GCard_Dream
09-15 01:41 PM
You bring up a good point about the conference committee. When is the conference committee needed? Is it when bills are significantly different or even for slight differences. I thought conference is only needed if the bills are significantly different and needs to be negotiated between 2 houses. If only few provisions ( like ours) are different then can it be voted on by the house as it is without any conference and get a up or down vote? Now this all assumes that republicans are actually serious about some kind of relief to legal folks which I am seriously starting to doubt.
if they take the bill, they might listen to us and include our provisions in this bill because our provisions are part of the CIR bill which they passed it.
but they will make changes to 'secure act' and pass it in such a way it goes to conference committee (big chance of this going because senate wants 370 miles fence, house wants 700miles) and they wont have time for that committee now, so they will work on it next yr after elections. again after elections, it is diff game as you said. anyhow we caught in the middle of their game.
if they take the bill, they might listen to us and include our provisions in this bill because our provisions are part of the CIR bill which they passed it.
but they will make changes to 'secure act' and pass it in such a way it goes to conference committee (big chance of this going because senate wants 370 miles fence, house wants 700miles) and they wont have time for that committee now, so they will work on it next yr after elections. again after elections, it is diff game as you said. anyhow we caught in the middle of their game.
wallpaper lt----- justin drew bieber
chanukya
05-17 11:43 PM
I think you are slightly off again. This clause pertains only to labor certification and has no relation to quotas as I understand. Remember that there is no such thing as an LC quota. So you still wait in line... Only gain is that the bar for labor is slightly lower because the employer has to show that they hired the best guy for the job as opposed to showing that no minimally qualified American citizen was available. ;)
US Masters and above exempt from quota...
Read this (Sec 514)
http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/attachment.php?attachmentid=56&d=1147880856
in conjunction with this ...(USCIS Section 201(b)(1)(8 U.S.C 1151(b)(1)
http://www.uscis.gov/lpbin/lpext.dll/inserts/slb/slb-1/slb-20/slb-1225?f=templates&fn=document-frame.htm
US Masters and above exempt from quota...
Read this (Sec 514)
http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/attachment.php?attachmentid=56&d=1147880856
in conjunction with this ...(USCIS Section 201(b)(1)(8 U.S.C 1151(b)(1)
http://www.uscis.gov/lpbin/lpext.dll/inserts/slb/slb-1/slb-20/slb-1225?f=templates&fn=document-frame.htm
desibechara
06-20 01:03 AM
but what is notice of forward...in labor certification..the phone number is
written on the labor document..
PD 2001 Oct
TR..was about to convert it to RIR,,,but they started the process already..
DB
written on the labor document..
PD 2001 Oct
TR..was about to convert it to RIR,,,but they started the process already..
DB
2011 JuStIn DrEw BiEbEr | Facebook
gc28262
03-26 10:22 PM
Why would an entry on AP not apply here?
also gap in employement when on AOS should not be a problem given GC is for future employment and as long as your employer can give an EVL when required with the necessary info. Right?
AP:
Earlieir link provided ( http://www.uscis.gov/files/nativedocuments/245(k)_14Jul08.pdf) has that info too.
An alien, however, who entered the United States pursuant to an advance parole document is not �lawfully admitted,� because the parole is not a final act with respect to admission. Thus, reentry based on a parole or advance parole does not start the clock over for the purpose of section 245(k).
Yes, on AOS you are always in status. Gap in employment should not be an issue on AOS as long as you can produce an EVL.
Status violations are a problem only when you are on H1B.
also gap in employement when on AOS should not be a problem given GC is for future employment and as long as your employer can give an EVL when required with the necessary info. Right?
AP:
Earlieir link provided ( http://www.uscis.gov/files/nativedocuments/245(k)_14Jul08.pdf) has that info too.
An alien, however, who entered the United States pursuant to an advance parole document is not �lawfully admitted,� because the parole is not a final act with respect to admission. Thus, reentry based on a parole or advance parole does not start the clock over for the purpose of section 245(k).
Yes, on AOS you are always in status. Gap in employment should not be an issue on AOS as long as you can produce an EVL.
Status violations are a problem only when you are on H1B.
more...
.jpg "justin drew bieber facebook.")
p.guptapost
06-04 10:09 AM
Hi,
We paper filed thru about company attorney in May 1st week from Texas. Till now no receipt received.
Is there any way I can call USCIS to check status without receipt number in hand? Can they track it via SSN or alien no?
Pl. let me know.
We paper filed thru about company attorney in May 1st week from Texas. Till now no receipt received.
Is there any way I can call USCIS to check status without receipt number in hand? Can they track it via SSN or alien no?
Pl. let me know.
cmhasan
07-07 02:44 PM
Thank you Ms Martin, the information you provided is very helpful. I have similar situation: I am citizen now, we got married 4 years back that time I was permanent resident and my wife�s application was processing on employment based and still pending. She is on EAD now, not on H1 any more. One quick question when we file a new family based immigration we need to provide the information about the current employment based application since there is question in I-485 like:
Have you ever applied for permanent resident status in the U.S.? If yes give date, place of filing and final disposition.
What to answer? Surely you have to give reference to the existing application, so will it not be an issue? Will INS reject the application?
Have you ever applied for permanent resident status in the U.S.? If yes give date, place of filing and final disposition.
What to answer? Surely you have to give reference to the existing application, so will it not be an issue? Will INS reject the application?
more...
GotGC??
03-27 02:09 PM
You missed the sarcasm, never mind :)
Yes, depending on how the educational requirements in your LC is worded - I mean right down to the last word - it just might leave you with some room for manoeuvre.
Yes. I have paid quite amount of money to fill the PERM application.
So, what you are saying that I actually can continue the process?
Yes, depending on how the educational requirements in your LC is worded - I mean right down to the last word - it just might leave you with some room for manoeuvre.
Yes. I have paid quite amount of money to fill the PERM application.
So, what you are saying that I actually can continue the process?
2010 Ago via web influencesjustin
DSLStart
12-16 10:32 AM
Very first thing hire your own attorney if new company is not providing one. Have your attorney send USCIS G-28 (change of attorney) on your 485 and other pending cases. Make sure the new attorney sends this out on the second day you meet him. This way your ex employer's attorney will have not control over your case. Spend money from your own pocket if new company not providing attorney as this is an important thing.
I'm EB3 (ROW)...PD: May 2006. My I485 is pending more than 18 months and I140 is approved a year ago. Recently, my boss fired me. I left the company and got a better job within a week. thanks god.
Now my ex-employer is calling my lawyer and bringing some alligation against me and asking my lawyer to withdraw my case. He also mentioned to my lawyer that he is going to call the immigration and take action against me by withdrawing my case.
1...Does anyone have any idea how the immigration going to react after listening to his alligation against me?
2...by submitting any paperwork to them can he hamper my proessing?
3...Do i have anything to scare about?
4...what should i do now?
This issues a very crutial to me now. he is one of those nasty desi employer's who underpaid me last 6 years not just acting funny when I'm asking for my rights. He setup the whole alligation against me and have some office staff working and supporting him.
I need help.....please let me know what should i do....please people help me....
I'm EB3 (ROW)...PD: May 2006. My I485 is pending more than 18 months and I140 is approved a year ago. Recently, my boss fired me. I left the company and got a better job within a week. thanks god.
Now my ex-employer is calling my lawyer and bringing some alligation against me and asking my lawyer to withdraw my case. He also mentioned to my lawyer that he is going to call the immigration and take action against me by withdrawing my case.
1...Does anyone have any idea how the immigration going to react after listening to his alligation against me?
2...by submitting any paperwork to them can he hamper my proessing?
3...Do i have anything to scare about?
4...what should i do now?
This issues a very crutial to me now. he is one of those nasty desi employer's who underpaid me last 6 years not just acting funny when I'm asking for my rights. He setup the whole alligation against me and have some office staff working and supporting him.
I need help.....please let me know what should i do....please people help me....
more...
DesiTech
06-01 06:46 PM
You will, however, need to keep the 140 and labor alive at your old job if you are beyond the 6th year of H1 in order to obtain an H1 transfer or extension with new employer. So if you are already done with your initial 6 year term, then you will need co-operation of your current employer to prevent him from withdrawing your current labor and 140 - atleast until 365 days have passed with new PERM labor or atleast until your PERM and 140 is approved with new GC process.
If I transfer to new company, how can I keep 140 and labor alive ? Its in old company hands if they wish they can cancel correct ??
MY 6th is completing Aug,2007. So U mean the new company has to start from ground zero then will I get H1 ext. or by that period my PD will be correct. Like my current PD is 06/2003 with EB3. But if I start from scratch I would be qualify for EB2. So can I get PD of my old which was filed under EB3 to new which would be filing under EB2 if I take new offer.
Thx for ur help
If I transfer to new company, how can I keep 140 and labor alive ? Its in old company hands if they wish they can cancel correct ??
MY 6th is completing Aug,2007. So U mean the new company has to start from ground zero then will I get H1 ext. or by that period my PD will be correct. Like my current PD is 06/2003 with EB3. But if I start from scratch I would be qualify for EB2. So can I get PD of my old which was filed under EB3 to new which would be filing under EB2 if I take new offer.
Thx for ur help
hair Justin Drew Bieber is a
SunnySurya
08-03 08:32 PM
Looks like they (TSC) are now processing July 3rd onwards. Any July 2nd filler , filled at TSC still waiting. Also do you know if your name check was cleared.
more...
sarva1
05-25 10:40 AM
Called Sen Coryn's office. Kicked out of voice mail to immigration counsel. However, did leave the message with the staff. He was professional and nice. HE even thanked for calling.
hot justin drew bieber facebook.
pcjandyala
07-23 10:48 AM
Rayyan,
It's always better to change the name in the passport (contact Passport office/Indian Embessy near by you) reflecting correctly when you have time now Otherwise it's really create problems in future either in GC or traveling to other countries etc.
Please look for procedure on Indian Embessy web site (if you are in USA) otherwise passport website in india.
My 2 cents
Thanks
It's always better to change the name in the passport (contact Passport office/Indian Embessy near by you) reflecting correctly when you have time now Otherwise it's really create problems in future either in GC or traveling to other countries etc.
Please look for procedure on Indian Embessy web site (if you are in USA) otherwise passport website in india.
My 2 cents
Thanks
more...
house Justin Drew Bieber
billbuff123
07-29 11:43 AM
As long as your marriage date is prior to your 485 approval date and the dates are current(means your priority date) you can apply for spouse 485.
I am also in the same boat and I am waiting my priority date to be current.
I got my 485 approved
Thanks,
Bill
I am also in the same boat and I am waiting my priority date to be current.
I got my 485 approved
Thanks,
Bill
tattoo Justin Drew Bieber Mallete -
vts31
10-20 03:33 PM
photoshop is more editing oriented while painter is more create oriented. Painter is designed to be used with a wacom tablet, so if you dont have one its pretty lame. Painter 5 sucks because the layers were retarded, Painter 6's layers are much more like photoshop.
more...
pictures Justin Drew Bieber (born March
Satya123
03-16 05:26 PM
Hi,
My wife's H4 visa got denied and her I94 got expired. Can she stay for 30 days if so will she be having any problem while coming back with valid status?
My wife's H4 visa got denied and her I94 got expired. Can she stay for 30 days if so will she be having any problem while coming back with valid status?
dresses Justin Drew Bieber Facebook
lost_in_migration
05-15 10:42 AM
/\/\
more...
makeup Justin Bieber Drew Mallete !
pappu
03-05 09:01 PM
check the news of the testimony posted by me last month. As per DHS this money was to be also used for enforcement.
girlfriend justin drew bieber facebook.
ski_dude12
09-26 08:58 PM
You can go for infopass though I am not sure how helpful it will be. In my case I was able to get the same information by talking to level 2 support at USCIS. My 3 infopass appointments were no good really in terms of getting any update.
Thanks for the advice. I appreciate your insight.
I amm zn. ! going all in now.
1. I will call the Customer Service Line tomorrow.
2. I already got the InfoPass for 10/6
3. The letter for my senator is drafted. It will be sent tomorrow.
4. Finally, an email to the Ombudsman has been sent.
Hopefully, there is be some movement.
Thanks for the advice. I appreciate your insight.
I amm zn. ! going all in now.
1. I will call the Customer Service Line tomorrow.
2. I already got the InfoPass for 10/6
3. The letter for my senator is drafted. It will be sent tomorrow.
4. Finally, an email to the Ombudsman has been sent.
Hopefully, there is be some movement.
hairstyles Capi 9:L Justin Drew Bieber
arunmohan
11-19 03:42 PM
job A designation is Software engineer
Job B designation is DBA
description of both jobs are almost same.
If i switch job using AC21 is there any problem with USCIS?
what is the chance of getting RFE in future?
guys please help me on this question.
Job B designation is DBA
description of both jobs are almost same.
If i switch job using AC21 is there any problem with USCIS?
what is the chance of getting RFE in future?
guys please help me on this question.
camilopino
02-13 05:21 PM
-Legally Ignored
-Living in the Legal Limbo
-When Legal is Worse
-The Path to Citizenship, an American Nightmare
-Freedom as a Green Card
-Freedom as a Dream
-Green Card, an American Nightmare
-The Third Rate Citizens
-Living in the Legal Limbo
-When Legal is Worse
-The Path to Citizenship, an American Nightmare
-Freedom as a Green Card
-Freedom as a Dream
-Green Card, an American Nightmare
-The Third Rate Citizens
Blog Feeds
07-09 12:30 PM
AILA Leadership Has Just Posted the Following:
While the 1986 Immigration Reform and Control Act (�IRCA�) prohibits employers from knowingly hiring or continuing to employ unauthorized workers, the Obama Administration�s decision to vigorously enforce employer sanction laws against employers, before providing a path to U.S. employers to legalize critical essential workers, is plain bad policy. �Immigration officers are investigating workplaces in every state in the US to check whether they are hiring illegal workers.� ICE launches workplace immigration crackdown (http://www.google.com/hostednews/ap/article/ALeqM5h_EhhmjIcqAzvJainjWnJTLRylXQD995P1T80)
We are in the midst of the �Great Recession� and U.S. industry is struggling to remain competitive. President Barack Obama�s strategy puts U.S. employers and industry between a rock and a hard place. While the law requires U.S. employers to verify, through a specific process, the identity and work authorization eligibility of all individuals, whether U.S. citizens or otherwise, it is practically impossible to obtain legal status for employers who discover undocumented workers in their workforce � even if they have been employed for decades. Immigrant Visa Numbers Hopelessly Encased In Amber (http://ailaleadership.blogspot.com/2009/06/immigrant-visa-numbers-hopelessly.html).
The diligent employer questioning the veracity of employment eligibility documents can face discrimination charges and vigorous enforcement by the U.S. Department of Justice, if for example, they check only Latino workers, or subject certain classes or worker to extra scrutiny. The U.S. Department of Justice Office of Special Counsel enforces the antidiscrimination provisions that protect most work-authorized persons from intentional employment discrimination based upon citizenship or immigration status, national origin, and unfair documentary practices relating to the employment eligibility verification process. The law prohibits retaliation against individuals who file charges and who cooperate with an investigation. Office of Special Counsel for Immigration-Related Unfair ... (http://www.usdoj.gov/crt/osc/)
No one knows how many of the 6,000,000 U.S. employers, as well as household employers, are familiar with, and in full compliance with the complex U.S. immigration law. Many employers are surprised when told the law requires ALL employers to complete an Employment Verification Form I-9 for any new employee hired after November 6, 1986, or face huge civil fines, and possible jail sentences. The I-9 Employee Verification form must be completed within three days of hire for all hires including U.S. citizens.
Vigorously enforcing this law without providing employers any way to keep essential workers puts employers struggling to make ends meet with the possibility of receiving huge fines, and even prison sentences if they "knowing continuing to hire five or more workers." Actual knowledge of the undocumented worker's status isn't always required, and "constructive knowledge" will suffice where the employer "should have known" of the worker's status. For example, if the employer tries to sponsor an undocumented worker for immigration benefits, the employer is presumed to know of the workers lack of immigration status. The Department of Homeland Security, through its enforcement division, Immigration and Customs Enforcements (ICE) has undertaken a massive new enforcement effort directed at employers large and small. More than 650 US businesses to have employee work files audited (http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/lanow/2009/07/more-than-650-businesses-nationwide-to-have-employee-work-files-inspected.html) Los Angeles Times - ?Jul 1, 2009.?
The focus on audit enforcement is clearly evidenced by the rising number of worksite audits, increased heavy civil penalties and likely continuing criminal prosecutions resulting from worksite violations. Immigration Focus Is on the Employers (http://www.nytimes.com/2009/07/02/us/02immig.html?ref=global-home) New York Times - ?Jul 1, 2009? �The Obama administration began investigations of hundreds of businesses on Wednesday as part of its strategy to focus immigration.�
While employers need to be extremely cautious and take steps to ensure that their employee verification papers are in order, the government needs to fix the immigration mess BEFORE pursuing this new aggressive policy of conducting ICE AUDIT "RAIDS�. Employers should be given an opportunity to pursue a legal path for essential workers before the Immigration and Customs Enforcement officers come �knocking at the door.�
http://www.latimes.com/news/local/la-me-immigemploy2-2009jul02,0,7434438.story (http://www.latimes.com/news/local/la-me-immigemploy2-2009jul02,0,7434438.story) Los Angeles Times: L.A. employers face immigration audits.
Many employers are caught in a Catch-22 when it comes to employee verification. �If you�re in the roofing business, if you�re in the concrete business, you don�t have American-born workers showing up at your door ... you have Hispanic workers showing up at your door, and they have what looks to be a legitimate Social Security card ... under our current law, if they have a card that looks legitimate and you don�t hire them because you suspect they are illegal, then you are guilty of discrimination and could be investigated by the U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission that�s the current system and it�s broken." Said Norman Adams, co-founder of Texans for Sensible Immigration Policy to the Houston Chronicle: Immigration crackdown goes after employers. http://www.chron.com/disp/story.mpl/special/immigration/6506722.html (http://www.chron.com/disp/story.mpl/special/immigration/6506722.html)
Vigorously enforcing these laws without providing an option to employers is plain bad policy and it could make our economic situation worse. My experience with the employer verification law is most employers are simply not familiar with all aspects of the complex immigration laws. Most employers don't know that if they question a legal worker�s documents, the U.S. Department of Justice (U.S.D.O.J.) may charge them with discrimination. The adverse impact on the economy and on the housing market could be serious. The substantial economic contribution of hard working immigrants is clear. Economic contributions of immigrants come in many forms in California. (http://topics.sacbee.com/California/) The California Immigrant Policy Center (http://topics.sacbee.com/California+Immigrant+Policy+Center/) estimates that the state's immigrants pay $30 billion in federal taxes, $5.2 billion in state income taxes, (http://topics.sacbee.com/state+income+taxes/) and $4.6 billion in sales taxes (http://topics.sacbee.com/sales+taxes/) each year. The Selig Center for Economic Growth (http://topics.sacbee.com/Selig+Center+for+Economic+Growth/) calculates that the purchasing power of Latino and Asian consumers in California (http://topics.sacbee.com/California/) totaled $412 billion in 2008 � nearly one-third of the state's total purchasing power. The U.S. Census Bureau (http://topics.sacbee.com/U.S.+Census+Bureau/) found that California (http://topics.sacbee.com/California/) businesses owned by Latinos and Asians constituted more than one-quarter of all businesses in the state as of 2002, employing 1.2 million people and generating sales and receipts of $183 billion. Where would our economy be without these immigrants? http://www.sacbee.com/opinion/story/1981220.html (http://www.sacbee.com/opinion/story/1981220.html) Sacramento Bee: Immigrants are not a fiscal drain.
Comprehensive immigration reform requires a path to legal status for the undocumented and an orderly system for future worker flows to allow U.S. industry to innovate and compete globally. It will require a complete overhaul of the government agencies that now mismanage a slew of immigration programs that could and should be the rejuvenating lifeblood of our nation. http://www.nytimes.com/2009/06/30/opinion/lweb30dream.html (http://www.nytimes.com/2009/06/30/opinion/lweb30dream.html) New York Times: Opening a Door to Young Immigrants.
The American Immigration Lawyers Association (AILA) understands the issues from a deep perspective, not merely from an emotional view. We believe that a sensible comprehensive immigration reform package will have to include smart enforcement, a path to citizenship for the 12 million undocumented immigrants currently living and working in the U.S., elimination of family and employment-based visa backlogs, adequate visas to meet the needs of U.S. families and businesses, a new visa program for essential workers to enable employers to legalize critically needed workers in agriculture, construction, and to provide future flows in certain areas including scientific fields, where as many as two thirds of our advanced degreed graduates are international students. We must also provide due process protections and restore the rule of law in immigration adjudications, and in our immigration courts. AILA Welcomes Obama's Proactive Push for Comprehensive Immigration Reform This Year (http://www.aila.org/content/default.aspx?docid=29372).https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/tracker/186823568153827945-4886898674742904565?l=ailaleadership.blogspot.com
More... (http://ailaleadership.blogspot.com/2009/07/ice-cracks-audit-whip.html)
While the 1986 Immigration Reform and Control Act (�IRCA�) prohibits employers from knowingly hiring or continuing to employ unauthorized workers, the Obama Administration�s decision to vigorously enforce employer sanction laws against employers, before providing a path to U.S. employers to legalize critical essential workers, is plain bad policy. �Immigration officers are investigating workplaces in every state in the US to check whether they are hiring illegal workers.� ICE launches workplace immigration crackdown (http://www.google.com/hostednews/ap/article/ALeqM5h_EhhmjIcqAzvJainjWnJTLRylXQD995P1T80)
We are in the midst of the �Great Recession� and U.S. industry is struggling to remain competitive. President Barack Obama�s strategy puts U.S. employers and industry between a rock and a hard place. While the law requires U.S. employers to verify, through a specific process, the identity and work authorization eligibility of all individuals, whether U.S. citizens or otherwise, it is practically impossible to obtain legal status for employers who discover undocumented workers in their workforce � even if they have been employed for decades. Immigrant Visa Numbers Hopelessly Encased In Amber (http://ailaleadership.blogspot.com/2009/06/immigrant-visa-numbers-hopelessly.html).
The diligent employer questioning the veracity of employment eligibility documents can face discrimination charges and vigorous enforcement by the U.S. Department of Justice, if for example, they check only Latino workers, or subject certain classes or worker to extra scrutiny. The U.S. Department of Justice Office of Special Counsel enforces the antidiscrimination provisions that protect most work-authorized persons from intentional employment discrimination based upon citizenship or immigration status, national origin, and unfair documentary practices relating to the employment eligibility verification process. The law prohibits retaliation against individuals who file charges and who cooperate with an investigation. Office of Special Counsel for Immigration-Related Unfair ... (http://www.usdoj.gov/crt/osc/)
No one knows how many of the 6,000,000 U.S. employers, as well as household employers, are familiar with, and in full compliance with the complex U.S. immigration law. Many employers are surprised when told the law requires ALL employers to complete an Employment Verification Form I-9 for any new employee hired after November 6, 1986, or face huge civil fines, and possible jail sentences. The I-9 Employee Verification form must be completed within three days of hire for all hires including U.S. citizens.
Vigorously enforcing this law without providing employers any way to keep essential workers puts employers struggling to make ends meet with the possibility of receiving huge fines, and even prison sentences if they "knowing continuing to hire five or more workers." Actual knowledge of the undocumented worker's status isn't always required, and "constructive knowledge" will suffice where the employer "should have known" of the worker's status. For example, if the employer tries to sponsor an undocumented worker for immigration benefits, the employer is presumed to know of the workers lack of immigration status. The Department of Homeland Security, through its enforcement division, Immigration and Customs Enforcements (ICE) has undertaken a massive new enforcement effort directed at employers large and small. More than 650 US businesses to have employee work files audited (http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/lanow/2009/07/more-than-650-businesses-nationwide-to-have-employee-work-files-inspected.html) Los Angeles Times - ?Jul 1, 2009.?
The focus on audit enforcement is clearly evidenced by the rising number of worksite audits, increased heavy civil penalties and likely continuing criminal prosecutions resulting from worksite violations. Immigration Focus Is on the Employers (http://www.nytimes.com/2009/07/02/us/02immig.html?ref=global-home) New York Times - ?Jul 1, 2009? �The Obama administration began investigations of hundreds of businesses on Wednesday as part of its strategy to focus immigration.�
While employers need to be extremely cautious and take steps to ensure that their employee verification papers are in order, the government needs to fix the immigration mess BEFORE pursuing this new aggressive policy of conducting ICE AUDIT "RAIDS�. Employers should be given an opportunity to pursue a legal path for essential workers before the Immigration and Customs Enforcement officers come �knocking at the door.�
http://www.latimes.com/news/local/la-me-immigemploy2-2009jul02,0,7434438.story (http://www.latimes.com/news/local/la-me-immigemploy2-2009jul02,0,7434438.story) Los Angeles Times: L.A. employers face immigration audits.
Many employers are caught in a Catch-22 when it comes to employee verification. �If you�re in the roofing business, if you�re in the concrete business, you don�t have American-born workers showing up at your door ... you have Hispanic workers showing up at your door, and they have what looks to be a legitimate Social Security card ... under our current law, if they have a card that looks legitimate and you don�t hire them because you suspect they are illegal, then you are guilty of discrimination and could be investigated by the U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission that�s the current system and it�s broken." Said Norman Adams, co-founder of Texans for Sensible Immigration Policy to the Houston Chronicle: Immigration crackdown goes after employers. http://www.chron.com/disp/story.mpl/special/immigration/6506722.html (http://www.chron.com/disp/story.mpl/special/immigration/6506722.html)
Vigorously enforcing these laws without providing an option to employers is plain bad policy and it could make our economic situation worse. My experience with the employer verification law is most employers are simply not familiar with all aspects of the complex immigration laws. Most employers don't know that if they question a legal worker�s documents, the U.S. Department of Justice (U.S.D.O.J.) may charge them with discrimination. The adverse impact on the economy and on the housing market could be serious. The substantial economic contribution of hard working immigrants is clear. Economic contributions of immigrants come in many forms in California. (http://topics.sacbee.com/California/) The California Immigrant Policy Center (http://topics.sacbee.com/California+Immigrant+Policy+Center/) estimates that the state's immigrants pay $30 billion in federal taxes, $5.2 billion in state income taxes, (http://topics.sacbee.com/state+income+taxes/) and $4.6 billion in sales taxes (http://topics.sacbee.com/sales+taxes/) each year. The Selig Center for Economic Growth (http://topics.sacbee.com/Selig+Center+for+Economic+Growth/) calculates that the purchasing power of Latino and Asian consumers in California (http://topics.sacbee.com/California/) totaled $412 billion in 2008 � nearly one-third of the state's total purchasing power. The U.S. Census Bureau (http://topics.sacbee.com/U.S.+Census+Bureau/) found that California (http://topics.sacbee.com/California/) businesses owned by Latinos and Asians constituted more than one-quarter of all businesses in the state as of 2002, employing 1.2 million people and generating sales and receipts of $183 billion. Where would our economy be without these immigrants? http://www.sacbee.com/opinion/story/1981220.html (http://www.sacbee.com/opinion/story/1981220.html) Sacramento Bee: Immigrants are not a fiscal drain.
Comprehensive immigration reform requires a path to legal status for the undocumented and an orderly system for future worker flows to allow U.S. industry to innovate and compete globally. It will require a complete overhaul of the government agencies that now mismanage a slew of immigration programs that could and should be the rejuvenating lifeblood of our nation. http://www.nytimes.com/2009/06/30/opinion/lweb30dream.html (http://www.nytimes.com/2009/06/30/opinion/lweb30dream.html) New York Times: Opening a Door to Young Immigrants.
The American Immigration Lawyers Association (AILA) understands the issues from a deep perspective, not merely from an emotional view. We believe that a sensible comprehensive immigration reform package will have to include smart enforcement, a path to citizenship for the 12 million undocumented immigrants currently living and working in the U.S., elimination of family and employment-based visa backlogs, adequate visas to meet the needs of U.S. families and businesses, a new visa program for essential workers to enable employers to legalize critically needed workers in agriculture, construction, and to provide future flows in certain areas including scientific fields, where as many as two thirds of our advanced degreed graduates are international students. We must also provide due process protections and restore the rule of law in immigration adjudications, and in our immigration courts. AILA Welcomes Obama's Proactive Push for Comprehensive Immigration Reform This Year (http://www.aila.org/content/default.aspx?docid=29372).https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/tracker/186823568153827945-4886898674742904565?l=ailaleadership.blogspot.com
More... (http://ailaleadership.blogspot.com/2009/07/ice-cracks-audit-whip.html)
No comments:
Post a Comment