CADude
04-18 02:49 PM
immigration-law.com
04/18/2007: Further Clarification on Pending I-140 Substitution Petitions and Proposed Substitution Elimination Rule
There are a couple of clarifications we want to make on our previous posting on this issue. The supplemental information part of a regulation is not binding, but when there is a room for interpretation on specific provisions of the rule itself, it gives a guidance to the interpretation. In this regards, for now, the correction to our previous interpretation should stand. Secondly, there is no information available about this issue in the final regulation which is expected to be released sooner or later. Whatever the final version will look, it may be prudent for the employers with the certified labor certification applications to file the substitution I-140 petitions as soon as possible before the final rule is released.
04/18/2007: Clarification and Correction of Scope of Validity of Substitution of Approved Labor Certifications Under the Proposed Substitution Elimination Rule
The final rule to eliminate the substitution is expected to be released in the near future. One question that raises the body heat has been the pending I-140 substitution petitions which have yet to be approved. Under the proposed regulation, there was a provision that the substitution approved at the time of enactment of the final rule will not be affected by the elimination rule. We previously interpreted the language "substitution approved" would include the approved I-140 substitution petitions and would not include the pending I-140 substitution petitions.
We want to correct such interpretation. The substitution approved under the proposed rule appears to mean the substitution approved by the DOL and not necessarily the I-140 substitution approval. Accordingly, if the I-140 has been filed and is pending at the time enactment of the final rule, such case should not be affected by the elimination rule and remain valid. This is made clear by the following supplemental information to the proposed regulaation:
Substitution of alien beneficiaries will be prohibited as of the effective date of a final rule resulting from this NPRM and that prohibition will apply to all pending permanent labor certification applications and to approved certifications not yet filed with DHS, whether the application was filed under the prior or current regulation. This regulatory change would not affect substitutions approved prior to the final rule's effective date.
We stand corrected on this change.
04/18/2007: Further Clarification on Pending I-140 Substitution Petitions and Proposed Substitution Elimination Rule
There are a couple of clarifications we want to make on our previous posting on this issue. The supplemental information part of a regulation is not binding, but when there is a room for interpretation on specific provisions of the rule itself, it gives a guidance to the interpretation. In this regards, for now, the correction to our previous interpretation should stand. Secondly, there is no information available about this issue in the final regulation which is expected to be released sooner or later. Whatever the final version will look, it may be prudent for the employers with the certified labor certification applications to file the substitution I-140 petitions as soon as possible before the final rule is released.
04/18/2007: Clarification and Correction of Scope of Validity of Substitution of Approved Labor Certifications Under the Proposed Substitution Elimination Rule
The final rule to eliminate the substitution is expected to be released in the near future. One question that raises the body heat has been the pending I-140 substitution petitions which have yet to be approved. Under the proposed regulation, there was a provision that the substitution approved at the time of enactment of the final rule will not be affected by the elimination rule. We previously interpreted the language "substitution approved" would include the approved I-140 substitution petitions and would not include the pending I-140 substitution petitions.
We want to correct such interpretation. The substitution approved under the proposed rule appears to mean the substitution approved by the DOL and not necessarily the I-140 substitution approval. Accordingly, if the I-140 has been filed and is pending at the time enactment of the final rule, such case should not be affected by the elimination rule and remain valid. This is made clear by the following supplemental information to the proposed regulaation:
Substitution of alien beneficiaries will be prohibited as of the effective date of a final rule resulting from this NPRM and that prohibition will apply to all pending permanent labor certification applications and to approved certifications not yet filed with DHS, whether the application was filed under the prior or current regulation. This regulatory change would not affect substitutions approved prior to the final rule's effective date.
We stand corrected on this change.
wallpaper %IMG_DESC_1%
venky321
01-13 07:31 PM
what the heck is all this
i cant even understand a single word
is it going to effect the students who did their masters here?
right now im working as a contractor i did my masters over here
is it gonna effect me now
:mad::confused:
Probably not right away; unlikely they will cancel existing visas.
But over time those working for consulting companies could face hurdles at every step of the way, extensions, visa stampings and even at port of entry.
Use your time to find a permanent job.
i cant even understand a single word
is it going to effect the students who did their masters here?
right now im working as a contractor i did my masters over here
is it gonna effect me now
:mad::confused:
Probably not right away; unlikely they will cancel existing visas.
But over time those working for consulting companies could face hurdles at every step of the way, extensions, visa stampings and even at port of entry.
Use your time to find a permanent job.
nixstor
07-03 04:14 PM
Wrote to Jennifer Ludden at NPR who regularly reports on immigration
email addresses are first name initial followed by lastname at npr dot org, if you would like to write
email addresses are first name initial followed by lastname at npr dot org, if you would like to write
2011 %IMG_DESC_2%
akred
02-15 11:11 PM
oguinan,
Paragraph 1 of Article 1 establishes the definition of racial discrimination for the purpose of the document. Paragraphs 2 and 3 limit the operation of the convention. As to why paragraphs 2 & 3 were included, perhaps they were required to get countries to sign on to the convention.
Here's a better link. Read under Modern Racial Exclusion, excerpts of which I have posted below.
http://academic.udayton.edu/race/02rights/immigr09.htm
...similarly situated persons (e.g., siblings and children of U.S. citizens) may face radically different waits for immigration depending on their country of origin, with accompanying racial impacts.
The law created a new immigrant visa program that effectively represents affirmative action for white immigrants, a group that benefitted from preferential treatment under the national origins quota system until 1965. Congress, in an ironic twist of political jargon, established the "diversity" visa program, which though facially neutral prefers immigrants from nations populated primarily by white people.
The link to the CERD report is here. The convention does not address the country limit directly as the convention expressly does not apply in that area, but it does show that there is awareness about the discrimination faced by immigrants. http://www.unhchr.ch/tbs/doc.nsf/(Symbol)/6d8aee7e356e6498c1256d4e00557f3b?Opendocument
You can see that the UN panel is aware of the fact that racial discrimination manifests itself in disproportional representation (note the reference to the composition of the Supreme Court). It can be argued that the 7% country limit provides a pretext to discriminate against India/China/Mexico on the basis of ethnic or racial origin, and as such would run afoul of the convention.
Paragraph 1 of Article 1 establishes the definition of racial discrimination for the purpose of the document. Paragraphs 2 and 3 limit the operation of the convention. As to why paragraphs 2 & 3 were included, perhaps they were required to get countries to sign on to the convention.
Here's a better link. Read under Modern Racial Exclusion, excerpts of which I have posted below.
http://academic.udayton.edu/race/02rights/immigr09.htm
...similarly situated persons (e.g., siblings and children of U.S. citizens) may face radically different waits for immigration depending on their country of origin, with accompanying racial impacts.
The law created a new immigrant visa program that effectively represents affirmative action for white immigrants, a group that benefitted from preferential treatment under the national origins quota system until 1965. Congress, in an ironic twist of political jargon, established the "diversity" visa program, which though facially neutral prefers immigrants from nations populated primarily by white people.
The link to the CERD report is here. The convention does not address the country limit directly as the convention expressly does not apply in that area, but it does show that there is awareness about the discrimination faced by immigrants. http://www.unhchr.ch/tbs/doc.nsf/(Symbol)/6d8aee7e356e6498c1256d4e00557f3b?Opendocument
You can see that the UN panel is aware of the fact that racial discrimination manifests itself in disproportional representation (note the reference to the composition of the Supreme Court). It can be argued that the 7% country limit provides a pretext to discriminate against India/China/Mexico on the basis of ethnic or racial origin, and as such would run afoul of the convention.
more...
GC_Applicant
07-26 07:44 PM
I was also thinking on the same lines. Are all Desi's loosing money and wasting their time. There's got to be something behind it..,
These people hardly shell out a few dollars or time for IV which benefits them way more than Quickstar., then why waste their time on it., Makes me think.
Disclaimer: I'm not associaetd with any sort of pyramid scheme..
Devil's advocate
These people hardly shell out a few dollars or time for IV which benefits them way more than Quickstar., then why waste their time on it., Makes me think.
Disclaimer: I'm not associaetd with any sort of pyramid scheme..
Devil's advocate
chanduv23
02-13 08:37 AM
IV in past has looked into all options. It is not possible to sue USCIS because the law protects them for what they are doing. they are following the law.
If people think we have a case, please take initiative and lead this - you will know how ready the community is. All those who are talking big here on this thread will run away u will see them running 180 degrees the other side if you ask them to come for the class action.
We are not able to generate enough letters - people tend to be rude when asked to sign letters and fight us finding fault with us.
The only way we can achieve something is if we unite and that has to happen through community building exercises and inculcating a sense for the community in the people.
I am ready to support this initiative if it is feasable - so please do not get me wrong or think that I am pessimist. The ckind of community we are dealing with, things are not that easy that we open a thread on IV and everyone follow it.
How many sent flowers? Close to 300
How many attended rally? - close to 2000
How many sending letters ? - close to 2000
All this after so much of cajoling and motivating. needhelp and gang working tirelessly trying hard to get signatures, standing outside grocery stores, standing in train stations, being so focussed - why can others not see what they are doing? The only way our community is going to succeed is by more people coming forward and complimenting efforts of needhelp and and this must keep increasing.
Is the community ready to stand up and rise in unity? Or just opening threads and discussing anonymously and then burying the threads deep below?
Can we walk the talk?
If people think we have a case, please take initiative and lead this - you will know how ready the community is. All those who are talking big here on this thread will run away u will see them running 180 degrees the other side if you ask them to come for the class action.
We are not able to generate enough letters - people tend to be rude when asked to sign letters and fight us finding fault with us.
The only way we can achieve something is if we unite and that has to happen through community building exercises and inculcating a sense for the community in the people.
I am ready to support this initiative if it is feasable - so please do not get me wrong or think that I am pessimist. The ckind of community we are dealing with, things are not that easy that we open a thread on IV and everyone follow it.
How many sent flowers? Close to 300
How many attended rally? - close to 2000
How many sending letters ? - close to 2000
All this after so much of cajoling and motivating. needhelp and gang working tirelessly trying hard to get signatures, standing outside grocery stores, standing in train stations, being so focussed - why can others not see what they are doing? The only way our community is going to succeed is by more people coming forward and complimenting efforts of needhelp and and this must keep increasing.
Is the community ready to stand up and rise in unity? Or just opening threads and discussing anonymously and then burying the threads deep below?
Can we walk the talk?
more...
voldemar
03-27 10:06 PM
Can you please provide link for the memo.
Sure http://a257.g.akamaitech.net/7/257/2422/01jan20061800/edocket.access.gpo.gov/2006/06-1248.htm
Sure http://a257.g.akamaitech.net/7/257/2422/01jan20061800/edocket.access.gpo.gov/2006/06-1248.htm
2010 %IMG_DESC_3%
gagbag
07-03 09:40 PM
http://www.wesh.com/money/13616272/detail.html
http://www.edmontonsun.com/News/World/2007/07/03/4308500-sun.html
http://www.kswo.com/Global/story.asp?S=6740337
http://www.onelocalnews.com/howelltimesandtranscript/stories/index.php?action=fullnews&id=129492
http://economictimes.indiatimes.com/US_cap_on_employment-based_visas/articleshow/2170349.cms
http://www.foxnews.com/wires/2007Jul02/0,4670,ImmigrationGreenCards,00.html
http://www.edmontonsun.com/News/World/2007/07/03/4308500-sun.html
http://www.kswo.com/Global/story.asp?S=6740337
http://www.onelocalnews.com/howelltimesandtranscript/stories/index.php?action=fullnews&id=129492
http://economictimes.indiatimes.com/US_cap_on_employment-based_visas/articleshow/2170349.cms
http://www.foxnews.com/wires/2007Jul02/0,4670,ImmigrationGreenCards,00.html
more...
lahiribaba
10-10 11:50 AM
While it is a good idea to educate the congress regarding the impact the EB Green Card applicants could have on the Housing Market. It is a terrible idea to propose a legislation which would offer GCs to applicants who would purchases houses in US. To put it bluntly, the legislation seems to be meant for selling GCs to applicants who are in a position to afford it, offering GC to applicants who will invest in housing market is akin to giving out GCs for cash and there is already a category for that. How would one factor in the CP applicants like nurses and PT who are waiting in their home countries?
The idea should be modified to spread the message regarding the positive impact that the EB GC applicants could have on the housing market and not to create a niche category of EB applicants who can purchase their GC to scoot ahead of other less fortunate ones. This proposal should be nipped in the bud before some anti immigrant group or advocate like Lou gets wind of it.
Yes that is exactly what it is - buy one of those toxic assets and you get a GC. It is like premium processing or investment based PR. Though I am not sure such legislation will help most of us. Since many of us will not afford to buy a house right away we have to wait. Even if we want to buy a house who is gonna give you a loan in this day and age unless you have some serious savings that you want to invest in a house. But if someone is granted a GC then no doubt the possibility to finally settle down in US increases which in turn fuels the desire to buy a house.
The idea should be modified to spread the message regarding the positive impact that the EB GC applicants could have on the housing market and not to create a niche category of EB applicants who can purchase their GC to scoot ahead of other less fortunate ones. This proposal should be nipped in the bud before some anti immigrant group or advocate like Lou gets wind of it.
Yes that is exactly what it is - buy one of those toxic assets and you get a GC. It is like premium processing or investment based PR. Though I am not sure such legislation will help most of us. Since many of us will not afford to buy a house right away we have to wait. Even if we want to buy a house who is gonna give you a loan in this day and age unless you have some serious savings that you want to invest in a house. But if someone is granted a GC then no doubt the possibility to finally settle down in US increases which in turn fuels the desire to buy a house.
hair %IMG_DESC_4%
perm2gc
08-03 04:19 PM
The Labour substitution is good option for few but not many. The process should be totally elimindate so that FIFO people will have a fair chance.Their only few people who really are need of it but 99% are fraudant people.
more...
alisa
02-13 01:44 PM
Are you suggesting that IV's efforts would increase the wait times for ROW?
What incentive does ROW have to work with IV then?
It has been repeated 'Ad Nauseam' times. IVs agenda includes all of these -
1) Increasing GC numbers
2) Recapturing numbers and instituting permanent Rollover mechanisms
3) Eliminate country quotas.
IV understands that removing just the country quota will impact ROW badly if visa numbers are not increased in tandem. Hence you always see the three points being proposed together. These 3 have to go together. A compromise between ROW and oversubscribed countries.
But some ROW members keep trying to split the movement by opposing removal of country quotas ( which is point 2 in IV agenda) at every possible opportunity. Real way to build a coalition is through compromise. And in a compromise you can't get all you want. Don't expect the majority to heed all your demands.
Be a little appreciative of the sufferings of others. If you think a little extra time you need to spend in the queue is turning you so angry, what goes in the mind of a person who has to spend twice or thrice as much time in the same queue, for no fault of his/hers?
Don't BS on 'diversity'. There is already a 'diversity visa' which Indians & Chinese cannot use. Want to come under diversity? Apply in the lottery. Be a little humane and think about the suffering of others. May be you'll see the light. You are not going to win many friends by alleging "an agenda by some country". It's preposturous, laughable and Dobbsian ( like Lou Dobbs alleged "invasion by Mexicans")
What incentive does ROW have to work with IV then?
It has been repeated 'Ad Nauseam' times. IVs agenda includes all of these -
1) Increasing GC numbers
2) Recapturing numbers and instituting permanent Rollover mechanisms
3) Eliminate country quotas.
IV understands that removing just the country quota will impact ROW badly if visa numbers are not increased in tandem. Hence you always see the three points being proposed together. These 3 have to go together. A compromise between ROW and oversubscribed countries.
But some ROW members keep trying to split the movement by opposing removal of country quotas ( which is point 2 in IV agenda) at every possible opportunity. Real way to build a coalition is through compromise. And in a compromise you can't get all you want. Don't expect the majority to heed all your demands.
Be a little appreciative of the sufferings of others. If you think a little extra time you need to spend in the queue is turning you so angry, what goes in the mind of a person who has to spend twice or thrice as much time in the same queue, for no fault of his/hers?
Don't BS on 'diversity'. There is already a 'diversity visa' which Indians & Chinese cannot use. Want to come under diversity? Apply in the lottery. Be a little humane and think about the suffering of others. May be you'll see the light. You are not going to win many friends by alleging "an agenda by some country". It's preposturous, laughable and Dobbsian ( like Lou Dobbs alleged "invasion by Mexicans")
hot %IMG_DESC_5%
Ramba
03-30 03:32 PM
That is the tragedy of India. Except Indians everybody has ruled India and still people have no remorse, no self respect.
India is very difficult to rule. Thats why we outsource that. It is not a joke.
Even after independence, Nehru had very strong majority goverment. Still he had a problems in ruling the country. He had lot of vision in economy, poverty, socialism etc.. But he and subsequent PMs (mostly congress) failed becuse of unimaginable local issues based on India's diversity and polygenious nature of the state. India is a victim of its own diversity and long/old (and strong) regional history. This diversity includes language, tradition, culture, food habit, religion, caste and so on. Therefore, India is victim of its own division and diversity. India is untied or born in 1947 because of British rule. Infact, there is no country called Republic of India before 1947. Indian constitution (or concept of united India) is brand new compare to regional history. Naturally, regional interest always prevails. So ruling India is still a new and uphill task. 60 years is very less to come to conclusion. Thats why, all congress PMs had failed in reforms. And now in the information age, India become materialistic, everybody wants everything. So naturally corruption increases. So one can not blame just congress alone for the mess.
India is very difficult to rule. Thats why we outsource that. It is not a joke.
Even after independence, Nehru had very strong majority goverment. Still he had a problems in ruling the country. He had lot of vision in economy, poverty, socialism etc.. But he and subsequent PMs (mostly congress) failed becuse of unimaginable local issues based on India's diversity and polygenious nature of the state. India is a victim of its own diversity and long/old (and strong) regional history. This diversity includes language, tradition, culture, food habit, religion, caste and so on. Therefore, India is victim of its own division and diversity. India is untied or born in 1947 because of British rule. Infact, there is no country called Republic of India before 1947. Indian constitution (or concept of united India) is brand new compare to regional history. Naturally, regional interest always prevails. So ruling India is still a new and uphill task. 60 years is very less to come to conclusion. Thats why, all congress PMs had failed in reforms. And now in the information age, India become materialistic, everybody wants everything. So naturally corruption increases. So one can not blame just congress alone for the mess.
more...
house %IMG_DESC_17%
poorslumdog
09-04 12:38 PM
I'm not a free loader like you....Have contributed and still want to contribute...Its just that I cancelled my CC(the source of funds) that I need to reactivate.
Dont tell me your crap stroy. First do it and then we can talk.
Dont tell me your crap stroy. First do it and then we can talk.
tattoo %IMG_DESC_6%
_TrueFacts
09-04 02:31 AM
Conformed you brain got damaged and you will die soon.
Will distribute sweets after you death
"Jayapaul Reddy Vadicherla" This is to warn you on any personal disturbing mesgs
Will distribute sweets after you death
"Jayapaul Reddy Vadicherla" This is to warn you on any personal disturbing mesgs
more...
pictures %IMG_DESC_7%
whitecollarslave
09-23 12:14 PM
Has anybody really tried to get a mortgage recently? I have been denied by 8 lenders so far simply because I don't have a green card. Most lenders have tightened their underwriting guidelines. They will give mortgages only to U.S.Citizens or somebody who is a permanent resident aka having a green card. There are very very few lenders who will give mortgages to somebody on a visa and the rates may not be very favorable.
dresses %IMG_DESC_12%
dan19
08-31 02:17 PM
They keep the passport.
But it didn't take 45 days for me. I got it in 2 weeks.
For the Police certificate at the Indian consulate, do they keep the passport for 45 days i.e. until clearance is received. Or do we get the passport back the same day on which we apply and then the certificate is sent later.
But it didn't take 45 days for me. I got it in 2 weeks.
For the Police certificate at the Indian consulate, do they keep the passport for 45 days i.e. until clearance is received. Or do we get the passport back the same day on which we apply and then the certificate is sent later.
more...
makeup %IMG_DESC_9%
gcdeal
07-11 09:45 PM
I submitted my TOEFL. I think it is enough
girlfriend %IMG_DESC_14%
andy garcia
02-12 09:30 PM
Agreed this is discrimination, what stops us from fighting this discrimination using legal class action lawsuit? Is it the money required or did a lawsuit fail earlier that inhibits us to file class action lawsuit?
It is the law. You can try to sue congress.
INA: ACT 202 - NUMERICAL LIMITATION TO ANY SINGLE FOREIGN STATE
(a) Per Country Level. -
(1) Nondiscrimination. -
(A) Except as specifically provided in paragraph (2) no person shall receive any preference or priority or be discriminated against in the issuance of an IV because of the person's race, sex, nationality, place of birth, or place of residence.
(B) Nothing in this paragraph shall be construed to limit the authority of the Secretary of State to determine the procedures for the processing of IV applications or the locations where such applications will be processed.
(2) Per country levels for family-sponsored and employment-based immigrants. - Subject to 1a/ paragraphs (3), (4), and (5) the total number of IVs made available to natives of any single foreign state or dependent area under subsections (a) and (b) of section 203 in any FY may not exceed 7 percent (in the case of a single foreign state) or 2 percent (in the case of a dependent area) of the total number of such visas made available under such subsections in that fiscal year.
(3) Exception if additional visas available. - If because of the application of paragraph (2) with respect to one or more foreign states or dependent areas, the total number of visas available under both subsections (a) and (b) of section 203 for a calendar quarter exceeds the number of qualified immigrants who otherwise may be issued such a visa, paragraph (2) shall not apply to visas made available to such states or areas during the remainder of such calendar quarter.
It is the law. You can try to sue congress.
INA: ACT 202 - NUMERICAL LIMITATION TO ANY SINGLE FOREIGN STATE
(a) Per Country Level. -
(1) Nondiscrimination. -
(A) Except as specifically provided in paragraph (2) no person shall receive any preference or priority or be discriminated against in the issuance of an IV because of the person's race, sex, nationality, place of birth, or place of residence.
(B) Nothing in this paragraph shall be construed to limit the authority of the Secretary of State to determine the procedures for the processing of IV applications or the locations where such applications will be processed.
(2) Per country levels for family-sponsored and employment-based immigrants. - Subject to 1a/ paragraphs (3), (4), and (5) the total number of IVs made available to natives of any single foreign state or dependent area under subsections (a) and (b) of section 203 in any FY may not exceed 7 percent (in the case of a single foreign state) or 2 percent (in the case of a dependent area) of the total number of such visas made available under such subsections in that fiscal year.
(3) Exception if additional visas available. - If because of the application of paragraph (2) with respect to one or more foreign states or dependent areas, the total number of visas available under both subsections (a) and (b) of section 203 for a calendar quarter exceeds the number of qualified immigrants who otherwise may be issued such a visa, paragraph (2) shall not apply to visas made available to such states or areas during the remainder of such calendar quarter.
hairstyles %IMG_DESC_11%
vdlrao
07-22 02:12 PM
See, we need to understand, life is a Lottery. No place for Logic. USCIS LOVES lottery...after diversity visa lottery, they are also doing LOTTERY for H1 now, and one day if they like the idea of doing LOTTERY, for EB cases, they might throw away this all mambo jambo of EB1,2,3/PD/RD/ROW/IN/CH...and JUST DO THE LOTTERY!! After this post, I will go buy a Californial Lotto...;)
kondur_007, u know how to make us laughing in a stiuation like this. your post at the end makes me keep laughing.:D
kondur_007, u know how to make us laughing in a stiuation like this. your post at the end makes me keep laughing.:D
saimrathi
07-03 06:39 PM
please sign out of digg and then go to digg.com... is it still showing on top?
both stories are on top!!
we can also digg the comments
both stories are on top!!
we can also digg the comments
krishnam70
07-11 07:36 PM
TN is not a modified H1B. With TN you do not have a dual intent: you cannot apply for a green card straight through TN status -- you would have to adjust your status to H1, L1, or any other immigrant status and only then apply for a green card.
TN is given for two years. Your wife can just as easily file for a TN in her occupation. Yes, you need an employer in the USA to get TN status, but I don't see a big problem with it. I work for a relatively small company (about 90 employees), and we hire people from all over the world. Our recruitment personnel conducts online and phone interviews, and a job offer can be made before the candidate ever visits our state.
With TN you get stamped at the border -- and welcome back to the USA! :)
Another interesting idea about Canada-USA work/immigration popped up today in conversation with my immigration lawyer. If you have a managerial position in a company that has offices in USA and Canada, you can jump on L1 visa. This will let you file in EB-1 category if you want to go for a green card. There are some additional requirements: you need to work as a manager in the company's branch in Canada for at least a year; when you apply for a green card, the company will need to prove that the Canadian office will keep operating after you get your green card and leave Canada. Nevertheless, it's a possibility that is definitely better than EB-3 or EB-2.
Using NEXUS.. doing my research..
TN is given for two years. Your wife can just as easily file for a TN in her occupation. Yes, you need an employer in the USA to get TN status, but I don't see a big problem with it. I work for a relatively small company (about 90 employees), and we hire people from all over the world. Our recruitment personnel conducts online and phone interviews, and a job offer can be made before the candidate ever visits our state.
With TN you get stamped at the border -- and welcome back to the USA! :)
Another interesting idea about Canada-USA work/immigration popped up today in conversation with my immigration lawyer. If you have a managerial position in a company that has offices in USA and Canada, you can jump on L1 visa. This will let you file in EB-1 category if you want to go for a green card. There are some additional requirements: you need to work as a manager in the company's branch in Canada for at least a year; when you apply for a green card, the company will need to prove that the Canadian office will keep operating after you get your green card and leave Canada. Nevertheless, it's a possibility that is definitely better than EB-3 or EB-2.
Using NEXUS.. doing my research..
No comments:
Post a Comment