more...
linuxra
02-18 09:56 PM
what can i do with my EAD then?
what are my options
so is it risker to work on ead
i am completely confused
can anybody answer my question?
current h1 with vsginc
i-140 with axiom
what are my options
so is it risker to work on ead
i am completely confused
can anybody answer my question?
current h1 with vsginc
i-140 with axiom
logiclife
06-20 12:06 PM
Fellows,
I had my PERM labour and I-140 approved with priority date Dec 2005 in EB2 category. I changed my job in April and was hoping to get the priority date transferred to with new labour and I-140 from new employer. I have not started the GC process with new employer and am in good terms with old employer. With the priority dates being current for July (and probably for August too), what are the options I have:
1. Filing new labour and pray to get approved before end of August. Then file for I-140 and I-485 concurrently. Do I stand a chance there, with advertisement publishing and other formalities?
2. Can I file my I-485 with old employer while working with new employer. What are the documents I would need from old employer.
3. If answer to question 2 is 'yes', do I need to go back and work for old employer ever (before or after getting green card)?
Thanks
(1) is surely an option if you think your prayers are strong enough. I wouldnt trust prayers when it comes to immigration process.
About options (2) and (3), its surely a great option. Contact your ex employer and file the greencard thru him. When I say "Thru him" all you need from him is a letter on company letter head from the boss/HR that still intend to hire you when you get your greencard. Other than that, it is possible to do the whole thing by yourself either thru your own lawyer or by doing it yourself. Its not rocket science. If you have a good lawyer, go thru him.
BEFORE YOUR GC IS APPROVED:
Also, keep in mind that you dont have to start working for him just because he is filing your 485 based on labor/140 that he sponsored. You can continue working where you are working right now. GC is for future employment. (However if you also apply for EAD, then maybe you have to join the ex employer who files your 485 at least during the intial 180 days after 485 is filed, please do check with your lawyer). Also, one last thing if you go thru this route. You need to maintain good relations with this employer if he files your 485 at least for 180 days after its filed. That's because you need him to write a letter that "yes I intend to hire this guy" should USCIS ask him that again during the intial 180 days. After 180 days have passed, if USCIS asks and sends RFE about "who is going to hire you after getting GC", you can exercise your AC21 option and produce a letter from your current employer (whomever you are working for at the time) that they intend to keep your employed after you get GC.
AFTER YOUR GC IS APPROVED:
Now, about having to work for your ex-employer because you filing 485 based on approved labor and 140 that was sponsored by your ex-employer, here is the deal : If 180 days have passed since your 485 is pending and if your greencard is approved after that (after 180 days of 485 filing) then you do not have to go back to your ex-employer. That's because the option of using AC21 portability is available only AFTER 180 days, not before that. Now, if your 485 gets approved in less than 180 days (which is unlikely because they are never that fast and plus the dates have to be current), then YES, you have to go to work for your employer for at least a couple of months as soon as your 485 is approved. However, the chances of the situation coming to that is very unlikely. I dont think anyone is going to get their 485 approved in less than 180 days.
I had my PERM labour and I-140 approved with priority date Dec 2005 in EB2 category. I changed my job in April and was hoping to get the priority date transferred to with new labour and I-140 from new employer. I have not started the GC process with new employer and am in good terms with old employer. With the priority dates being current for July (and probably for August too), what are the options I have:
1. Filing new labour and pray to get approved before end of August. Then file for I-140 and I-485 concurrently. Do I stand a chance there, with advertisement publishing and other formalities?
2. Can I file my I-485 with old employer while working with new employer. What are the documents I would need from old employer.
3. If answer to question 2 is 'yes', do I need to go back and work for old employer ever (before or after getting green card)?
Thanks
(1) is surely an option if you think your prayers are strong enough. I wouldnt trust prayers when it comes to immigration process.
About options (2) and (3), its surely a great option. Contact your ex employer and file the greencard thru him. When I say "Thru him" all you need from him is a letter on company letter head from the boss/HR that still intend to hire you when you get your greencard. Other than that, it is possible to do the whole thing by yourself either thru your own lawyer or by doing it yourself. Its not rocket science. If you have a good lawyer, go thru him.
BEFORE YOUR GC IS APPROVED:
Also, keep in mind that you dont have to start working for him just because he is filing your 485 based on labor/140 that he sponsored. You can continue working where you are working right now. GC is for future employment. (However if you also apply for EAD, then maybe you have to join the ex employer who files your 485 at least during the intial 180 days after 485 is filed, please do check with your lawyer). Also, one last thing if you go thru this route. You need to maintain good relations with this employer if he files your 485 at least for 180 days after its filed. That's because you need him to write a letter that "yes I intend to hire this guy" should USCIS ask him that again during the intial 180 days. After 180 days have passed, if USCIS asks and sends RFE about "who is going to hire you after getting GC", you can exercise your AC21 option and produce a letter from your current employer (whomever you are working for at the time) that they intend to keep your employed after you get GC.
AFTER YOUR GC IS APPROVED:
Now, about having to work for your ex-employer because you filing 485 based on approved labor and 140 that was sponsored by your ex-employer, here is the deal : If 180 days have passed since your 485 is pending and if your greencard is approved after that (after 180 days of 485 filing) then you do not have to go back to your ex-employer. That's because the option of using AC21 portability is available only AFTER 180 days, not before that. Now, if your 485 gets approved in less than 180 days (which is unlikely because they are never that fast and plus the dates have to be current), then YES, you have to go to work for your employer for at least a couple of months as soon as your 485 is approved. However, the chances of the situation coming to that is very unlikely. I dont think anyone is going to get their 485 approved in less than 180 days.
more...
gcformeornot
08-30 01:21 PM
he is a dummy. Just wasting our time.
2010 hot guy wallpaper desktop.
adreg
06-05 10:22 AM
If it makes you feel better -- its 11 years for us :). And no Labor Cert since I am black-logged at PBEC. So we need the annual H1B extension ritual :(
Yep, if CIR falls apart its pack-your-bags-and-go-home for us.
Yep, if CIR falls apart its pack-your-bags-and-go-home for us.
more...
cjain
07-23 04:03 PM
^^^^
hair katy perry iphone wallpaper 3
siva008
02-24 03:04 PM
I have a Master's program in US and had 3 years previous work ex. Filed my H1B transfer on Sep, which was recently converted to premium processing. Got the RFE as listed below:
If it is your contention that the beneficialry is qualified to perform services in the specialty occupation yu have described through a combination of education, specialised training and/or work experience in areas related to the specialty . you must submit an evaluation from an official who has the authority to grant college-level credit for training and/or experience in the speciality at an accredited college or univeristy, which has a program for granting such credit based on an individual's training and/or work experience.
With the evaluation, the official must include a letter from the dean or provost of the official's affiliated education instutions, stating that the evaluating offical has the authoriity to grant college-level credit for training and/or experience. The dean or provost must also state in the letter whether the affiliated educational instutiion has a program for granting credit based on a indicidual's training and/or work experience, If the evealuator bases the evaluation partly or completely on the beneficiary's work experience. the evaluation must vlearly demonstate that:
) The beneficiary''s training and/or work experience included the theoretical and practical application of specialized knowledge required by the specialty;
2) The claimed experience was gained while working with peers, supervisors, and/or subordinates who have a degree or equivalent in the specialty
3) The beneficiary has recognition of expertise in the specialty evidenced by at least one type of documentation
A) Recognition of expertise in the specialty occupation by at least two recognized authorities in the same specialty occupation;
B) Membership in a recognized foreign or United States association or society in the specialty
occupation;
C) Published material by or about the alien in professional publications, trade journals, or major newspapers;
D) licensure or registration to practice the specialty occupation in a foreign country; or Achievements
if any one has similar problem please share
Thanks
Hi NoUserName,
here more details:
Bachelors in Civil
Masters in Civil
And having 3+ years experience as computer systems analyst
My lawyer is saying just educational evaluation is fine but after I read the query they are looking for more.
I really confused how to answer this query, if you have any ideal please help me
If it is your contention that the beneficialry is qualified to perform services in the specialty occupation yu have described through a combination of education, specialised training and/or work experience in areas related to the specialty . you must submit an evaluation from an official who has the authority to grant college-level credit for training and/or experience in the speciality at an accredited college or univeristy, which has a program for granting such credit based on an individual's training and/or work experience.
With the evaluation, the official must include a letter from the dean or provost of the official's affiliated education instutions, stating that the evaluating offical has the authoriity to grant college-level credit for training and/or experience. The dean or provost must also state in the letter whether the affiliated educational instutiion has a program for granting credit based on a indicidual's training and/or work experience, If the evealuator bases the evaluation partly or completely on the beneficiary's work experience. the evaluation must vlearly demonstate that:
) The beneficiary''s training and/or work experience included the theoretical and practical application of specialized knowledge required by the specialty;
2) The claimed experience was gained while working with peers, supervisors, and/or subordinates who have a degree or equivalent in the specialty
3) The beneficiary has recognition of expertise in the specialty evidenced by at least one type of documentation
A) Recognition of expertise in the specialty occupation by at least two recognized authorities in the same specialty occupation;
B) Membership in a recognized foreign or United States association or society in the specialty
occupation;
C) Published material by or about the alien in professional publications, trade journals, or major newspapers;
D) licensure or registration to practice the specialty occupation in a foreign country; or Achievements
if any one has similar problem please share
Thanks
Hi NoUserName,
here more details:
Bachelors in Civil
Masters in Civil
And having 3+ years experience as computer systems analyst
My lawyer is saying just educational evaluation is fine but after I read the query they are looking for more.
I really confused how to answer this query, if you have any ideal please help me
more...
njboy
09-11 01:38 PM
-----------
This is just USCIS backlogs, DOL is a separate agency and the labor backlogs do not count in this.
--------------
not true,, the DOL does not do labor certification for backlogged cases anymore..this work has been transferred over from the State workforce agencies/state departments of labor to the backlog reduction centers..So....while, the DOL is a seperate agency, the labor backlogs is no longer handled by them, it is handled by the BPC..
This is just USCIS backlogs, DOL is a separate agency and the labor backlogs do not count in this.
--------------
not true,, the DOL does not do labor certification for backlogged cases anymore..this work has been transferred over from the State workforce agencies/state departments of labor to the backlog reduction centers..So....while, the DOL is a seperate agency, the labor backlogs is no longer handled by them, it is handled by the BPC..
hot Robert Pattinson Wallpapers
shx
02-25 04:33 PM
People like your (friend's) wife are a shame to the legal immigration community. We come here to work hard and make a better living. I don't think, this woman deserve to be admitted back to the US and I am not sorry to be rude in this case.
WOW. Stealing $30 worth of stuff makes her so bad?
I wonder what stealing from an employer by leaving early from work would mean.
You are beyond hopeless.
WOW. Stealing $30 worth of stuff makes her so bad?
I wonder what stealing from an employer by leaving early from work would mean.
You are beyond hopeless.
more...
house kristen stewart wallpapers
transpass
07-29 10:55 PM
Also one EB1 participant asked for preferential treatment for EB1 applications.
I don't think that dude knows what he is talking about. Anyway EB1 cases ARE separate from EB2/EB3 and ARE adjudicated separately than the rest. That's why it is current and I don't know what more that dude wanted...Just few months here and there in adjudication process of EB1 cases...so what? In this whole mess of years and years of waiting for others, what's the big deal?
I don't think that dude knows what he is talking about. Anyway EB1 cases ARE separate from EB2/EB3 and ARE adjudicated separately than the rest. That's why it is current and I don't know what more that dude wanted...Just few months here and there in adjudication process of EB1 cases...so what? In this whole mess of years and years of waiting for others, what's the big deal?
tattoo Free Robert Pattinson
das0
05-27 10:38 PM
What is the Cut off date for EB candidates for the proposed CIR Bill > May 21 2005 or May 21 2007 ???
more...
pictures robert pattinson, actor, model
rvr_jcop
03-27 12:51 PM
I feel the same... but I'm not sure if I am ready to go back just yet. I spent beyond my means to get my masters and spent a couple of years just paying it back.
I might have some left in me to try again one more time and hoping that some reforms would happen which would help me then.
But yeah, I am not sure if I'll really go after that h1 if I have to go for stamping now.
pal :)
Oh, and also, consider the 'risk' involved in the underlying 485. If you have everything in place and all the documents such as LCA are proper, proved A2P etc...then the risk should be negligible. But again, you know that better than us. Good Luck.
In my case, I decided enough is enough. I am going back 'home' should something happen to my 485., in fact with a big smile.
I might have some left in me to try again one more time and hoping that some reforms would happen which would help me then.
But yeah, I am not sure if I'll really go after that h1 if I have to go for stamping now.
pal :)
Oh, and also, consider the 'risk' involved in the underlying 485. If you have everything in place and all the documents such as LCA are proper, proved A2P etc...then the risk should be negligible. But again, you know that better than us. Good Luck.
In my case, I decided enough is enough. I am going back 'home' should something happen to my 485., in fact with a big smile.
dresses Pattinson Wallpaper for pc
mdipi
10-21 06:37 PM
i heard that steve ODed on drugs, thats why he left. almost dieed.:evil:
more...
makeup robert pattinson shirtless
psn1975
11-05 10:38 PM
no ... EB2 labor/petition to transfer was not filled either .... absolutely nothing was done except for EAD/AP renewal few months ago and I got EAD/AP approval notice couple of months back without any issues :confused:
girlfriend robert pattinson wallpaper
asterix
02-22 05:45 PM
Not sure if people understood the question. Based on this data it shows India got much more then what was in the quota and there were more GC given than the yearly total limit. If this is true, why do I keep hearing that in forums that there were 250K visa's over the last 5 years that were lost because they GC's were not processed in time? If anything there were more visa's given and a disproportionately higher # for India.
hairstyles Robert-Pattinson- as Tyler
anilsal
06-14 04:54 PM
Hopefully by labor PD. But I have read about cases being approved in no sane logic.
sobers
02-09 08:58 AM
Discussion about challenges in America�s immigration policies tends to focus on the millions of illegal immigrants. But the more pressing immigration problem facing the US today, writes Intel chairman Craig Barrett, is the dearth of high-skilled immigrants required to keep the US economy competitive. Due to tighter visa policies and a growth in opportunities elsewhere in the world, foreign students majoring in science and engineering at US universities are no longer staying to work after graduation in the large numbers that they once did. With the poor quality of science and math education at the primary and secondary levels in the US, the country cannot afford to lose any highly-skilled immigrants, particularly in key, technology-related disciplines. Along with across-the-board improvements in education, the US needs to find a way to attract enough new workers so that companies like Intel do not have to set up shop elsewhere.
----------------------------------
America Should Open Its Doors Wide to Foreign Talent
Craig Barrett
The Financial Times, 1 February 2006
America is experiencing a profound immigration crisis but it is not about the 11m illegal immigrants currently exciting the press and politicians in Washington. The real crisis is that the US is closing its doors to immigrants with degrees in science, maths and engineering � the �best and brightest� from around the world who flock to the country for its educational and employment opportunities. These foreign-born knowledge workers are critically important to maintaining America�s technological competitiveness.
This is not a new issue; the US has been partially dependent on foreign scientists and engineers to establish and maintain its technological leadership for several decades. After the second world war, an influx of German engineers bolstered our efforts in aviation and space research. During the 1960s and 1970s, a brain drain from western Europe supplemented our own production of talent. In the 1980s and 1990s, our ranks of scientists and engineers were swelled by Asian immigrants who came to study in our universities, then stayed to pursue professional careers.
The US simply does not produce enough home-grown graduates in engineering and the hard sciences to meet our needs. Even during the high-tech revolution of the past two decades, when demand for employees with technical degrees was exploding, the number of students majoring in engineering in the US declined. Currently more than half the graduate students in engineering in the US are foreign born � until now, many of them have stayed on to seek employment. But this trend is changing rapidly.
Because of security concerns and improved education in their own counties, it is increasingly difficult to get foreign students into our universities. Those who do complete their studies in the US are returning home in ever greater numbers because of visa issues or enhanced professional opportunities there. So while Congress debates how to stem the flood of illegal immigrants across our southern border, it is actually our policies on highly skilled immigration that may most negatively affect the American economy.
The US does have a specified process for granting admission or permanent residency to foreign engineers and scientists. The H1-B visa programme sets a cap � currently at 65,000 � on the number of foreigners allowed to enter and work each year. But the programme is oversubscribed because the cap is insufficient to meet the demands of the knowledge-based US economy.
The system does not grant automatic entry to all foreign students who study engineering and science at US universities. I have often said, only half in jest, that we should staple a green card to the diploma of every foreign student who graduates from an advanced technical degree programme here.
At a time when we need more science and technology professionals, it makes no sense to invite foreign students to study at our universities, educate them partially at taxpayer expense and then tell them to go home and take the jobs those talents will create home with them.
The current situation can only be described as a classic example of the law of unintended consequences. We need experienced and talented workers if our economy is to thrive. We have an immigration problem that remains intractable and, in an attempt to appear tough on illegal immigration, we over-control the employment-based legal immigration system. As a consequence, we keep many of the potentially most productive immigrants out of the country. If we had purposefully set out to design a system that would hobble our ability to be competitive, we could hardly do better than what we have today. Certainly in the post 9/11 world, security must always be a foremost concern. But that concern should not prevent us from having access to the highly skilled workers we need.
Meanwhile, when it comes to training a skilled, home-grown workforce, the US is rapidly being left in the dust.
A full half of China�s college graduates earn degrees in engineering, compared with only 5 per cent in the US. Even South Korea, with one-sixth the population of the US, graduates about the same number of engineers as American universities do. Part of this is due to the poor quality of our primary and secondary education, where US students typically fare poorly compared with their international counterparts in maths and science.
In a global, knowledge-based economy, businesses will naturally gravitate to locations with a ready supply of knowledge-based workers. Intel is a US-based company and we are proud of the fact that we have hired almost 10,000 new US employees in the past four years. But the hard economic fact is that if we cannot find or attract the workers we need here, the company � like every other business � will go where the talent is located.
We in the US have only two real choices: we can stand on the sidelines while countries such as India, China, and others dominate the game � and accept the consequent decline in our standard of living. Or we can decide to compete.
Deciding to compete means reforming the appalling state of primary and secondary education, where low expectations have become institutionalised, and urgently expanding science education in colleges and universities � much as we did in the 1950s after the Soviet launch of Sputnik gave our nation a needed wake-up call.
As a member of the National Academies Committee assigned by Congress to investigate this issue and propose solutions, I and the other members recommended that the government create 25,000 undergraduate and 5,000 graduate scholarships, each of $20,000 (�11,300), in technical fields, especially those determined to be in areas of urgent �national need�. Other recommendations included a tax credit for employers who make continuing education available for scientists and engineers, so that our workforce can keep pace with the rapid advance of scientific discovery, and a sustained national commitment to basic research.
But we all realised that even an effective national effort in this area would not produce results quickly enough. That is why deciding to compete also means opening doors wider to foreigners with the kind of technical knowledge our businesses need. At a minimum the US should vastly increase the number of permanent visas for highly educated foreigners, streamline the process for those already working here and allow foreign students in the hard sciences and engineering to move directly to permanent resident status. Any country that wants to remain competitive has to start competing for the best minds in the world. Without that we may be unable to maintain economic leadership in the 21st century.
----------------------------------
America Should Open Its Doors Wide to Foreign Talent
Craig Barrett
The Financial Times, 1 February 2006
America is experiencing a profound immigration crisis but it is not about the 11m illegal immigrants currently exciting the press and politicians in Washington. The real crisis is that the US is closing its doors to immigrants with degrees in science, maths and engineering � the �best and brightest� from around the world who flock to the country for its educational and employment opportunities. These foreign-born knowledge workers are critically important to maintaining America�s technological competitiveness.
This is not a new issue; the US has been partially dependent on foreign scientists and engineers to establish and maintain its technological leadership for several decades. After the second world war, an influx of German engineers bolstered our efforts in aviation and space research. During the 1960s and 1970s, a brain drain from western Europe supplemented our own production of talent. In the 1980s and 1990s, our ranks of scientists and engineers were swelled by Asian immigrants who came to study in our universities, then stayed to pursue professional careers.
The US simply does not produce enough home-grown graduates in engineering and the hard sciences to meet our needs. Even during the high-tech revolution of the past two decades, when demand for employees with technical degrees was exploding, the number of students majoring in engineering in the US declined. Currently more than half the graduate students in engineering in the US are foreign born � until now, many of them have stayed on to seek employment. But this trend is changing rapidly.
Because of security concerns and improved education in their own counties, it is increasingly difficult to get foreign students into our universities. Those who do complete their studies in the US are returning home in ever greater numbers because of visa issues or enhanced professional opportunities there. So while Congress debates how to stem the flood of illegal immigrants across our southern border, it is actually our policies on highly skilled immigration that may most negatively affect the American economy.
The US does have a specified process for granting admission or permanent residency to foreign engineers and scientists. The H1-B visa programme sets a cap � currently at 65,000 � on the number of foreigners allowed to enter and work each year. But the programme is oversubscribed because the cap is insufficient to meet the demands of the knowledge-based US economy.
The system does not grant automatic entry to all foreign students who study engineering and science at US universities. I have often said, only half in jest, that we should staple a green card to the diploma of every foreign student who graduates from an advanced technical degree programme here.
At a time when we need more science and technology professionals, it makes no sense to invite foreign students to study at our universities, educate them partially at taxpayer expense and then tell them to go home and take the jobs those talents will create home with them.
The current situation can only be described as a classic example of the law of unintended consequences. We need experienced and talented workers if our economy is to thrive. We have an immigration problem that remains intractable and, in an attempt to appear tough on illegal immigration, we over-control the employment-based legal immigration system. As a consequence, we keep many of the potentially most productive immigrants out of the country. If we had purposefully set out to design a system that would hobble our ability to be competitive, we could hardly do better than what we have today. Certainly in the post 9/11 world, security must always be a foremost concern. But that concern should not prevent us from having access to the highly skilled workers we need.
Meanwhile, when it comes to training a skilled, home-grown workforce, the US is rapidly being left in the dust.
A full half of China�s college graduates earn degrees in engineering, compared with only 5 per cent in the US. Even South Korea, with one-sixth the population of the US, graduates about the same number of engineers as American universities do. Part of this is due to the poor quality of our primary and secondary education, where US students typically fare poorly compared with their international counterparts in maths and science.
In a global, knowledge-based economy, businesses will naturally gravitate to locations with a ready supply of knowledge-based workers. Intel is a US-based company and we are proud of the fact that we have hired almost 10,000 new US employees in the past four years. But the hard economic fact is that if we cannot find or attract the workers we need here, the company � like every other business � will go where the talent is located.
We in the US have only two real choices: we can stand on the sidelines while countries such as India, China, and others dominate the game � and accept the consequent decline in our standard of living. Or we can decide to compete.
Deciding to compete means reforming the appalling state of primary and secondary education, where low expectations have become institutionalised, and urgently expanding science education in colleges and universities � much as we did in the 1950s after the Soviet launch of Sputnik gave our nation a needed wake-up call.
As a member of the National Academies Committee assigned by Congress to investigate this issue and propose solutions, I and the other members recommended that the government create 25,000 undergraduate and 5,000 graduate scholarships, each of $20,000 (�11,300), in technical fields, especially those determined to be in areas of urgent �national need�. Other recommendations included a tax credit for employers who make continuing education available for scientists and engineers, so that our workforce can keep pace with the rapid advance of scientific discovery, and a sustained national commitment to basic research.
But we all realised that even an effective national effort in this area would not produce results quickly enough. That is why deciding to compete also means opening doors wider to foreigners with the kind of technical knowledge our businesses need. At a minimum the US should vastly increase the number of permanent visas for highly educated foreigners, streamline the process for those already working here and allow foreign students in the hard sciences and engineering to move directly to permanent resident status. Any country that wants to remain competitive has to start competing for the best minds in the world. Without that we may be unable to maintain economic leadership in the 21st century.
gapala
07-06 05:54 PM
Did you mean to say new H1B from a different sponsor? If it is the same sponsor and new H1B, what difference would that make? Since they have not provided any reason, MTR is the best option and this could be a genuine mistake from CIS.
