pranavgandhi
07-16 12:59 PM
IF the position needs Master's+ and applicant has a MS+ degree, then USCIS automatically classifies the I-140 as EB2, as the law clearly states this.
If the position requires (BS+5yrs)+ and the applicant meets this, it will NOT automatically be put into EB2. Employer must ask for the "exceptional ability" provision of the law to get EB2.
Is there offered salary criteria associated with this category?
If the position requires (BS+5yrs)+ and the applicant meets this, it will NOT automatically be put into EB2. Employer must ask for the "exceptional ability" provision of the law to get EB2.
Is there offered salary criteria associated with this category?
wallpaper justin ieber cartoon pictures
sagi9
11-15 11:31 PM
I am from Tucson just started my process early November. Anyone from phoenix or tucson?
javaconsultant
03-28 01:55 PM
This would be a very welcome change ..........
Lets go for it.....I was watching yesterday's bill and could not find this
provision...Correct me if I am wrong....
Let us form a group who are pushing to introduce Ammendment for Filling I485, AP &EAD when I140 approved/pending, eventhough Cut-off dates are not reached for EB category immigration. Please discuss here weather any work being done to introduce this ammendment with present Comprehencive Bill.
Lets go for it.....I was watching yesterday's bill and could not find this
provision...Correct me if I am wrong....
Let us form a group who are pushing to introduce Ammendment for Filling I485, AP &EAD when I140 approved/pending, eventhough Cut-off dates are not reached for EB category immigration. Please discuss here weather any work being done to introduce this ammendment with present Comprehencive Bill.
2011 Justin Bieber (Cartoon)
Be_Pragmatic
07-23 05:35 PM
It varies from state to state based upon which money pool is used to pay the beneficiaries, but it is wise to not to go for it. You will show up as social burden at the time of adjudication and may affect the IOs descision while granting you the AOS approval or not.
Its my 2 cents. You may wanna talk to your attorney before even thinking about filing for such benefits.
OK, thanks much for your suggestion. I'll consult my attorney before plunging in.
Its my 2 cents. You may wanna talk to your attorney before even thinking about filing for such benefits.
OK, thanks much for your suggestion. I'll consult my attorney before plunging in.
more...
psaxena
06-22 07:54 PM
to get some smile on your faces..
Still thinking what Jeniffer(Usha ji) will make the immigrants do.. may be ask to make some pasta!!
Still thinking what Jeniffer(Usha ji) will make the immigrants do.. may be ask to make some pasta!!
hebron
08-10 12:25 PM
Thank you my_gc_wait and amitkhare77 for your suggestions.
One last question to amitkhare77, how long did it take after you joined your new employer to file EB2.
One last question to amitkhare77, how long did it take after you joined your new employer to file EB2.
more...
eldrick
08-16 01:53 PM
Initially, when lawyer sent the documents for signature, they said we should send a $745 dollars check for spouse's form fees. So, my husband asked HR if he's gonna pay for this but HR told him no need they are gonna cover it.
But just yesterday, after my husband got his payslip they deducted 1245 fee. So, my husband complained that he was told that he's not suppose to pay even for spouse's fee.
Because of this complaint, Company sent a letter of apology for wrong information.
My question is , do we really need to pay for this + separate legal fee?
Sorry my details are incomplete in my first post.
Please help. Thanks
But just yesterday, after my husband got his payslip they deducted 1245 fee. So, my husband complained that he was told that he's not suppose to pay even for spouse's fee.
Because of this complaint, Company sent a letter of apology for wrong information.
My question is , do we really need to pay for this + separate legal fee?
Sorry my details are incomplete in my first post.
Please help. Thanks
2010 Fat Justin Bieber
shree19772000
08-08 05:54 PM
Hi All,
I am sure there will be some sort of immigration reform worked out by the mid next year. So please stay calm and enjoy! Eventually you will get your EAD and GC. You just have to hang in there.
peace........
I am sure there will be some sort of immigration reform worked out by the mid next year. So please stay calm and enjoy! Eventually you will get your EAD and GC. You just have to hang in there.
peace........
more...
rrajasekar
08-04 09:06 AM
Same situation here for my wife, we applied only on 29 Jun and current EAD expiring on 22 Aug. We totally forgot about it. She is working for a very reputed bank in NY. Yesterday she received a call from HR asking if she had applied for EAD renewal. She explained the situation and asked them what to do. This is their reply:"That's not a problem. You can work for 180 days after expiry. Just send me a copy of the receipt notice once you receive it".
I think this essentially means the 245(k). So I went back to read the same top to bottom, and looks like you are allowed to work not exceeding 180 days.
I will update once i get more clarification.
I think this essentially means the 245(k). So I went back to read the same top to bottom, and looks like you are allowed to work not exceeding 180 days.
I will update once i get more clarification.
hair justin ieber cartoon pictures
deardar
09-14 02:47 PM
If your employer questions you.
Tell em you had an appoinment with the Senater. ;)
Tell em you had an appoinment with the Senater. ;)
more...
pmb76
03-25 04:49 AM
This sustain act is total BS. They want to increase H1-B numbers without reforming the EB system. They do not want to increase EB numbers. They do not want to do away with country quotas. They don't have country quotas in H1-B. This just creates more and more backlogs for everyone. I HOPE THIS BILL DOESN'T PASS. The companies and lawmakers just want cheap labor without "paying" for it. Just a bunch of self-serving bigots !
hot Justin Bieber#39;s New Cartoon?
kk_kk
02-19 01:28 PM
I would say go ahead and ask your employer if they can apply another labor in EB2 for the new role. Yes, it is correct that there is a lot of scrutiny these days, but if filed properly and if your compnay has followed all the procedures, your PERM might get approved.
Good Luck
Good Luck
more...
house Justin Bieber Fame magazine
BimmerFAn
06-22 09:03 PM
Hi guys, I am trying to understand this whole process and was wondering if you could help me out.
I'm a CPA working for a Big4 in the US for h1-B. I have 2 years of experiences (1 with the same company). I am not from Europe. I have the following 2 questions:
1. What can I expect in terms of waiting for a GC if my employer were to file today? It's a huge firm and submits many GC sponsorship requests per year. I belieave 700 were submitted in 2009.
2. Would my CPA/Lvl 2 CFA Certification as well as my membership in professional organizations and performance bonuses (highlighting exceptional ability) bump me up to EB2 if EB3 is not current?
Thank you for your input.
I'm a CPA working for a Big4 in the US for h1-B. I have 2 years of experiences (1 with the same company). I am not from Europe. I have the following 2 questions:
1. What can I expect in terms of waiting for a GC if my employer were to file today? It's a huge firm and submits many GC sponsorship requests per year. I belieave 700 were submitted in 2009.
2. Would my CPA/Lvl 2 CFA Certification as well as my membership in professional organizations and performance bonuses (highlighting exceptional ability) bump me up to EB2 if EB3 is not current?
Thank you for your input.
tattoo justin ieber cartoon drawing.
webm
03-17 11:49 AM
ALl I-485, repeat ALL do not have PD date on it. Only the I-140 approval notices have a date filled in.
Very true
Very true
more...
pictures Post this Cartoon on Twitter
paskal
10-26 03:11 PM
Can you talk in english please?
:D
:D
dresses JUSTIN BIEBER CARTOON
terpcurt
January 6th, 2005, 07:08 PM
Now I am Jealous......... you guys make it look easy, and I have no clue on how you get the color into the B&W like you do..........................
more...
makeup A cartoon Justin Bieber meets
amdn123
06-13 09:00 AM
Wow, this is news to me. Could you please clarify something, logiclife? I apply to another company, who gets me a 3 year H1B before my 6th year starts. Do I need to request my old company to keep my PERM and I-140 alive until the I-485 is filed and approved? I thought the only way to move to another company was after 3 months of applying for I-485. Thanks for the advice!
First of all, make sure you double check everything I say here with an immigration lawyer. I am not an immigration lawyer and my knowledge is based on forums like these.
Ok.
You still have another 2 months before you begin the last year of your initial 6-year H1 term.
If you new employer is willing to do H1, then FILE H1 as soon as possible. You will get a 3 year H1 term with your new employer based on your current 140 that is approved(with your current employer). The thing is - beyond the 6th year, you can get 3 year extensions of H1 if your 140 is approved(with someone, anyone, it doesnt have to be your employer at that time). Now, if you quit your current employer and go with new one and you end up getting only 1 year H1 with the new employer(in case if you cannot somehow use your current approved 140 to get a 3 year H1), then its still ok. But have your new employer start the new GC's labor right away. That way, you will have 365 days passed when your 6 year term is over in Aug 2007, making you eligible for 7th year of H1. This is very important.
Yes, if your old employer is going to withdraw your labor and 140, then your new employer will have to start GC from scratch. That begins with PERM labor. If you file under EB2, I think you can still transfer your priority date from your old EB3 labor and 140 to new EB2 process. (however, better make sure from a lawyer).
First of all, make sure you double check everything I say here with an immigration lawyer. I am not an immigration lawyer and my knowledge is based on forums like these.
Ok.
You still have another 2 months before you begin the last year of your initial 6-year H1 term.
If you new employer is willing to do H1, then FILE H1 as soon as possible. You will get a 3 year H1 term with your new employer based on your current 140 that is approved(with your current employer). The thing is - beyond the 6th year, you can get 3 year extensions of H1 if your 140 is approved(with someone, anyone, it doesnt have to be your employer at that time). Now, if you quit your current employer and go with new one and you end up getting only 1 year H1 with the new employer(in case if you cannot somehow use your current approved 140 to get a 3 year H1), then its still ok. But have your new employer start the new GC's labor right away. That way, you will have 365 days passed when your 6 year term is over in Aug 2007, making you eligible for 7th year of H1. This is very important.
Yes, if your old employer is going to withdraw your labor and 140, then your new employer will have to start GC from scratch. That begins with PERM labor. If you file under EB2, I think you can still transfer your priority date from your old EB3 labor and 140 to new EB2 process. (however, better make sure from a lawyer).
girlfriend justin ieber cartoon images.
nixstor
08-30 01:11 PM
My 25,000 AAdvantage miles to IV.
hairstyles Cartoon - Bieber on Healthcare
thomachan72
11-08 03:03 PM
regarding carrying older LCAs;
It might never be asked. However, the only time it is asked is when you dont have it with you.
Be prepared to carry a transparent plastic bag or so with all the documents. Its a pain but better to be careful.:(
It might never be asked. However, the only time it is asked is when you dont have it with you.
Be prepared to carry a transparent plastic bag or so with all the documents. Its a pain but better to be careful.:(
alkg
08-13 08:41 PM
see the paragraph in bold letters.................
Greenspan Sees Bottom
In Housing, Criticizes Bailout
August 14, 2008
WASHINGTON -- Alan Greenspan usually surrounds his opinions with caveats and convoluted clauses. But ask his view of the government's response to problems confronting mortgage giants Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, and he offers one word: "Bad."
In a conversation this week, the former Federal Reserve chairman also said he expects that U.S. house prices, a key factor in the outlook for the economy and financial markets, will begin to stabilize in the first half of next year.
"Home prices in the U.S. are likely to start to stabilize or touch bottom sometime in the first half of 2009," he said in an interview. Tracing a jagged curve with his finger on a tabletop to underscore the difficulty in pinpointing the precise trough, he cautioned that even at a bottom, "prices could continue to drift lower through 2009 and beyond."
A long-time student of housing markets, Mr. Greenspan now works out of a well-windowed, oval-shaped office that is evidence of his fascination with the housing market. His desk, couch, coffee table and conference table are strewn with print-outs of spreadsheets and multicolored charts of housing starts, foreclosures and population trends siphoned from government and trade association sources.
An end to the decline in house prices, he explained, matters not only to American homeowners but is "a necessary condition for an end to the current global financial crisis" he said.
"Stable home prices will clarify the level of equity in homes, the ultimate collateral support for much of the financial world's mortgage-backed securities. We won't really know the market value of the asset side of the banking system's balance sheet -- and hence banks' capital -- until then."
At 82 years old, Mr. Greenspan remains sharp and his fascination with the workings of the economy undiminished. But his star no longer shines as brightly as it did when he retired from the Fed in January 2006.
Mr. Greenspan has been criticized for contributing to today's woes by keeping interest rates too low too long and by regulating too lightly. He has been aggressively defending his record -- in interviews, in op-ed pieces and in a new chapter in his recent book, included in the paperback version to be published next month. Mr. Greenspan attributes the rise in house prices to a historically unusual period in which world markets pushed interest rates down and even sophisticated investors misjudged the risks they were taking.
His views remain widely watched, however. Mr. Greenspan's housing forecast rests on two pillars of data. One is the supply of vacant, single-family homes for sale, both newly completed homes and existing homes owned by investors and lenders. He sees that "excess supply" -- roughly 800,000 units above normal -- diminishing soon. The other is a comparison of the current price of houses -- he prefers the quarterly S&P Case Shiller National Home Price Index because it includes both urban and rural areas -- with the government's estimate of what it costs to rent a single-family house. As other economists do, Mr. Greenspan essentially seeks to gauge when it is rational to own a house and when it is rational to sell the house, invest the money elsewhere and rent an identical house next door.
"It's the imbalance of supply and demand which causes prices to go down, but it's ultimately the valuation process of the use of the commodity...which tells you where the bottom is," Mr. Greenspan said, recalling his days trading copper a half century ago. "For example, the grain markets can have a huge excess of corn or wheat, but the price never goes to zero. It'll stabilize at some level of prices where people are willing to hold the excess inventory. We have little history, but the same thing is surely true in housing as well. We will get to the point where there will be willing holders of vacant single-family dwellings, and that will no longer act to depress the price level."
The collapse in home prices, of course, is a major threat to the stability of Fannie and Freddie. At the Fed, Mr. Greenspan warned for years that the two mortgage giants' business model threatened the nation's financial stability. He acknowledges that a government backstop for the shareholder-owned, government-sponsored enterprises, or GSEs, was unavoidable. Not only are they crucial to the ailing mortgage market now, but the Fed-financed takeover of investment bank Bear Stearns Cos. also made government backing of Fannie and Freddie debt "inevitable," he said. "There's no credible argument for bailing out Bear Stearns and not the GSEs."
His quarrel is with the approach the Bush administration sold to Congress. "They should have wiped out the shareholders, nationalized the institutions with legislation that they are to be reconstituted -- with necessary taxpayer support to make them financially viable -- as five or 10 individual privately held units," which the government would eventually auction off to private investors, he said.
Instead, Congress granted Treasury Secretary Henry Paulson temporary authority to use an unlimited amount of taxpayer money to lend to or invest in the companies. In response to the Greenspan critique, Mr. Paulson's spokeswoman, Michele Davis, said, "This legislation accomplished two important goals -- providing confidence in the immediate term as these institutions play a critical role in weathering the housing correction, and putting in place a new regulator with all the authorities necessary to address systemic risk posed by the GSEs."
But a similar critique has been raised by several other prominent observers. "If they are too big to fail, make them smaller," former Nixon Treasury Secretary George Shultz said. Some say the Paulson approach, even if the government never spends a nickel, entrenches current management and offers shareholders the upside if the government's reassurance allows the companies to weather the current storm. The Treasury hasn't said what conditions it would impose if it offers Fannie and Freddie taxpayer money.
Fear that financial markets would react poorly if the U.S. government nationalized the companies and assumed their approximately $5 trillion debt is unfounded, Mr. Greenspan said. "The law that stipulates that GSEs are not backed by the full faith and credit of the U.S. government is disbelieved. The market believes the government guarantee is there. Foreigners believe the guarantee is there. The only fiscal change is for someone to change the bookkeeping."
In the past, to be sure, Mr. Greenspan's crystal ball has been cloudy. He didn't foresee the sharp national decline in home prices. Recently released transcripts of Fed meetings do record him warning in November 2002: "It's hard to escape the conclusion that at some point our extraordinary housing boom...cannot continue indefinitely into the future."
Publicly, he was more reassuring. "While local economies may experience significant speculative price imbalances, a national severe price distortion seems most unlikely in the United States, given its size and diversity," he said in October 2004. Eight months later, he said if home prices did decline, that "likely would not have substantial macroeconomic implications." And in a speech in October 2006, nine months after leaving the Fed, he told an audience that, though housing prices were likely to be lower than the year before, "I think the worst of this may well be over." Housing prices, by his preferred gauge, have fallen nearly 19% since then. He says he was referring not to prices but to the downward drag on economic growth from weakening housing construction.
Mr. Greenspan urges the government to avoid tax or other policies that increase the construction of new homes because that would delay the much-desired day when home prices find a bottom.
He did offer one suggestion: "The most effective initiative, though politically difficult, would be a major expansion in quotas for skilled immigrants," he said. The only sustainable way to increase demand for vacant houses is to spur the formation of new households. Admitting more skilled immigrants, who tend to earn enough to buy homes, would accomplish that while paying other dividends to the U.S. economy.
He estimates the number of new households in the U.S. currently is increasing at an annual rate of about 800,000, of whom about one third are immigrants. "Perhaps 150,000 of those are loosely classified as skilled," he said. "A double or tripling of this number would markedly accelerate the absorption of unsold housing inventory for sale -- and hence help stabilize prices."
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB121865515167837815.html?mod=hpp_us_whats_news
Greenspan Sees Bottom
In Housing, Criticizes Bailout
August 14, 2008
WASHINGTON -- Alan Greenspan usually surrounds his opinions with caveats and convoluted clauses. But ask his view of the government's response to problems confronting mortgage giants Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, and he offers one word: "Bad."
In a conversation this week, the former Federal Reserve chairman also said he expects that U.S. house prices, a key factor in the outlook for the economy and financial markets, will begin to stabilize in the first half of next year.
"Home prices in the U.S. are likely to start to stabilize or touch bottom sometime in the first half of 2009," he said in an interview. Tracing a jagged curve with his finger on a tabletop to underscore the difficulty in pinpointing the precise trough, he cautioned that even at a bottom, "prices could continue to drift lower through 2009 and beyond."
A long-time student of housing markets, Mr. Greenspan now works out of a well-windowed, oval-shaped office that is evidence of his fascination with the housing market. His desk, couch, coffee table and conference table are strewn with print-outs of spreadsheets and multicolored charts of housing starts, foreclosures and population trends siphoned from government and trade association sources.
An end to the decline in house prices, he explained, matters not only to American homeowners but is "a necessary condition for an end to the current global financial crisis" he said.
"Stable home prices will clarify the level of equity in homes, the ultimate collateral support for much of the financial world's mortgage-backed securities. We won't really know the market value of the asset side of the banking system's balance sheet -- and hence banks' capital -- until then."
At 82 years old, Mr. Greenspan remains sharp and his fascination with the workings of the economy undiminished. But his star no longer shines as brightly as it did when he retired from the Fed in January 2006.
Mr. Greenspan has been criticized for contributing to today's woes by keeping interest rates too low too long and by regulating too lightly. He has been aggressively defending his record -- in interviews, in op-ed pieces and in a new chapter in his recent book, included in the paperback version to be published next month. Mr. Greenspan attributes the rise in house prices to a historically unusual period in which world markets pushed interest rates down and even sophisticated investors misjudged the risks they were taking.
His views remain widely watched, however. Mr. Greenspan's housing forecast rests on two pillars of data. One is the supply of vacant, single-family homes for sale, both newly completed homes and existing homes owned by investors and lenders. He sees that "excess supply" -- roughly 800,000 units above normal -- diminishing soon. The other is a comparison of the current price of houses -- he prefers the quarterly S&P Case Shiller National Home Price Index because it includes both urban and rural areas -- with the government's estimate of what it costs to rent a single-family house. As other economists do, Mr. Greenspan essentially seeks to gauge when it is rational to own a house and when it is rational to sell the house, invest the money elsewhere and rent an identical house next door.
"It's the imbalance of supply and demand which causes prices to go down, but it's ultimately the valuation process of the use of the commodity...which tells you where the bottom is," Mr. Greenspan said, recalling his days trading copper a half century ago. "For example, the grain markets can have a huge excess of corn or wheat, but the price never goes to zero. It'll stabilize at some level of prices where people are willing to hold the excess inventory. We have little history, but the same thing is surely true in housing as well. We will get to the point where there will be willing holders of vacant single-family dwellings, and that will no longer act to depress the price level."
The collapse in home prices, of course, is a major threat to the stability of Fannie and Freddie. At the Fed, Mr. Greenspan warned for years that the two mortgage giants' business model threatened the nation's financial stability. He acknowledges that a government backstop for the shareholder-owned, government-sponsored enterprises, or GSEs, was unavoidable. Not only are they crucial to the ailing mortgage market now, but the Fed-financed takeover of investment bank Bear Stearns Cos. also made government backing of Fannie and Freddie debt "inevitable," he said. "There's no credible argument for bailing out Bear Stearns and not the GSEs."
His quarrel is with the approach the Bush administration sold to Congress. "They should have wiped out the shareholders, nationalized the institutions with legislation that they are to be reconstituted -- with necessary taxpayer support to make them financially viable -- as five or 10 individual privately held units," which the government would eventually auction off to private investors, he said.
Instead, Congress granted Treasury Secretary Henry Paulson temporary authority to use an unlimited amount of taxpayer money to lend to or invest in the companies. In response to the Greenspan critique, Mr. Paulson's spokeswoman, Michele Davis, said, "This legislation accomplished two important goals -- providing confidence in the immediate term as these institutions play a critical role in weathering the housing correction, and putting in place a new regulator with all the authorities necessary to address systemic risk posed by the GSEs."
But a similar critique has been raised by several other prominent observers. "If they are too big to fail, make them smaller," former Nixon Treasury Secretary George Shultz said. Some say the Paulson approach, even if the government never spends a nickel, entrenches current management and offers shareholders the upside if the government's reassurance allows the companies to weather the current storm. The Treasury hasn't said what conditions it would impose if it offers Fannie and Freddie taxpayer money.
Fear that financial markets would react poorly if the U.S. government nationalized the companies and assumed their approximately $5 trillion debt is unfounded, Mr. Greenspan said. "The law that stipulates that GSEs are not backed by the full faith and credit of the U.S. government is disbelieved. The market believes the government guarantee is there. Foreigners believe the guarantee is there. The only fiscal change is for someone to change the bookkeeping."
In the past, to be sure, Mr. Greenspan's crystal ball has been cloudy. He didn't foresee the sharp national decline in home prices. Recently released transcripts of Fed meetings do record him warning in November 2002: "It's hard to escape the conclusion that at some point our extraordinary housing boom...cannot continue indefinitely into the future."
Publicly, he was more reassuring. "While local economies may experience significant speculative price imbalances, a national severe price distortion seems most unlikely in the United States, given its size and diversity," he said in October 2004. Eight months later, he said if home prices did decline, that "likely would not have substantial macroeconomic implications." And in a speech in October 2006, nine months after leaving the Fed, he told an audience that, though housing prices were likely to be lower than the year before, "I think the worst of this may well be over." Housing prices, by his preferred gauge, have fallen nearly 19% since then. He says he was referring not to prices but to the downward drag on economic growth from weakening housing construction.
Mr. Greenspan urges the government to avoid tax or other policies that increase the construction of new homes because that would delay the much-desired day when home prices find a bottom.
He did offer one suggestion: "The most effective initiative, though politically difficult, would be a major expansion in quotas for skilled immigrants," he said. The only sustainable way to increase demand for vacant houses is to spur the formation of new households. Admitting more skilled immigrants, who tend to earn enough to buy homes, would accomplish that while paying other dividends to the U.S. economy.
He estimates the number of new households in the U.S. currently is increasing at an annual rate of about 800,000, of whom about one third are immigrants. "Perhaps 150,000 of those are loosely classified as skilled," he said. "A double or tripling of this number would markedly accelerate the absorption of unsold housing inventory for sale -- and hence help stabilize prices."
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB121865515167837815.html?mod=hpp_us_whats_news
Berkeleybee
05-18 08:13 PM
Good job! However, like I and some other people on this forum have mentioned before, there is the need to de-emphasize our course as an Indian course. We know the majority of people in the GC process are of Indian or Chinese origin but we should recognize we need an all-inclusive approach to this struggle.
I clicked on the link and the headline read "Indian immigrants in US raise voices" While I understand that this might have come from the reporters who put togther the news, it is important that the members of IV at the forefront of this campaign and indeed all members on this forum, portray our course as as a high-skilled immigrant course and NOT an Indian or Chinese course.
Just something to think about!
Alabaman,
We have repeatedly stressed the fact that our members are from all over the place. That we represent not only our members but the over 500,000 EB applicants from all over the world who are stuck in the process. On the other hand we cannot always control the spin that individual news organizations choose -- this CNN-IBN covers Indian issues and chose to characterize us that way.
There were Chinese members who attended our DC event, but this reporter didn't film them! Sucks.
See what I said earlier many times, including here:
http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/showpost.php?p=9897&postcount=55
Franklin,
We have members from all over the world. And as far as EB-3 is concerned the entire category retrogressed -- all countries. We feel that this is a problem that affects all highly skilled workers.
One thing to remember is that reporters take snippets from hours of interviews, and then their editors edit the article down further.
best,
Berkeleybee
I clicked on the link and the headline read "Indian immigrants in US raise voices" While I understand that this might have come from the reporters who put togther the news, it is important that the members of IV at the forefront of this campaign and indeed all members on this forum, portray our course as as a high-skilled immigrant course and NOT an Indian or Chinese course.
Just something to think about!
Alabaman,
We have repeatedly stressed the fact that our members are from all over the place. That we represent not only our members but the over 500,000 EB applicants from all over the world who are stuck in the process. On the other hand we cannot always control the spin that individual news organizations choose -- this CNN-IBN covers Indian issues and chose to characterize us that way.
There were Chinese members who attended our DC event, but this reporter didn't film them! Sucks.
See what I said earlier many times, including here:
http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/showpost.php?p=9897&postcount=55
Franklin,
We have members from all over the world. And as far as EB-3 is concerned the entire category retrogressed -- all countries. We feel that this is a problem that affects all highly skilled workers.
One thing to remember is that reporters take snippets from hours of interviews, and then their editors edit the article down further.
best,
Berkeleybee
