PDA

View Full Version : AILA News and Discussion


stuckinline
10-29-2015, 02:11 PM
Thought people might be interested, "Guest Blogger" Greg Siskind published a blog post on the AILA website (http://www.ailaleadershipblog.org/2015/10/29/i-140-employment-card-rule-could-be-a-winner-for-both-american-and-immigrant-workers/) that purportedly supports I140-EAD.

legalexpat
10-29-2015, 02:24 PM
I have been responding to that in twitter. If this is a better place for discussion, we can do it here :-)

DMX17
10-29-2015, 02:25 PM
Thought people might be interested, "Guest Blogger" Greg Siskind published a blog post on the AILA website (http://www.ailaleadershipblog.org/2015/10/29/i-140-employment-card-rule-could-be-a-winner-for-both-american-and-immigrant-workers/) that purportedly supports I140-EAD.

I told you so that someone should write a blog.

There you have it ladies and gentlement. We fully support.

Maa-Ki-Kirkiri:D

Bhishma
10-29-2015, 02:35 PM
Thought people might be interested, "Guest Blogger" Greg Siskind published a blog post on the AILA website (http://www.ailaleadershipblog.org/2015/10/29/i-140-employment-card-rule-could-be-a-winner-for-both-american-and-immigrant-workers/) that purportedly supports I140-EAD.

It is still a blog, not an official document from AILA. We need something from AILA to DHS, USCIS and all concerned parties.

hil3182
10-29-2015, 02:59 PM
I have been responding to that in twitter. If this is a better place for discussion, we can do it here :-)

Ok Read this AILA submission (http://www.aila.org/infonet/amicus-brief-with-aao-to-receive-notice-under-ac21) very carefully.

Congress passed AC-21 to give job portability to people stuck in Adjustment of Status delays. This means that you need to have I485 pending. AC-21 is why people with pending I485 get EAD's.

But GOTUS never did formal rule-making to implement I485-EAD, they just started handing them out.

When they do formal rule making they have the freedom to consider the "Intent of Congress" and use existing authority to fulfill the intent of Congress. Clearly Congress never intended for people to be stuck in long backlogs, driving down wages and so on - as demonstrated by AC-21.

With this background USCIS AAO put out an RFI asking for input on how to write AC-21 rules.

And what does AILA do? They put out the above submission (http://www.aila.org/infonet/amicus-brief-with-aao-to-receive-notice-under-ac21).

If you read between the lines, they are very careful to reiterate over and over again that only people with pending AoS should benefit from this. This submission happened in late May of this year. At this time everyone and his dog know that I140-EAD was in the works and the sole reason USCIS was going through the AC-21 rule-making process was to consider the intent of Congress and issue I140-EAD.

If you read between the lines of AILA's submission, it is obvious that they want nothing to change. In-fact they are scrambling very hard to keep the scope of AC-21 rulemaking limited to people with pending I1485's not for people with approved I140's. If you cannot see that, no one here can help you.

AILA has been acting in bad faith for years. We cannot go into WH meetings with tape recorders, if we did - AILA's position (both stated and unstated) would curdle your blood. There are certain things - especially background lobbying - that cannot be proven and disproven beyond a reasonable doubt, to people who do not witnesses the act. You just need to know what peoples underlying motivation is, who your friends are and who your enemies are.

If you think AILA is somehow on your side in-spite of all you have read on this forum, that is your loss. The rest of us are grateful that IV is taking a realistic view of the situation.

hil3182
10-29-2015, 03:56 PM
Thought people might be interested, "Guest Blogger" Greg Siskind published a blog post on the AILA website (http://www.ailaleadershipblog.org/2015/10/29/i-140-employment-card-rule-could-be-a-winner-for-both-american-and-immigrant-workers/) that purportedly supports I140-EAD.

Regarding the blog post. It means nothing.

If AILA is serious, they will send official submissions to agencies. If they do that, we will take copies of their submission into every WH meeting and say AILA supports this - so please move faster. We will also say, see AILA is full of hypocrites - just last week they had elaborate legal arguments why I140-EAD should not happen and were trying to kill this.

AILA knows this very well, this is why it is very unlikely we will ever see this. If AILA ever does do this it will be as a face-saving measure -- after they have lost the I140-EAD fight.

Bhishma
10-29-2015, 04:03 PM
Regarding the blog post. It means nothing.
AILA knows this very well, this is why it is very unlikely we will ever see this. If AILA ever does do this it will be as a face-saving measure -- after they have lost the I140-EAD fight.

I pity the lawyer who took up the task to have something from AILA 'shortly'. And now to cover his face he came up with this 'Guest Blogger' article and crying out loud that these are AILA's words

hil3182
10-29-2015, 04:06 PM
I pity the lawyer who took up the task to have something from AILA 'shortly'. And now to cover his face he came up with this 'Guest Blogger' article and crying out loud that these are AILA's words

Greg must think people are stupid to fall for that.

DMX17
10-29-2015, 04:16 PM
If AILA is serious, they will send official submissions to agencies.


Just like the submission they sent in May (the link you posted in your original post), but this time making opposite arguments for the greater good of their so-called immigrant clients. The hundreds of thousands of us immigrant clients would much appreciate it if they now come up an immigrant favorable letter! And please not the f**king blogs again, we are tired!

If I recall correctly, that letter argued that an immigrant “beneficiary” starts owning an I-140 only after AC21 period and hence should be allowed to represent him/her (of course with an attorney). Guess what, most of the immigrant clients do not give shit about this odd-ball case. If such cases deserves an official submission, why not I-140 EAD/AP?

I remember discussing that AILA submission with you and it was indirectly opposing I-140 based EAD as you rightly brought it up. Good man!

Bhishma
10-29-2015, 04:30 PM
Where are all the sepoys? Come on guys, now is the time to rise from the ashes and back your Masters.

hil3182
10-29-2015, 04:35 PM
Just like the submission they sent in May (the link you posted in your original post), but this time making opposite arguments for the greater good of their so-called immigrant clients. The hundreds of thousands of us immigrant clients would much appreciate it if they now come up an immigrant favorable letter! And please not the f**king blogs again, we are tired!

If I recall correctly, that letter argued that an immigrant “beneficiary” starts owning an I-140 only after AC21 period and hence should be allowed to represent him/her (of course with an attorney). Guess what, most of the immigrant clients do not give shit about this odd-ball case. If such cases deserves an official submission, why not I-140 EAD/AP?

I remember discussing that AILA submission with you and it was indirectly opposing I-140 based EAD as you rightly brought it up. Good man!
It should be an official comment in response to a rule making RFI that could result in I140-EAD. A random letter on AILA letterhead will not go very far.

AILA has had two cracks at it and that boat has sailed.

In late 2014, they had a chance to do it with their much lampooned response to the Presidents Executive Order RFI. We have heard two explanations about why it didn't happen, no space - and it was "obvious" in the Presidents announcement, so they didn't do it.

In May, AILA submits a comment for AC-21 rule making. AC-21 rule making was done explicitly for I140-EAD, but somehow AILA doesn't mention it. Instead there is palatable desperation in the document to keep the scope of AC-21 rule making limited to people with pending I485's only.

Don't believe me - read the submission (http://www.aila.org/infonet/amicus-brief-with-aao-to-receive-notice-under-ac21). That submission is missing something very "obvious" - like I140-EAD. Again, the whole reason for the AC-21 rule-making process was I140-EAD, and somehow they find a way to write a 20 page document without mentioning it even once.


If you still think AILA and immigration lawyers are on your side, I seriously doubt there is absolutely anything anyone can do to convince you.

DMX17
10-29-2015, 04:36 PM
Where are all the sepoys? Come on guys, now is the time to rise from the ashes and back your Masters.

They are probably praising the blogs and tweets as usual? Or bothering the president on tweeter.

Bhishma
10-29-2015, 05:03 PM
I like Greg for his Pro-Immigration stand. And here is my honest advice to Greg to get AILA to respond

Create a petition requesting AILA to release their official letter in support of I140/EAD and have all your followers sign it.
Here are a few tips on how to gather those signatures
1. Tweet to all your followers and fellow AILA members to sign the petition
2. Join Other Lawyer's forums/blogs to request their members to sign your petition
3. Pay for Google ads to promote your petition
4. Advertise on TV/Radio
5. You can always convey to AILA that you will quit AILA's membership and create another outfit for Immigration lawyers who are ready to issue this letter of support

stuckinline
10-29-2015, 05:22 PM
I have been responding to that in twitter. If this is a better place for discussion, we can do it here :-)

still want to discuss AILA's intentions?

Bhishma
10-29-2015, 07:21 PM
Poor Siskind is trying so hard to make a fool out of himself.
I think we should send him some flowers for trying and may be
A book on how not to get carried away

rohan_vus123
10-29-2015, 07:45 PM
Appreciate IV for bringing this out at this right time - guess IV also learnt such hard lessons from past .
This should make this very crystal clear so that folks who still dont get it can understand the sheer duplicity played by such creatures . Its not for IV , not for lawyer but for you and all those who just are not able to see things beyond those nicest and sweet words from that legal community .
Time and again , we agreed that lawyers are not bad people per say .. they are just doing their profession which is what anyone would do -i.e to do best in your profession and look for their own interests ...their profession profits by keeping ppl backlogged and get more H1/L1s.. nothing wrong here .

But problem comes when these legal community start pretending to represent immigrants or try to be sympathetic to backlogged plights ... This sheer hypocrisy and duplicity by these *** need to be exposed . They are the ones who created such a complex system and yet have such an audacity to claim being pro-immigrant ??

That guy was point out IV's credibility taking a hit and lookslike he is himself trying all he can to save his credibility . Let him try his best - all power to him .. after all he is master of how to market on internet ... The book he authored - http://www.amazon.com/Lawyers-Marketing-Internet-Gregory-Siskind/dp/1590318765 )

hil3182
10-29-2015, 09:35 PM
Poor Siskind is trying so hard to make a fool out of himself.
I think we should send him some flowers for trying and may be
A book on how not to get carried away

Don't feel bad for Greg. He knows exactly what he is doing. Him and his friends at AILA are perfectly capable of taking care of themselves. Reserve your sympathy for fellow H1-B's making 30-40% of their potential while being screwed by abusive employers.

Cracking down on precisely that kind of abuse is what made Siskind and AILA oppose HR.3012 (http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/forum16-iv-agenda-and-legislative-updates/3041365-update-action-item-hr3012-ask-your-employer-to-sign-this-petition-supporting-hr3012-16.html#post3507979). "High Skilled Immigration" has essentially become a human trafficking (http://www.nbcbayarea.com/investigations/Silicon-Valleys-Body-Shop-Secret-280567322.html) operation for many people - feel bad for the victims - not the perpetrators and their defenders.

The only reason we have any credibility on the Hill is because we unflinchingly and unfailingly speak the truth - regardless of how unpalatable it might be - and people respect that. Our bill has 59 sponsors (today), AILA and the companies are held in such low esteem on the Hill, they can't even find a Congressman to introduce their bill.

Please don't feel bad for Siskind, AILA or any of those crooks. When IV is done with them, they will be better off when the find an honest way to make a living.

Bhishma
10-29-2015, 10:32 PM
Don't feel bad for Greg.

My apologies. For a few minutes, I forgot that he was an immigration lawyer. Thank you for pointing it out.

But, I must say, it was fun to get the definition of 'shortly' from Greg ;)

DMX17
10-29-2015, 11:39 PM
If you read between the lines, they are very careful to reiterate over and over again that only people with pending AoS should benefit from this. This submission happened in late May of this year. At this time everyone and his dog know that I140-EAD was in the works and the sole reason USCIS was going through the AC-21 rule-making process was to consider the intent of Congress and issue I140-EAD.

I.

I read it again it is again filled twisted reasoning.

Truth: The benificiary has an interest in I-140 decision from the day it is filed.

AILA Twisted Truth: But according to the perfect interpreters of the original congressional intent (AILA), that interest by the beneficiary only surfaces after filing 485 filing.

I found this series of atricles for those like me who are now into learning immigration law.
ILW.COM - "A Moveable Feast": New and Old Portability under AC21 § 105 (Finale) (http://www.ilw.com/articles/2001,0910-Paparelli.shtm)

legalexpat
10-30-2015, 10:21 AM
Gentlemen, I did read through the submission. Maybe I am being extra dense, so please bear with me. I want to get this right.

In my reading of the document, it speaks about the beneficiary being an interested party equal to a petitioner and it makes a case for them to be informed of any actions after the Adjustment of Status is filed.

What it does not do is make a strong case that beneficiaries with an approved I-140 have an equally strong interest in the outcome of the visa application.

Is that statement correct?

Also, while it does not request for I-140 EAD, the document itself does not seem the correct place to request that.

I tried searching through the forum for context, but could not

legalexpat
10-30-2015, 10:25 AM
Ah.. This is interesting.. The document is worded extremely well..

This is where they define the beneficiary

"AC21 stands in stark contrast to the present interpretation of the "affected
party" regulation. Once a beneficiary triggers AC21 by filing an adjustment of status
application that remains pending for 180 days, the beneficiary has a right to change
employment without risking the automatic revocation of the visa petition"

In the rest of the document, they go on to discuss the rights of AC21 beneficiary WITHOUT the fact that the beneficiary is an interested party THROUGHOUT the entire application.

Let me read through this again.

hil3182
10-30-2015, 10:38 AM
Let me read through this again.

Please do.

And when you do, please keep the following points in mind:

If you are not an "Interested Party" in your I-140, you cannot get EAD.
AILA is saying you are in "Interested Party" 180 days AFTER I-485 submission - when you presumably are already enjoying I-485 EAD
What use is being an "Interested Party" in a presumably approved I-140 application AFTER you have I-1485 EAD? Its like "owning" your F1 visa after you get on an H1-B.
All this talk of ownership is shaddow boxing around I-140 EAD.
There is an edge case where AILA's submission makes sense - concurrent I-140 and I-485 filing, but USCIS isn't going through the rulemaking process for this edge case - they are going through rule making for I-140 EAD i.e. "Job Mobility" which President Obama himself announced. By ignoring this elephant in the room, AILA is acting in bad faith.
Don't hold me to this, but I think concurrent I-140 and I-485 submissions were stopped before AILA sent those comments in - making even the edge case moot.
Why then did AILA tie themselves in knots trying desperately to limit the scope of AC21 rule-making to people who are 180 days AFTER I-485 approval and completely ignoring the elephant in the room? Is is called acting in good faith?

DMX17
10-30-2015, 12:01 PM
Good points Hil.

Here is another old post from you on the same letter:
Immigration Voice - View Single Post - Questions and Answers on How to file Adjustment Of Status (http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/3587538-post760.html)

That AILA letter was a great opportunity to at the least "show" support, but they did not because what if the support really translated into reality? They would have been screwed by losing this indenture servitude "Feast".

And it should be noted again that when writing in response to VB reversal, AILA took the time to highlight irrelevant issues (except the I-140 EAD/AP). In fact, I-140 EAD/AP is the only relevant issue which could have been in that AILA letter. Just like yesterday's letter by House Democrats letter did.

hil3182
10-30-2015, 12:44 PM
Let me ask folks a few rhetorical questions.

Why do you think the AC21 was written in such a way that you needed to file AoS to get Job Mobility?

Is it not obvious that there are only 140K GC's given out every year - with a per-country cap?

What about everybody else waiting to file for AoS? Don't they need Job Mobility?

Now some of you might say, well - no one foresaw the a scenario where filing AoS was the bottleneck - which is complete bullshit!!! This is because the same AC21 act explicitly lets you file H1 extensions (post 6-years) even before you file AoS - so someone clearly saw the bottleneck!!!


We know the lobbyists who were behind this - by name. These same lobbyists are very upset that IV is finding loopholes in the restrictions they specifically put in AC21 to screw us. They are at war with us right now to stop I-140 EAD.


You may choose to believe it or not - but AILA and Companies have been screwing us for decades - since the H1-B program was first created. Every single tweak to the H1-B program has been done with the end goal of harmonizing the interests of AILA and Companies. AILA's interests are to maximize fees and Companies interests are cheap long-term labor. The current system maximizes both.


Had IV existed when AC21 was written - I guarantee you the bill would have looked very different and we would not be in this mess today.

legalexpat
10-30-2015, 03:01 PM
@hil3182 - I believe you're right.

The piece that was missing for me was that I did not understand that EAD can be given to an "interested" party. Yes, it is obvious on hindsight and common sense.

That submission, on further reading, could be straight out of George Orwell's 1984.

To be honest, my first reading was the whole submission seemed to be advocating for Immigrants. But it's essentially saying that 180 days after SUBMISSION of I-485 is when this needs to happen. That is just INSANE.

I apologize. I thought that AILA/Greg and other lawyer have the interests of immigrants at heart. I was wrong.

Summary:

1. Between this and the other submission where they did not mention I-140 EAD as well, I feel that AILA definitely has not advocated for I-140 EAD and has, as shown in the May 2015 submission, tried to say that the beneficiary is not an interested party till AoS is filed.

2. A common American saying is "Follow the money". Figuring out how AILA is funded is not really difficult. Would anyone work against the interests of your employers ? Then, they need to understand how AILA is funded.

3. I don't know about lawyers, but if someone belongs to AILA, then I would assume they represent their views. I am not saying Greg is a bad guy (to be honest I still think he is genuine), but if he is employed by someone and that someone holds reins on his future employment, then Greg has very limited options on what he can do.
Curiously enough, that is the exact reason why we want I140-EAD :-) .

4. I still think IV's supporters tend to go overboard, but I think they have a very very strong case on why they are so against immigration lawyers. I don't have any background on what undisclosed conversations they have had, but I would not be surprised that they have encountered significant opposition.

5. Lastly, I think it is high time we recognize that beyond the immigration organizations or IV or lawyers are the main contributors to the problem. Those are the organizations that want lower and lower wages and they have deeper pockets than we will ever have. Knowing that, I have a newfound respect for IV who have actually accomplished quite a lot.

A lot of people deride IV for asking donations. Let me rephrase that. They have a donation page. I have not seen anyone solicit donations in all the forum posts I have seen. This is a good thing. AILA does not have a donate page, but they need to pay for the members and they do need to pay for travel, food and meeting with legislators. Once you know where that comes from, you will easily know where their interests lie.

rohan_vus123
10-30-2015, 03:21 PM
I apologize. I thought that AILA/Greg and other lawyer have the interests of immigrants at heart. I was wrong.



Its the game of perception my frd . Thats what makes unsuspecting folks think AILA/Greg are working for you whereas these guys are exactly trying to screw you under the bus .. Luckily we now have IV to fight such behind the scene games . There are still nuts who every time peep into IV's forum and then discuss what IV says in lawyers forum and ridicule the same org that is truly standing for them in this world of lies/deceits .. The EB folks can atleast do their bit (if nothing else ) by not following such lawyers when it comes to any relief for backlogged folks . Time and again its been proven and IV has spoken enough on this .

Its high time that we justify that we are high skilled by exercising commonsense to discern facts from fiction and decide who truly stands for us

DMX17
10-30-2015, 03:53 PM
A lot of people deride IV for asking donations. Let me rephrase that. They have a donation page. I have not seen anyone solicit donations in all the forum posts I have seen. This is a good thing. AILA does not have a donate page, but they need to pay for the members and they do need to pay for travel, food and meeting with legislators. Once you know where that comes from, you will easily know where their interests lie.

I personally feel bad when people blame IV for everything, which implies they also failed as there is no other mature organization out there representing us.

Following your line of thought, IV' money (and time) comes from "our" contributions and the IV guys are working for us. No one else.

Like Hil said in a recent post, 80% of IV are backlogged and I guess the remaining 20% are already beyond the backlog mess and still providing their time and years of knowledge. I read some of the posts of the old timers and I believe they know what they are talking about.

With that, let me ask the question "How much will the rest of the backlogged class pay for I-140 EAD/AP fix?"*


*(not a donation pitch)

Ramalingam
10-31-2015, 03:03 PM
But at the time AC21 they did recapture also. So it is not entirely true that lawyers are playing villian game. During that period when people were leaving after 6 years of H1b AC 21 was Saviour for employees and employers. Each and every part of the law had meaning. They made immigration more difficult just to give more opportunity to US citizens. Now that is going away by relaxing each and every rule.
And each and every group is working on their own agenda than the global benefit. IV also no exception. Hr 3012 and Hr 213 will benefit Indians at the cost of the other countries. But still IV is working on it. The bill could have included recapture or dependent exemption and IV could have asked all or none. But still it is seeing own agenda but expecting the support from all. When there is a difference in policy division is not unexpected. Even for IV there was a speculation that IV's effort made USCIS to change the policy of spill over(Earlier it was split between Eb3 and Eb2 and then chnaged to EB2). But no acceptance or denial for this. So there will be always big speculation for a very small truth.

Let me ask folks a few rhetorical questions.

Why do you think the AC21 was written in such a way that you needed to file AoS to get Job Mobility?

Is it not obvious that there are only 140K GC's given out every year - with a per-country cap?

What about everybody else waiting to file for AoS? Don't they need Job Mobility?

Now some of you might say, well - no one foresaw the a scenario where filing AoS was the bottleneck - which is complete bullshit!!! This is because the same AC21 act explicitly lets you file H1 extensions (post 6-years) even before you file AoS - so someone clearly saw the bottleneck!!!


We know the lobbyists who were behind this - by name. These same lobbyists are very upset that IV is finding loopholes in the restrictions they specifically put in AC21 to screw us. They are at war with us right now to stop I-140 EAD.


You may choose to believe it or not - but AILA and Companies have been screwing us for decades - since the H1-B program was first created. Every single tweak to the H1-B program has been done with the end goal of harmonizing the interests of AILA and Companies. AILA's interests are to maximize fees and Companies interests are cheap long-term labor. The current system maximizes both.


Had IV existed when AC21 was written - I guarantee you the bill would have looked very different and we would not be in this mess today.

hil3182
10-31-2015, 04:12 PM
But at the time AC21 they did recapture also. So it is not entirely true that lawyers are playing villian game. During that period when people were leaving after 6 years of H1b AC 21 was Saviour for employees and employers. Each and every part of the law had meaning. They made immigration more difficult just to give more opportunity to US citizens. Now that is going away by relaxing each and every rule.
And each and every group is working on their own agenda than the global benefit. IV also no exception. Hr 3012 and Hr 213 will benefit Indians at the cost of the other countries. But still IV is working on it. The bill could have included recapture or dependent exemption and IV could have asked all or none. But still it is seeing own agenda but expecting the support from all. When there is a difference in policy division is not unexpected. Even for IV there was a speculation that IV's effort made USCIS to change the policy of spill over(Earlier it was split between Eb3 and Eb2 and then chnaged to EB2). But no acceptance or denial for this. So there will be always big speculation for a very small truth.

When AC21 passed, Congress wanted to do something about the backlog. They could have done things like dependent-exemption and lifting the per-country cap which would have fixed the problem long-term.

Instead they did recapture and left the system as-is. Recapture was a one-time fix and everyone knew that the backlog will grow. To make sure the backlog will grow, AILA and the companies pushed Congess to increase the H1 visa cap to 195K without increasing Green Cards in AC21. What do you think will happen with to the backlog when they increase H1-B without increasing Green Cards?

The biggest cause for the backlog today is precisely the AC-21 imbalance in H1-B's and Green Cards which just kept rolling on.

This was a deliberate and cynical choice.

The only reason they did recapture was to make AC21 look good, when infact it was a piece of putrefying s**t. This is a common tactic, that is why "LegalExpat" first thought AILA's submission was good for immigrants when infact it was carefully written to reduce the chances of I140-EAD.

As far as "people were leaving" before AC21 - that is true. AILA and the companies made damn sure we could stay - but under their terms, with minimal Job Mobility (that could be ruined by revoking I-140 at any time) and having to pay the "lawyer tax" every three years. Job portability pre filing for AoS is a joke and the reason it is bad is no accident - it is deliberate.

I don't understand why you continue to defend and explain AILA's agenda. The issue here is people think AILA and immigration lawyers are their friends and are working for them -- this misconception hurts everyone stuck in backlog because AILA is telling powerful people that they speak for backlogged -- when they infact don't. AILA's positions actually hurt us - people need to speak up against AILA or people in Washington will listen to AILA thinking they speak for us and we will end up deeper and deeper in this hole.

Reading HR.213, the reason there is no dependent or recapture in there because any net-increase in Green Cards will not pass this Congress. Anyone who wants to add recapture of dependent exemption to HR.213 is trying to make sure HR.213 will not happen - it is called a "poison pill".

Also, IV has nothing to do with EB-2 vs EB-3 overflow politics - if you don't want to believe it, there is nothing we can do.

You might find this hard to understand - because your experience is limited to fourms, we don't speculate - we deal in facts. This is because we have boots on the ground. The people that did the bargaining for AC21 are still around, still doing high skilled lobbying and we talk to them - and bash them in all kinds of meetings regularly. It is precisely because of that kind of bashing I-140 EAD is happening DESPITE AILA's desperate attempts to stop it. People are slowly figuring out AILA is dealing in bad faith.

Administrator2's post bears repeating over and over:
For those of us who are stuck in backlogs, there is ONLY one side. You may not realize it, some may not understand it, but there is only one side. EVERYONE, that means EVERYONE out their is working to screw you. Lawyers, Employers, Companies, US companies, Indian Companies, you name it. You may not understand it, but that doesn't change the facts

Ramalingam
10-31-2015, 04:52 PM
I have no reason to defend lawyers. When you work with lobbyists and government agencies you should be knowing more information than me or who spend only in forum. But it is difficult to know other's intentions and hidden agenda if any. I surprised to see the comments about lawyers from Admin recently. That became aggressive nowadays and was mild before that. Still there is no question that IV worked on fixes H4-EAD and I140 EAD and VB modernization.

When AC21 passed, Congress wanted to do something about the backlog. They could have done things like dependent-exemption and lifting the per-country cap which would have fixed the problem long-term.

Instead they did recapture and left the system as-is. Recapture was a one-time fix and everyone knew that the backlog will grow. To make sure the backlog will grow, AILA and the companies pushed Congess to increase the H1 visa cap to 195K without increasing Green Cards in AC21. What do you think will happen with to the backlog when they increase H1-B without increasing Green Cards?

The biggest cause for the backlog today is precisely the AC-21 imbalance in H1-B's and Green Cards which just kept rolling on.

This was a deliberate and cynical choice.

The only reason they did recapture was to make AC21 look good, when infact it was a piece of putrefying s**t. This is a common tactic, that is why "LegalExpat" first thought AILA's submission was good for immigrants when infact it was carefully written to reduce the chances of I140-EAD.

As far as "people were leaving" before AC21 - that is true. AILA and the companies made damn sure we could stay - but under their terms, with minimal Job Mobility (that could be ruined by revoking I-140 at any time) and having to pay the "lawyer tax" every three years. Job portability pre filing for AoS is a joke and the reason it is bad is no accident - it is deliberate.

I don't understand why you continue to defend and explain AILA's agenda. The issue here is people think AILA and immigration lawyers are their friends and are working for them -- this misconception hurts everyone stuck in backlog because AILA is telling powerful people that they speak for backlogged -- when they infact don't. AILA's positions actually hurt us - people need to speak up against AILA or people in Washington will listen to AILA thinking they speak for us and we will end up deeper and deeper in this hole.

Reading HR.213, the reason there is no dependent or recapture in there because any net-increase in Green Cards will not pass this Congress. Anyone who wants to add recapture of dependent exemption to HR.213 is trying to make sure HR.213 will not happen - it is called a "poison pill".

Also, IV has nothing to do with EB-2 vs EB-3 overflow politics - if you don't want to believe it, there is nothing we can do.

You might find this hard to understand - because your experience is limited to fourms, we don't speculate - we deal in facts. This is because we have boots on the ground. The people that did the bargaining for AC21 are still around, still doing high skilled lobbying and we talk to them - and bash them in all kinds of meetings regularly. It is precisely because of that kind of bashing I-140 EAD is happening DESPITE AILA's desperate attempts to stop it. People are slowly figuring out AILA is dealing in bad faith.

Administrator2's post bears repeating over and over:

stuckinline
10-31-2015, 05:02 PM
I have no reason to defend lawyers. When you work with lobbyists and government agencies you should be knowing more information than me or who spend only in forum. But it is difficult to know other's intentions and hidden agenda if any. I surprised to see the comments about lawyers from Admin recently. That became aggressive nowadays and was mild before that. Still there is no question that IV worked on fixes H4-EAD and I140 EAD and VB modernization.

From your previous posts for some reason I thought you were a lawyers troll... I am glad to see even you seem to be seeing the light...

People on the insurance forums have started calling people in lawyers groups bootlickers... I think that's a good name for them.

spulugur
10-31-2015, 05:03 PM
You said - " I surprised to see the comments about lawyers from Admin recently. That became aggressive nowadays and was mild before that"


Perhaps because of even more aggressive push recently by certain lawyers to create the impression that they represent us.

I for one want to scream at the top of my lungs that 'AILA or Lawyers dont represent me. They are out to hurt me and my family for their profit'.

DMX17
10-31-2015, 05:24 PM
According to that series of articles from Paparelli, AC21 created a "Moveable Feast" of H1B workers with substitute labors. It was called a feast for obvious reasons.

With I-140 EAD/AP, IV is fighting all opposition in creating a pool of "Open Market" workers. And this they cannot allow and cannot openly call a "Moveable Curse", which it is for the lawyers.

tapanhp
10-31-2015, 05:29 PM
I recently joined IV. Have been following the forums for a couple of weeks now. I was completely unaware of what was going on legislatively in regards to immigration. Really glad I joined.

Thank you admins, hil, dmx. You vociferously speaking out about these issues have steered me in the right direction. Have been following the action items. I plan on meeting congressman Vela (TX-34). Will pm one of you when I have an appointment.

Thank you

Keep up the good work

Bhishma
10-31-2015, 05:42 PM
I recently joined IV. Have been following the forums for a couple of weeks now. I was completely unaware of what was going on legislatively in regards to immigration. Really glad I joined.

Thank you admins, hil, dmx. You vociferously speaking out about these issues have steered me in the right direction. Have been following the action items. I plan on meeting congressman Vela (TX-34). Will pm one of you when I have an appointment.

Thank you

Keep up the good work

Remember one thing, Not everyone who speaks about immigration is friend. And also not to forget, everyone who fights for Skilled Immigrants is a friend except the ones who pose as our advocates but are chamchas/sepoys of some filthy immigration lawyers

DMX17
11-03-2015, 01:15 PM
The insightful Thanksgiving Turkey blogger has released a new blog that is very similar to the AILA brief on I-140 Employee standing nonsense for cases in which I-140 was revoked by USCIS.

Most people do not give a shit about "standing" in USCIS revoked I-140s, we all need I-140 to remain valid once approved and strip away the employer’s practice of hurting the employee by cancelling the I-140 after employee leaves

INA 204(j) is again referenced in this context, but we all know that INA 204(j) is the main section for the I-140 EAD/AP fix.

The bloggers are really reading our posts or what? Just kidding.:D

Let me just say "we fully support their blogs" right back at ya!

hil3182
11-03-2015, 09:27 PM
The insightful Thanksgiving Turkey blogger has released a new blog that is very similar to the AILA brief on I-140 Employee standing nonsense for cases in which I-140 was revoked by USCIS.

Most people do not give a shit about "standing" in USCIS revoked I-140s, we all need I-140 to remain valid once approved and strip away the employer’s practice of hurting the employee by cancelling the I-140 after employee leaves

INA 204(j) is again referenced in this context, but we all know that INA 204(j) is the main section for the I-140 EAD/AP fix.

The bloggers are really reading our posts or what? Just kidding.:D

Let me just say "we fully support their blogs" right back at ya!
Yes. Looks like at-least two pages of unadulterated bullshit that doesn't get to the damn point.

It could have been one sentence - do not let employers revoke approved I-140 under ANY circumstances. If there is employee fraud, let them report it to USCIS who can investigate and give beneficiaries due process rights. If there is employer fraud, don't penalize the employee.

hil3182
11-03-2015, 09:35 PM
The bloggers are really reading our posts or what? Just kidding.:D

I think this particular fellow is reading our most August and Knowledgeable forum. Fortunately he is keeping his distance - something we are grateful for :D

His two pages of unadulterated bullshit came suspiciously close to the closing of our <strike>bashing</strike> careful introspection of AILA's most "immigration friendly" submission on the same matter.

DMX17
11-03-2015, 11:07 PM
Yes. Looks like at-least two pages of unadulterated bullshit that doesn't get to the damn point.

It could have been one sentence - do not let employers revoke approved I-140 under ANY circumstances. If there is employee fraud, let them report it to USCIS who can investigate and give beneficiaries due process rights. If there is employer fraud, don't penalize the employee.

Yep exactly. To make sure that "beneficiary" in those special cases is not affected for something that is not his fault, the per-requisite is to make the beneficiary an equally interested party (50-50 split between employer and employee) at the time of I-140 petition filing for ALL I-140s. This would be accomplished by a rule that DHS has authority to undertake using the rule making process as stated in that Memo leaked to the other lawyer. Then, we come to I-140 EAD/AP rule! Easy solution by changing INA 204(j) among others. But, they love to keep it complicated for obvious reasons (dollar dollar bills y'all!)

That would still give the employer permission to revoke the I-140, thereby giving up their 50% and still keep the remaining 50% ownership to the employee. This way, the employee can do whatever with the I-140 like extension of H-1B, recapture PD, file 485.

Here you go dear blogger!

DMX17
11-04-2015, 05:34 PM
Who is trolling? :confused:

stuckinline
11-04-2015, 06:05 PM
Not an Admin or a Mod... But I think this post by Administrator2 belongs here: Immigration Voice - View Single Post - USCIS Internal Memo about EAD for I140 from June 2015 (http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/3592863-post60.html)

Admin/Mod please move that beautiful post here and please don't ban me :D

DMX17
11-04-2015, 06:20 PM
As an example - in a few days from now you will see SKILLS Visa Act introduced. That bill will increase H1Bs to around 195K without increasing green cards. According to calculations, that bill will increase the current backlog size from 1 million to 10 million. But when SKILLS Visa Act is introduced, you will probably see Siskind and his cronies jump up and down in support of bills that increase backlogs 10 times. Why? Because backlogs mean more business and money for immigration lawyers.



So I request someone to explain why this SKILLS bill, despite the claim of adding 55000 additional green cards, will add more backlog.

Is this what is meant by adding more green cards (See summary text below)? Seems the new GCs like will go the doctors and dentist or PhD? I may be wrong.:confused:

"Makes up to 55,000 (EB-6) visas, reduced by the number of returned visas resulting from the elimination of the diversity immigrant lottery, available in FY2014 and subsequent fiscal years to qualified immigrants who: (1) have a doctorate degree in a field of science, technology, engineering, or mathematics (STEM degree) from a U.S. doctoral institution of higher education, or have completed a dental, medical, or veterinary residency program, have received a medical degree, a dentistry degree, a veterinary degree, or an osteopathic medicine/osteopathy degree; and (2) have taken all required courses, including courses taken by correspondence or by distance education, while physically present in the United States"

hil3182
11-04-2015, 06:45 PM
So I request someone to explain why this SKILLS bill, despite the claim of adding 55000 additional green cards, will add more backlog.

Is this what is meant by adding more green cards (See summary text below)? Seems the new GCs like will go the doctors and dentist or PhD? I may be wrong.:confused:

"Makes up to 55,000 (EB-6) visas, reduced by the number of returned visas resulting from the elimination of the diversity immigrant lottery, available in FY2014 and subsequent fiscal years to qualified immigrants who: (1) have a doctorate degree in a field of science, technology, engineering, or mathematics (STEM degree) from a U.S. doctoral institution of higher education, or have completed a dental, medical, or veterinary residency program, have received a medical degree, a dentistry degree, a veterinary degree, or an osteopathic medicine/osteopathy degree; and (2) have taken all required courses, including courses taken by correspondence or by distance education, while physically present in the United States"

SKILLS adds 55K GC's but increases H1-B to 195K. Each H1-B comes with 1.1 dependents on average, so annual GC demand is 195K x 2.1. This does not count L1 or uncapped H1 from non-profits. GC supply will be 140K + 55K. The Math doesn't work. This is fundementally bad policy. I don't know how anyone can write a bill that specifically creates a GC backlog with a straight face.

Forgetting about the GC shortage issue, the cardinal sin of this bill is it will never pass. Companies and AILA are playing a 4-6 year game. Step one is to fight for introduction, then get it through committee and maybe in 2017 pass it through the House - if they are very very lucky (obviously not happening in this House). In say, 2018 get it through committee in the Senate. If they are lucky it will be done by 2018, more realistically 2020 or 2022.

All that assumes they manage to convince the Dems to kill the DV lotto. ZERO Dems in either house will vote for that.

We don't have that long to wait, HR.213 can get done in this Congress. We don't have time for things that cannot pass and are fundamentally bad policy.

The companies and AILA have absolutely no problems talking about useless bills that will go nowhere while you and I rot in the GC backlog. They will let us out when they can bring in a new batch of fresh eyed H1-B's to take advantage off - in 2020 if they are lucky.

Bottomline, SKILLS isn't going anywhere for a loooong time. Anyone who uses the word SKILLS as a solution to our problems is acting in bad faith.

DMX17
11-04-2015, 06:52 PM
SKILLS adds 55K GC's but increases H1-B to 195K. Each H1-B comes with 1.1 dependents on average, so annual GC demand is 195K x 2.1. This does not count L1 or uncapped H1 from non-profits. GC supply will be 140K + 55K. The Math doesn't work. This is fundementally bad policy. I don't know how anyone can write a bill that specifically creates a GC backlog with a straight face.

Forgetting about the GC shortage issue, the cardinal sin of this bill is it will never pass. Companies and AILA are playing a 4-6 year game. Step one is to fight for introduction, then get it through committee and maybe in 2017 pass it through the House - if they are very very lucky (obviously not happening in this House). In say, 2018 get it through committee in the Senate. If they are lucky it will be done by 2018, more realistically 2020 or 2022.

All that assumes they manage to convince the Dems to kill the DV lotto. ZERO Dems in either house will vote for that.

We don't have that long to wait, HR.213 can get done in this Congress. We don't have time for things that cannot pass and are fundamentally bad policy.

The companies and AILA have absolutely no problems talking about useless bills that will go nowhere while you and I rot in the GC backlog. They will let us out when they can bring in a new batch of fresh eyed H1-B's to take advantage off - in 2020 if they are lucky.

Bottomline, SKILLS isn't going anywhere for a loooong time. Anyone who uses the word SKILLS as a solution to our problems is acting in bad faith.

The followers hate you more for this post as they make dinner ready for their beloved! :D

stuckinline
11-04-2015, 08:30 PM
Bottomline, SKILLS isn't going anywhere for a loooong time. Anyone who uses the word SKILLS as a solution to our problems is acting in bad faith.

You mean this (https://twitter.com/gsiskind/status/662030901564579840) guy :D

Bhishma
11-04-2015, 08:58 PM
You mean this (https://twitter.com/gsiskind/status/662030901564579840) guy :D
Mamu is just one of the AILA and chalees chor (in reality the number is 40X)

DMX17
11-04-2015, 09:40 PM
Mamu is just one of the AILA and chalees chor (in reality the number is 40X)

Read in hydrabadi ..bumbaia mixed....

Yeh loga SKILL ki maki karke 213 me ghusara aur worker loga ko bolara sadne ko
Apun loga bhi husiyar SKILLs ko baigan me mila ke bharta khakech dakar marne ka

My hydrabadi is bad....:D

sengs
11-04-2015, 09:43 PM
read in hydrabadi ..bumbaia mixed....

Yeh loga skill ki maki karke 213 me ghusara aur worker loga ko bolara sadne ko
apun loga bhi husiyar skills ko baigan me mila ke bharta khakech dakar marne ka

my hydrabadi is bad....:d

:d:d:d:d

Bhishma
11-04-2015, 09:48 PM
Read in hydrabadi ..bumbaia mixed....

Yeh loga SKILL ki maki karke 213 me ghusara aur worker loga ko bolara sadne ko
Apun loga bhi husiyar SKILLs ko baigan me mila ke bharta khakech dakar marne ka

My hydrabadi is bad....:D

LOL dude

kamakazee
11-04-2015, 11:42 PM
Dear Aman and Puneet - It is with regret that I have to request my removal from your Board of Advisors. I’ve really enjoyed working with IV over the years on its advocacy efforts and have found participating in many of your teleconferences assisting IV members with their immigration questions to be rewarding. But after seeing this passage in Aman’s email advocating on behalf of amending HR 3012 (a bill I strongly support, by the way) I can no longer in good conscience be associated with the organization.

Unfortunately, some immigration lawyers and their advocacy groups in DC are against this amendment. We believe that this fringe group has always advocated a system where immigrants are taken advantage of.

Immigration Lawyers have chosen to be on the wrong side of history. They want to protect companies that are abusing the system. This set of Immigration lawyers want to side with companies that are under-cutting US workers and committing fraud.

It’s time for us to standup to speak for ourselves and tell everyone that immigration lawyers don't represent immigrants. When it comes to advocacy, immigration lawyers and their groups only represent their own special interest to design the system to keep more people in limbo for longer so that they can pocket more money through renewals and extension of applications for visas and work-permits while immigrants wait forever in their green card process. A large percentage of these immigration lawyers have a vested interest in keeping the immigration process slow and confusing. They will oppose streamlining or simplifying the process that would help employers and employees.

I think the IV position on the Grassley Amendment is really short sighted and will be deeply regretted over time. But I would not quit over a policy difference. I just can’t sit idly by and listen to my brethren – people that have dedicated their careers to helping immigrants (many being immigrants themselves) – painted as being greedy and anti-immigrant. I am personally insulted by this form of defamation and it strongly resembles the type of attack we usually hear from rabid anti-immigrants attacking us for advocating on behalf of immigrants. That this email originated from an immigrants rights advocacy group is simply shocking. You say you are only talking about “some lawyers” but I can tell you that the immigration bar sees this as an attack on all of us. The letter has circulated like wildfire across the immigration bar and I’m afraid IV’s reputation has been seriously damaged with a group that is composed of people that are naturally allied with most of your positions. And in Washington, finding allies is necessary in the long run to achieving anything. It’s also unfortunate because lashing out and defaming the immigration bar was unnecessary. You could have simply taken your position and just stated that you disagree with other groups, but stand by your decisions as representing the best interests of your members. Instead, you’ve hurt IV’s chances of finding friends in the future to help on issues that will be of concern to you.

Finally, It’s also odd that you have a Board of Advisors comprised of a number of immigration lawyers you consider to be trusted enough to include on a board of this sort, but we had to learn about your attack on immigration lawyers from other lawyers who heard about it online.

I wish the two of you well.
Regards,
Greg Siskind
Gregory Siskind, Attorney at Law
Siskind Susser - Immigration Lawyers
Telephone: 800-748-3819 or 901-682-6455
Fax: 800-684-1267 or 901-339-9604
Email: gsiskind@visalaw.com
Web: Guide To U.S. Immigration Law | Law Firm Assisting With Visas, Green Cards, Naturalization | Siskind Susser PC (http://www.visalaw.com)

hil3182
11-05-2015, 12:18 AM
Below is the newsletter from 06-26-2012 that precipitated Greg's "resignation". At the time, we viewed it as an invitation for all lawyers who we thought were hurting our efforts to get HR.3012 done to leave the coalition pushing for the bill.

We believe this Drama is about Greg being a Drama Queen.

____________________________________

Dear Immigration Voice Member:

For past few months, we have been involved in the discussion to find a way to move forward HR3012 – the bill to remove per-country ceilings.

With the leadership of Senator Grassley (R-IA) and Senator Schumer (D-NY), last week, the two Senate offices have worked out a deal on an amendment to H.R. 3012. Immigration Voice applauds Senator Grassley and Senator Schumer for their leadership.



The proposed amendment has been carefully vetted by Congressional staff. This amendment makes a very good bill, even better. The amendment is balanced in a way where a small fraction of employers with more than 100 employees and 15% employees on H1 (L1/J1 is not part of 15%) visa will be audited. Again, the amendment is to audit employers (not employees). The amendment does not put any restriction on the employers or employees. If employers are not committing fraud, if they are not abusing the system, then there is nothing to fear.

As we all know, there are some bad employers out there who take advantage of the system. This amendment is designed to root out companies engaged in fraud or exploitation. A large number of coalition, trade groups and the entire large Hi-tech industry (you know all the large companies) are fully on-board with this amendment. The reason being, they are not afraid of audit, they do not have anything to hide, they don't game the system. These over 200 companies are the good citizens of the non-immigrant and immigrant visa system.


ACTION ITEMS



1.) Petition to employers: Now we need your help to reach out to more companies, your employers, to sign this petition to the key Senators. Over 200 of the Top companies have already signed up this petition. We need more companies to sign up. If your employer's business directly or indirectly depends on innovation and technology, then your employer will appreciate you letting them know about this development.



The deadline for signing this letter is now extended to 26th June.

Letter to employers (To request employers to sign the petition)

Petition from employers - (Petition to key Senators)

Here is a sample format for requesting your HR VP/Head to sign the above petition.



2.) Twitter. Support HR3012 Twitter Campaign

3.) Facebook. Spread the word and tell your friends. Join the Facebook Campaign.

3.) Contribute. Support and Contribute to Immigration Voice


What is the Risk to HR 3012 ?


Unfortunately, some immigration lawyers and their advocacy groups in DC are against this amendment. We believe that this fringe group has always advocated a system where immigrants are taken advantage of.

Immigration Lawyers have chosen to be on the wrong side of history. They want to protect companies that are abusing the system. This set of Immigration lawyers want to side with companies that are under-cutting US workers and committing fraud.

It’s time for us to standup to speak for ourselves and tell everyone that immigration lawyers don't represent immigrants. When it comes to advocacy, immigration lawyers and their groups only represent their own special interest to design the system to keep more people in limbo for longer so that they can pocket more money through renewals and extension of applications for visas and work-permits while immigrants wait forever in their green card process. A large percentage of these immigration lawyers have a vested interest in keeping the immigration process slow and confusing. They will oppose streamlining or simplifying the process that would help employers and employees.

Housing market is not about realtors; housing market is about living the American Dream and home ownership. Likewise, the purpose of immigration system is not to help immigration lawyers line their pockets with more cash. Immigration system is about America, US Employers and immigrants. It’s time for us to raise our voice and say it loud, that immigration lawyers or their group doesn't represent Immigrants.

Ask your employer to stand on the right side of history and support a change for you, a change which has been long awaited. Ask your employer to do the right thing NOW!

Aman Kapoor

Immigration Voice

Administrator2
11-05-2015, 12:20 AM
Greg,

Why are you sending private emails to us saying you "like to discuss how to re-align matters so that we can all be working in concert", and then send this idiot to pick a fight. You seem to be confused and you don't seem to know what you want.

We don't like to beat around the bush. Pick one and let us know when you are able to decide. We don't want to waste time on you because regardless of what you seem to project online, we believe you have no relevance in immigration policy realm. But please do not be disillusioned for a minute that we will shy away if you want to pick a fight.




Dear Aman and Puneet - It is with regret that I have to request my removal from your Board of Advisors. I’ve really enjoyed working with IV over the years on its advocacy efforts and have found participating in many of your teleconferences assisting IV members with their immigration questions to be rewarding. But after seeing this passage in Aman’s email advocating on behalf of amending HR 3012 (a bill I strongly support, by the way) I can no longer in good conscience be associated with the organization.

Unfortunately, some immigration lawyers and their advocacy groups in DC are against this amendment. We believe that this fringe group has always advocated a system where immigrants are taken advantage of.

Immigration Lawyers have chosen to be on the wrong side of history. They want to protect companies that are abusing the system. This set of Immigration lawyers want to side with companies that are under-cutting US workers and committing fraud.

It’s time for us to standup to speak for ourselves and tell everyone that immigration lawyers don't represent immigrants. When it comes to advocacy, immigration lawyers and their groups only represent their own special interest to design the system to keep more people in limbo for longer so that they can pocket more money through renewals and extension of applications for visas and work-permits while immigrants wait forever in their green card process. A large percentage of these immigration lawyers have a vested interest in keeping the immigration process slow and confusing. They will oppose streamlining or simplifying the process that would help employers and employees.

I think the IV position on the Grassley Amendment is really short sighted and will be deeply regretted over time. But I would not quit over a policy difference. I just can’t sit idly by and listen to my brethren – people that have dedicated their careers to helping immigrants (many being immigrants themselves) – painted as being greedy and anti-immigrant. I am personally insulted by this form of defamation and it strongly resembles the type of attack we usually hear from rabid anti-immigrants attacking us for advocating on behalf of immigrants. That this email originated from an immigrants rights advocacy group is simply shocking. You say you are only talking about “some lawyers” but I can tell you that the immigration bar sees this as an attack on all of us. The letter has circulated like wildfire across the immigration bar and I’m afraid IV’s reputation has been seriously damaged with a group that is composed of people that are naturally allied with most of your positions. And in Washington, finding allies is necessary in the long run to achieving anything. It’s also unfortunate because lashing out and defaming the immigration bar was unnecessary. You could have simply taken your position and just stated that you disagree with other groups, but stand by your decisions as representing the best interests of your members. Instead, you’ve hurt IV’s chances of finding friends in the future to help on issues that will be of concern to you.

Finally, It’s also odd that you have a Board of Advisors comprised of a number of immigration lawyers you consider to be trusted enough to include on a board of this sort, but we had to learn about your attack on immigration lawyers from other lawyers who heard about it online.

I wish the two of you well.
Regards,
Greg Siskind
Gregory Siskind, Attorney at Law
Siskind Susser - Immigration Lawyers
Telephone: 800-748-3819 or 901-682-6455
Fax: 800-684-1267 or 901-339-9604
Email: gsiskind@visalaw.com
Web: Guide To U.S. Immigration Law | Law Firm Assisting With Visas, Green Cards, Naturalization | Siskind Susser PC (http://www.visalaw.com)

FrankUnderwood
11-05-2015, 12:32 AM
Greg,

Why are you sending private emails to us saying you "like to discuss how to re-align matters so that we can all be working in concert", and then send this idiot to pick a fight. You seem to be confused and you don't seem to know what you want.

This Siskind and his Bootlicker kamakazee are the biggest scums on planet Earth. God help them.

Siskind promoting skills visa act over HR 213 is a slap on the face of the very immigrants he is 'claiming' to advocate for.

All his followers have hopefully seen the truth behind this evil mind and his evil organization, AILA.

Looks like his waterboy kamakazee is still in <3 with licking siskind's ....

-FU

Bhishma
11-05-2015, 12:43 AM
We don't like to beat around the bush.


we believe you have no relevance in immigration policy realm



please do not be disillusioned for a minute that we will shy away if you want to pick a fight



We don't want to waste time on you


Once more. Aise hich rehna dekho, ghaab gheeb, ghaab gheeb, dishum dishum karke phod diya inhe mamu ki.
Inhe Deewar mein Amitab jaise dikhra mereko

FrankUnderwood
11-05-2015, 12:48 AM
Once more. Aise hich rehna dekho, ghaab gheeb, ghaab gheeb, dishum dishum karke phod diya inhe mamu ki.
Inhe Deewar mein Amitab jaise dikhra mereko

Siskind got no self respect. His favorite hobby is to get humiliated by immigrants he claims to help. If that is what he wants, we can definitely offer a good dose of humiliation to him and his sepoys such as kamakazee. :D

-FU

legalexpat
11-05-2015, 12:49 AM
Gentlemen,

I am trying to understand IV's strategy of public arguments with immigration lawyers. It's not like they are going to put up their hands and say "Oh!! you got me!!" . If a fight has to happen, let it happen where it counts (behind the scenes).

People like me will eventually come around to your cause. With a little effort one can see that IV is on the immigrants side, so why waste time arguing with lawyers on the forum and twitter ? What good can come out of it?

Shouldn't we ignore them?

vrs7734
11-05-2015, 01:14 AM
Gentlemen,

I am trying to understand IV's strategy of public arguments with immigration lawyers. It's not like they are going to put up their hands and say "Oh!! you got me!!" . If a fight has to happen, let it happen where it counts (behind the scenes).

People like me will eventually come around to your cause. With a little effort one can see that IV is on the immigrants side, so why waste time arguing with lawyers on the forum and twitter ? What good can come out of it?

Shouldn't we ignore them?

I dont know about IV, but personally I love to pick up fight with these wolf in sheep clothing attorneys just to show the world how two faced they are and their evil association AILA. What AILA guys say on the capitol hill is far different and they always try to make sure backlog remains there so employees will be stuck in vicious H1B cycle. Until these points their activities were mostly unknown but in the EAD AP for approved i140 they showed their true colors openly. Plus lawyers like Greg lie from their teeth and say AILA is not against EAD 140. When questioned on twitter, he blocked everyone saying questioning err attacking AILA is attack on him. He then wrote a guest blog post by himself on AILA website and made a ridiculously weak attempt to recover AILAs positions on his behalf. BTW there is still no official word from AILA yet supporting EAD 140.

Even after all these happen, some f***** idiots like Kamakazee still go and lick boots of Greg and Ron Gotcher. I dont know what they anticipate from these guys (Perhaps super super moderator title). Not only they F*** themselves but directly/indirectly causing harm to our case.

As you said, people will come around eventually. This "Eventually" is very dangerous because "eventually" that would be too late and this evil AILA and idiots like Kamakazee would have done irreparable harm by then.

My point is immigration is an issue between US Government, US Employer and employees. Why should these attorneys even bother to lobby for immigration policy changes? Only answer is to keep and grow their business by keeping their client longer in the immgrant status.

That's why it is very important to expose these lawyers and their minions publicly before it's too late.

Hope this helps

Bhishma
11-05-2015, 01:16 AM
Gentlemen,

I am trying to understand IV's strategy of public arguments with immigration lawyers. It's not like they are going to put up their hands and say "Oh!! you got me!!" . If a fight has to happen, let it happen where it counts (behind the scenes).

People like me will eventually come around to your cause. With a little effort one can see that IV is on the immigrants side, so why waste time arguing with lawyers on the forum and twitter ? What good can come out of it?

Shouldn't we ignore them?

Chichaa,

Khali peeli pareshaani kaiko. tension nakko. IV ke loga hoshiyaar loga hain, chichoron ko kaise sambhaalna unko maaloom hai. Ab tum garam chai piyo, biryani khao mast sojao

And finally, please dont ask us to ignore. I first ignored an abusive employer and then there were many of them, I (and thousands of other skilled immigrants) ignored them, then came the lawyers who treated us as pests and now you ask me to ignore lawyers who are trying to dilute these reforms.

I ignored my troubles when waiting for my GC for over 10 years now, I ignored my priorities, I ignored (delayed for 7 years now) my plans to setup a startup company and then watched people use my ideas to come up with (mediocre) products and I ignored them as well and now this Santh suggests us to ignore on this forum and also tweets Greg on twitter (wishing IV ignores lawyers and move on)

I dont know what to say to you but thank you for your advice anyway

legalexpat
11-05-2015, 01:39 AM
@Bhishma - There you have it. I guess it was just a matter of time.

Have the public arguments with the lawyers helped IVs cause ? That's all I want to know.

I suggested to ignore them on twitter not stop working against them which IV has mentioned it is doing.

We all know the constraints we live under and we take appropriate actions based on the limited choices. I don't spend my time responding to Donald Trump or SAVE or numbersusa because there is just no point. I ignore them and continue to do what I can based on my limited choices. I am not sure how your lack of action to your own problems is related to my suggestion.

Maybe I am missing the upside of public arguments with Immigration Laywers and that is why I am asking one of you to enlighten me. If you knew there was a measurable upside, you would have told me that instead of what you just did.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------
@vrs7734

"I dont know about IV, but personally I love to pick up fight with these wolf in sheep clothing attorneys just to show the world how two faced they are and their evil association AILA."

How has that been working? Were you able to gain any converts? Did you piss off someone else? Overall have you been able to positively influence people to join IV's side? If yes, then that's a very good thing and shows that this strategy is effective.

"BTW there is still no official word from AILA yet supporting EAD 140"
Agreed. Do you really believe that is going to change because you fight with lawyers on forums and twitter ?

"Even after all these happen, some fucking idiots like Kamakazee still go and lick boots of Greg and Ron Gotcher. I dont know what they anticipate from these guys (Perhaps super super moderator title). Not only they FUCK themselves but directly/indirectly causing harm to our case"

I added the complete words to your post because I am certain we as adults, don't need to censor certain words. To your point, your statement is fair enough. Again, how does arguing with them help? You're not going to change their behavior.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

In case my message gets lost, my question is simple. I genuinely want to know if public arguments and attacks by IV and some of its representatives is part of a strategy or is it just lashing out with no end goal in mind.

Bhishma
11-05-2015, 01:50 AM
@Bhishma - There you have it. I guess it was just a matter of time.

Have the public arguments with the lawyers helped IVs cause ? That's all I want to know.

In case my message gets lost, my question is simple. I genuinely want to know if public arguments and attacks by IV and some of its representatives is part of a strategy or is it just lashing out with no end goal in mind.


Good Questions dude. I made a note of them and lets table it for now.
My schedule allows us to discuss this from
6:30 PM CST to 7:45 PM CST on 11/5/2015
5:45 PM CST to 7:15 PM CST on 11/6/2015 and from
10:00 AM CST to 11:30 AM CST on 11/7/2015

Please feel free to choose any of these slots and notify me so that we can talk about it in detail. Please dont ignore my meeting.

panchi2131
11-05-2015, 02:02 AM
Gentlemen,

I am trying to understand IV's strategy of public arguments with immigration lawyers. It's not like they are going to put up their hands and say "Oh!! you got me!!" . If a fight has to happen, let it happen where it counts (behind the scenes).

People like me will eventually come around to your cause. With a little effort one can see that IV is on the immigrants side, so why waste time arguing with lawyers on the forum and twitter ? What good can come out of it?

Shouldn't we ignore them?

so now instead of channeling resources ,admin and siskind are fighting it out on public space .
guess its difficult to agree to disagree respectfully.:o

Maybe time for parties to join big boss 9:rolleyes:

pd052011
11-05-2015, 07:45 AM
Is this a new strategy from IV? If yes, its a horrible way to distance the organization from immigration lawyers.

I am surprised moderators and admins are using such language directed at a lawyer. IV, can you please reel these people in and contribute to a more civilized discussion on topics? Especially on public forums. Anonymous contributors directing their anger towards a person erodes the legitimacy of IV and its values.

If you have a problem with immigration lawyers, deal with it in your own way. IV represents many of us and this is not the tone/language I support. I am sure many on these forums will agree with me on this.

legalexpat
11-05-2015, 08:10 AM
@Bhishma - Happy to engage, but why can't we discuss this in the forum? I am traveling this week and next, so I won't be able to make those times, but I'll PM you my number.

If you're based in Dallas TX area, we can even meet for a drink

eastindia
11-05-2015, 08:16 AM
Is this a new strategy from IV? If yes, its a horrible way to distance the organization from immigration lawyers.

I am surprised moderators and admins are using such language directed at a lawyer. IV, can you please reel these people in and contribute to a more civilized discussion on topics? Especially on public forums. Anonymous contributors directing their anger towards a person erodes the legitimacy of IV and its values.

If you have a problem with immigration lawyers, deal with it in your own way. IV represents many of us and this is not the tone/language I support. I am sure many on these forums will agree with me on this.

Have you said the same thing to the lawyers and their forums? When they say wrong things about an organization they are doing disservice to the immigrant community and hurting a noble cause. I have not heard anyone protesting against that. Instead people are acting as sepoys of lawyers and praising them on their forums. It hurts such people when we post anything negative against lawyers here and try to bring out the truth.

rupen
11-05-2015, 08:34 AM
Is this a new strategy from IV? If yes, its a horrible way to distance the organization from immigration lawyers.

I am surprised moderators and admins are using such language directed at a lawyer. IV, can you please reel these people in and contribute to a more civilized discussion on topics? Especially on public forums. Anonymous contributors directing their anger towards a person erodes the legitimacy of IV and its values.

If you have a problem with immigration lawyers, deal with it in your own way. IV represents many of us and this is not the tone/language I support. I am sure many on these forums will agree with me on this.

You are commenting without knowing history. Here, Greg is trying to pick a fight by asking one of his "trusted" person to post private email conversation. If you had followed history of 3012 bill in 2011, you would have seen how much lawyers had flip flopped on the issue. After months of negotiations that went on to lift the hold, aila started opposing the bill over simple amendment which some lawyers supported initially but then got direction from aila to opppose it. And some lawyers are still opposing per country bill whereas they do not have problem supporting skills act which will add to the backlog. I wish you could have seen beyond the rhetoric.

stuckinline
11-05-2015, 09:12 AM
Hello, good discussion here.

The blogging lawyer tweets that (https://mobile.twitter.com/gsiskind/status/662263497133305856) SKILLS is a good idea because Rep Lofgren is supportive and a sponsor.

Can someone explain what is going on, how can a lawmaker be both for SKILLS and backlog elimination?

:confused:

stuckinline
11-05-2015, 09:41 AM
Hello, good discussion here.

The blogging lawyer tweets that (https://mobile.twitter.com/gsiskind/status/662263497133305856) SKILLS is a good idea because Rep Lofgren is supportive and a sponsor.

Can someone explain what is going on, how can a lawmaker be both for SKILLS and backlog elimination?

:confused:

Never mind. It was pointed out to me this was another example of Greg lying... Rep Lofgren never supported SKILLS infact there is a video (http://youtu.be/rUos2HAEW_E) of her opposing it.

I think it goes to show how little Greg actually knows about these things... how much he really cares about the backlog problem.

I think Administrator2 said it best:

We don't want to waste time on you because regardless of what you seem to project online, we believe you have no relevance in immigration policy realm.

Not a lobbyist... But I would think Lofgren's position on SKILLS is a very basic thing... I think Adminsitrator2 is right about Siskind.

DMX17
11-05-2015, 10:21 AM
It’s time for us to standup to speak for ourselves and tell everyone that immigration lawyers don't represent immigrants. When it comes to advocacy, immigration lawyers and their groups only represent their own special interest to design the system to keep more people in limbo for longer so that they can pocket more money through renewals and extension of applications for visas and work-permits while immigrants wait forever in their green card process. A large percentage of these immigration lawyers have a vested interest in keeping the immigration process slow and confusing. They will oppose streamlining or simplifying the process that would help employers and employees.



Am I reading this right? I am not sure what the intent is.

Why say this now? IV folks have been saying this for ever since VB reversal and before.

Is he trying to separate himself from AILA and all other immigration lawyers (except for a chosen few)?

The "large percentage" is AILA. The small timers are not doing anything but hoping that AILA succeed in keeping the system as is and add more immigrants in the limbo out of their self interest.

stuckinline
11-05-2015, 10:24 AM
Am I reading this right? I am not sure what the intent is.

Why say this now? IV folks have been saying this for ever since VB reversal and before.

Is he trying to separate himself from AILA and all other immigration lawyers (except for a chosen few)?

The "large percentage" is AILA. The small timers are not doing anything but hoping that AILA succeed in keeping the system as is and add more immigrants in the limbo out of their self interest.

I think he is quoting IV's newsletter in his email... kamakazee isn't "high-skilled" enough to format it properly. ;)

DMX17
11-05-2015, 10:27 AM
I think he is quoting IV's newsletter in his email... kamakazee isn't "high-skilled" enough to format it properly. ;)

Thanks! For a minute I thought he had a change of heart. :D:D

FrankUnderwood
11-05-2015, 10:37 AM
Thanks! For a minute I thought he had a change of heart. :D:D

SAVE ME THE HORROR!

I will trust Donald Trump with immigration before trusting these lawyers.

-FU

RH_93
11-05-2015, 11:49 AM
SAVE ME THE HORROR!

I will trust Donald Trump with immigration before trusting these lawyers.

-FU

Wow...to see Mr.Lawsuit change stripes like this is beyond shocking. Validates IV's thought process all the way. I was thinking why in the hell is IV bent on shaming and getting into these shouting matches. It became clear as day for me today. Thank you, thank you, thank you.....people dont realize who's really on their side ! Appreciate all that you are doing....

Thanks much !

mallina
11-05-2015, 12:06 PM
I like my immigration attorney. He has always done an outstanding job in supporting my visa petitions and I am certainly grateful. That doesn't mean he is my ally when I go and ask for policy change to my local congressmen that will reduce backlogs. And frankly I don't expect him to. I respect him for his profession but in this case the interests are conflicting.

Now, lets take the case of so called lawyers who claim to be immigrants best friends. Nothing wrong with it. There may be few noble souls who see the real abuse and would like to see things change even at the cost of some of their future business. But, someone who has gone fundraising in the mask of helping folks in a dire moment and someone who wasn't even supportive of the idea of fee refund for an issue that was not in the control of folks who paid for it claiming that they have a legitimate claim to not refund, I don't see anything noble in it. None of us here expect them to work for free. When these folks process hundreds of petitions in a year and when an event happens once in what three or four decades, they are negotiating about refunds.

A simple fact here is IV is by people affected by the backlogs and Immigration Lawyers live on people affected by backlogs. What do people think when supporting lawyers on policy matters ? Are they out of their mind ?

The final issue for few people seem to be IV's tone in responses. Guys, you are surrounded by sharks and wolves, you cannot request them. You got to do what it takes.

I do not represent IV's leadership nor am a part of their leadership team. Just one volunteer trying to help myself and hopefully one or two will see some sense in my argument and change their views. THERE IS ONLY ONE SIDE.

DMX17
11-05-2015, 12:18 PM
I like my immigration attorney. He has always done an outstanding job in supporting my visa petitions and I am certainly grateful. That doesn't mean he is my ally when I go and ask for policy change to my local congressmen that will reduce backlogs. And frankly I don't expect him to. I respect him for his profession but in this case the interests are conflicting.

Now, lets take the case of so called lawyers who claim to be immigrants best friends. Nothing wrong with it. There may be few noble souls who see the real abuse and would like to see things change even at the cost of some of their future business. But, someone who has gone fundraising in the mask of helping folks in a dire moment and someone who wasn't even supportive of the idea of fee refund for an issue that was not in the control of folks who paid for it claiming that they have a legitimate claim to not refund, I don't see anything noble in it. None of us here expect them to work for free. When these folks process hundreds of petitions in a year and when an event happens once in what three or four decades, they are negotiating about refunds.

A simple fact here is IV is by people affected by the backlogs and Immigration Lawyers live on people affected by backlogs. What do people think when supporting lawyers on policy matters ? Are they out of their mind ?

The final issue for few people seem to be IV's tone in responses. Guys, you are surrounded by sharks and wolves, you cannot request them. You got to do what it takes.

I do not represent IV's leadership nor am a part of their leadership team. Just one volunteer trying to help myself and hopefully one or two will see some sense in my argument and change their views. THERE IS ONLY ONE SIDE.

Thank you! Good post.

BenCokila
11-05-2015, 01:14 PM
Are you the same person as johnnydsouza in twitter. He tweets exactly the same language as yours. If you are the same then a humble hat tip from me.

I like my immigration attorney. He has always done an outstanding job in supporting my visa petitions and I am certainly grateful. That doesn't mean he is my ally when I go and ask for policy change to my local congressmen that will reduce backlogs. And frankly I don't expect him to. I respect him for his profession but in this case the interests are conflicting.

Now, lets take the case of so called lawyers who claim to be immigrants best friends. Nothing wrong with it. There may be few noble souls who see the real abuse and would like to see things change even at the cost of some of their future business. But, someone who has gone fundraising in the mask of helping folks in a dire moment and someone who wasn't even supportive of the idea of fee refund for an issue that was not in the control of folks who paid for it claiming that they have a legitimate claim to not refund, I don't see anything noble in it. None of us here expect them to work for free. When these folks process hundreds of petitions in a year and when an event happens once in what three or four decades, they are negotiating about refunds.

A simple fact here is IV is by people affected by the backlogs and Immigration Lawyers live on people affected by backlogs. What do people think when supporting lawyers on policy matters ? Are they out of their mind ?

The final issue for few people seem to be IV's tone in responses. Guys, you are surrounded by sharks and wolves, you cannot request them. You got to do what it takes.

I do not represent IV's leadership nor am a part of their leadership team. Just one volunteer trying to help myself and hopefully one or two will see some sense in my argument and change their views. THERE IS ONLY ONE SIDE.

DMX17
11-05-2015, 01:24 PM
Anyway, just checked the fun on twitter, I must say this guy S Ram @arams is asking the right questions/providing good arguments and getting BS responses.


For people who are in backlog, it is in our priority of interests to reduce the wait times, create a fair system, and reduce abuse/fraud (HR213) before there is any support for more H-1Bs (SKILLS). Keep in mind we are not saying kill the H-1B program or kill the SKILL bill (as that has its own proponents and opponents). This does not mean we want to shut the door behind us.

If there is reservation that HR213 will add wait times for ROW, that is not our problem to think about as it is ROW’s problem to solve. If the lawyers and companies thought like this, we would not have been in this mess since AC21. But there is a plus in that the more people suffer the pain of wait times, the more likely it will be to support other wait time reduction fixes. The number of people is important and as IV has said the number of volunteers IV has is really low and there is a reason for that.

The tweets should make it very clear that the only people who will support and make HR213 happen is the backlogged themselves. No one else. All we are saying is that first fix our problems and not get distracted with utopic bullshit. The tweets are just that. Big distractions aimed at the backlogged people so that the backlog class does not unite and push the only meaningful bill in the current climate.

The tweets also should make clear that their interest is “growing the pie” and if they have to they are willing to “throw in” a disproportionate number of GCs to shut us up. That is a trap.

Now to the question of why piss of AILA, as Admin2 said before, no matter what we do or do not do, they are and will continue to work on either “growing the pie” or at the least “keeping the pie refrigerated” by opposing I-140 EAD/AP fix. This is not a conspiracy but a reality as IV folks have openly shared. It is not like we are creating new enemies, they have been screwing us for a long time and it cannot hurt any more than it already has.

My views and not IV’s.

BenCokila
11-05-2015, 01:26 PM
Going through the comments in this forum, and twitter link. It is amazing man. How can someone gather so much BS? I have one advice for the poor soul. Distribute responsibly. Those things don't smell good if they come back at you.

I'm going to the rally next week. Hopefully they will be fasting there on the footpath in front of WH. Do u guys think secret service will come and arrest fasting lawyers?

BenCokila
11-05-2015, 01:31 PM
Is it your view or from the lawyer's forum. I cannot see anything in that forum even after logging in.

Anyway, just checked the fun on twitter, I must say this guy S Ram @arams is asking the right questions/providing good arguments and getting BS responses.


For people who are in backlog, it is in our priority of interests to reduce the wait times, create a fair system, and reduce abuse/fraud (HR213) before there is any support for more H-1Bs (SKILLS). Keep in mind we are not saying kill the H-1B program or kill the SKILL bill (as that has its own proponents and opponents). This does not mean we want to shut the door behind us.

If there is reservation that HR213 will add wait times for ROW, that is not our problem to think about as it is ROW’s problem to solve. If the lawyers and companies thought like this, we would not have been in this mess since AC21. But there is a plus in that the more people suffer the pain of wait times, the more likely it will be to support other wait time reduction fixes. The number of people is important and as IV has said the number of volunteers IV has is really low and there is a reason for that.

The tweets should make it very clear that the only people who will support and make HR213 happen is the backlogged themselves. No one else. All we are saying is that first fix our problems and not get distracted with utopic bullshit. The tweets are just that. Big distractions aimed at the backlogged people so that the backlog class does not unite and push the only meaningful bill in the current climate.

The tweets also should make clear that their interest is “growing the pie” and if they have to they are willing to “throw in” a disproportionate number of GCs to shut us up. That is a trap.

Now to the question of why piss of AILA, as Admin2 said before, no matter what we do or do not do, they are and will continue to work on either “growing the pie” or at the least “keeping the pie refrigerated” by opposing I-140 EAD/AP fix. This is not a conspiracy but a reality as IV folks have openly shared. It is not like we are creating new enemies, they have been screwing us for a long time and it cannot hurt any more than it already has.

My views and not IV’s.

DMX17
11-05-2015, 01:36 PM
Is it your view or from the lawyer's forum. I cannot see anything in that forum even after logging in.

I was referring to twitter.
https://twitter.com/arams/with_replies

I thought that forum is behind closed doors now. Am I right? Anyway, we are open for business!

DMX17
11-05-2015, 01:43 PM
Going through the comments in this forum, and twitter link. It is amazing man. How can someone gather so much BS? I have one advice for the poor soul. Distribute responsibly. Those things don't smell good if they come back at you.

I'm going to the rally next week. Hopefully they will be fasting there on the footpath in front of WH. Do u guys think secret service will come and arrest fasting lawyers?

Who is fasting? They will be eating the pie in their modern offices while the paralegals work on the paperwork of the pie's renewal.:D:D

hil3182
11-05-2015, 03:20 PM
Aman Kapoor pressuring DHS today

Try to go back to -24 mins towards the end: https://youtu.be/nUh-VO9k15E

panchi2131
11-05-2015, 03:20 PM
meanwhile in addition to comments regarding venting out in public space earlier ,liked the venting out to dhs at the end of conference by AK today ...

DMX17
11-05-2015, 03:26 PM
Well done Aman! We all have reasons to be frustrated and vent off....

Any update on what Kevin said about "Aman.. see when the regulations come out and submit comment there is a lot speculation"?

Is option 2 still more favorable or not at this point?

RH_93
11-05-2015, 03:29 PM
Well done Aman! We all have reasons to be frustrated and vent off....

Any update on what Kevin said about "Aman.. see when the regulations come out and submit comment there is a lot speculation"?

Is option 2 still more favorable or not at this point?

Aman Kapoor, the Josh Machine.....

spulugur
11-05-2015, 03:50 PM
The following is live link.. and you need to go past 55min mark.. I did not know how to only link Aman's speech. It was SPECTACULAR!!!!

Can some one post the link to Aman's speech?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nUh-VO9k15E

SSIVUS
11-05-2015, 04:12 PM
Link to Audio (Aman's). Copied from FB

https://onedrive.live.com/?cid=80baa97690927ffc&id=80BAA97690927FFC!751&authkey=!AA-hcl6CtBR9vpw

thankstooptx
11-05-2015, 04:22 PM
Link to Audio (Aman's). Copied from FB

https://onedrive.live.com/?cid=80baa97690927ffc&id=80BAA97690927FFC!751&authkey=!AA-hcl6CtBR9vpw

Here is the audio of Aman's question. Thanks Aman for bringing more light to this situation.

https://soundcloud.com/user-331565318/immigrant-frustration

thankstooptx
11-05-2015, 04:26 PM
The following is live link.. and you need to go past 55min mark.. I did not know how to only link Aman's speech. It was SPECTACULAR!!!!

Can some one post the link to Aman's speech?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nUh-VO9k15E

https://soundcloud.com/user-331565318/immigrant-frustration

bcci
11-05-2015, 04:27 PM
Aman, I Love You :)

On a serious note, how can we not trust IV anymore even after seeing this? Immigrant Rights - What a touching point. Fuck all laws and rules but what about Immigrant rights? I salute you, Aman!!

DMX17
11-05-2015, 04:34 PM
Aman, I Love You :)

On a serious note, how can we not trust IV anymore even after seeing this? Immigrant Rights - What a touching point. Fuck all laws and rules but what about Immigrant rights? I salute you, Aman!!

Also after listening to Cell Mitosis expert Paparelli who also did the same shit as AILA brief on I-140 ownership question without touching the new regulations , we all know what shit they care about.

At least he should have asked "Will the upcoming regulations address this issue and if so how?" or "Please consider addressing this issue in the new regulations that the president promised".

They are just very careful in posing questions, submitting briefs, and writing blogs, all the same. Aholes!

soopergal
11-05-2015, 04:37 PM
Link to Audio (Aman's). Copied from FB

https://onedrive.live.com/?cid=80baa97690927ffc&id=80BAA97690927FFC!751&authkey=!AA-hcl6CtBR9vpw

If there is ANY organization that speaks for Immigrant Rights, it is IV. If anyone had any doubt before, this particular audio should make everything clear.

vicky23
11-05-2015, 04:44 PM
This gave me goose bumps. Way to go Aman & IV.

testman
11-05-2015, 04:46 PM
I felt like I heard Sardar Patel or Gandhi speaking when Aman was raising his concerns.

Thank you, Aman! There should not be any doubt in anyone's mind who represents Immigrant workers honestly and fairly.

These guys from IV have been doing it for so long with so less. That itself is a tribute to their commitments. Thank you!

pd052011
11-05-2015, 04:50 PM
Applauding Aman.

DMX17
11-05-2015, 04:50 PM
Some hard blow! Every question sounded like it is my question. :)

“These are people with approved immigrant petitions, why would they have to wait one year?”

“If you look around the room, everybody is a lawyer or someone who profits from this business of getting more people from outside”

“in the end only a handful 100 people will be able to apply for EAD?”

“When are you going to talk about the rights of people who are already here?”

pd052011
11-05-2015, 04:54 PM
What a response from the guy from DHS!! Absolutely emotionless voice.

GCBuyer
11-05-2015, 04:55 PM
I respect you Mr. Aman for standing by for the right issue and for the right reason. I admire your courage.

Suva
11-05-2015, 05:07 PM
Kudos to Aman.

Thanks

casinoking
11-05-2015, 05:13 PM
Anyway, just checked the fun on twitter, I must say this guy S Ram @arams is asking the right questions/providing good arguments and getting BS responses.
.

S Ram twitter ID is not @arams. Correct twitter id is "arams".

casinoking
11-05-2015, 05:15 PM
S Ram twitter ID is not @arams. Correct twitter id is "arams".
There is something wrong with the filtering program. its not allowing correct to post correct id.

DMX17
11-05-2015, 05:15 PM
S Ram twitter ID is not @arams. Correct twitter id is "arams".

Is it you? If so, sorry man!

I don't have rights to correct my post.

casinoking
11-05-2015, 05:24 PM
Is it you? If so, sorry man!

I don't have rights to correct my post.

Its not me but someone I know who asked me to correct the twitter id. I tried but I am unable to make correction.

vall
11-05-2015, 05:37 PM
https://soundcloud.com/user-331565318/immigrant-frustration

I have listened to this so many times I cant even count
Hatts Off to you Aman - Really appreciate every question you asked
its the same question everyone have...
wow really wow so great to represent everyone of us.

Also can you give us some insight of the extra ordinary condition they are posting,
whats the special condition they are adding for this I140 EAD rule.

DMX17
11-05-2015, 05:45 PM
https://soundcloud.com/user-331565318/immigrant-frustration

I have listened to this so many times I cant even count
Hatts Off to you Aman - Really appreciate every question you asked
its the same question everyone have...
wow really wow so great to represent everyone of us.

Also can you give us some insight of the extra ordinary condition they are posting,
whats the special condition they are adding for this I140 EAD rule.


Here


There is also background activity whereby immigration lawyers and companies are working very hard to derail EAD for I140 fix. They are trying all sorts of ways to derail or water down this fix that we have worked for years.

Immigration lawyers and companies want this fix to be only applied to those with 'Extraordinary Circumstances' i.e. where employee can show economic hardship, exploitation by employer etc. They are trying to water down so no more than 600 people in an year would be able to benefit from this fix.

gcseeker23
11-05-2015, 05:52 PM
Thank-you IV and Aman. These are exactly same questions that all of us suffering from backlog trap would want to ask.
Thank-you for being voice of thousands of legal tax paying folks.

vall
11-05-2015, 06:11 PM
Thanks but do we know what are these extraordinary Circumstances or do we need to wait untill bill is out :(

DMX17
11-05-2015, 06:15 PM
Thanks but do we know what are these extraordinary Circumstances or do we need to wait untill bill is out :(

Did you not read "Extraordinary Circumstances' i.e. where employee can show economic hardship, exploitation by employer etc."

In a twisted way they are to turn this into a humanitarian issue like immigration benefits for victims of domestic violence for example.

vall
11-05-2015, 06:28 PM
oh no that's really bad

DMX17
11-05-2015, 06:39 PM
Check out IV facebook.

hil3182
11-05-2015, 06:40 PM
It's up on FB: https://www.facebook.com/ImmigrationVoice/posts/1029232440476313

Please like and share.

Bhishma
11-05-2015, 10:00 PM
so now instead of channeling resources ,admin and siskind are fighting it out on public space .
guess its difficult to agree to disagree respectfully.:o

Maybe time for parties to join big boss 9:rolleyes:

Please dont forget to watch how the admin is channeling resources. I wonder what would have happened today if IV was not fighting it out on public space.
Be it DHS conference, forums or twitter IV is the only voice of backlogged skilled immigrants. And I dont think this is difficult to agree

My apologies that this will not be aired on Big Boss9. You will have to spare a few minutes to discover IVs facebook page and witness it there. Unlike Big Boss 9 there wont be any ads :) or anything entertaining but plain sorrows and grieves of skilled immigrants. Sorry IV doesnt spice up things

Bhishma
11-05-2015, 10:12 PM
Is this a new strategy from IV? If yes, its a horrible way to distance the organization from immigration lawyers.

[Not speaking for IV]
I like this new strategy (if it was a strategy) to keep distance from immigration lawyers.


I am surprised moderators and admins are using such language directed at a lawyer

I am glad that moderators and admins are using such language directed at lawyers. The visitors on this forums and IV volunteers are not kids and I honestly think your language is suitable for this audience.

IV, can you please reel these people in and contribute to a more civilized discussion on topics? Especially on public forums

If it were not a civilized discussion, it would have been held on twitter where folks block you for asking questions. I wonder how many were blocked by them

Anonymous contributors directing their anger towards a person erodes the legitimacy of IV and its values.

I am sure you appreciate guest blogs on trade associations only created to depict that it was the organization's voice but not an individuals voice with malicious intent

If you have a problem with immigration lawyers, deal with it in your own way

We all have problems with immigration lawyers. If you have appreciation for these immigration lawyers please feel free to chant their bhajans 'in your own way' but not here

greenappletx
11-05-2015, 10:58 PM
Thanks IV & Aman, it was really great to listen Aman, he made right points, gr8.

abcdgc
11-05-2015, 11:06 PM
So what is this..... "wait wait you can't fire me, because I quit....." type of thingy :rolleyes:

Get real. If you oppose the core belief of any organization, you don't need to resign, you are fired. At that point, it doesn't matter as it is too late to say - wait wait you can't fire me, because I quit :rolleyes: :rolleyes::rolleyes::rolleyes: :D:D:D:D:D:D:D




Dear Aman and Puneet - It is with regret that I have to request my removal from your Board of Advisors. I’ve really enjoyed working with IV over the years on its advocacy efforts and have found participating in many of your teleconferences assisting IV members with their immigration questions to be rewarding. But after seeing this passage in Aman’s email advocating on behalf of amending HR 3012 (a bill I strongly support, by the way) I can no longer in good conscience be associated with the organization.

Unfortunately, some immigration lawyers and their advocacy groups in DC are against this amendment. We believe that this fringe group has always advocated a system where immigrants are taken advantage of.

Immigration Lawyers have chosen to be on the wrong side of history. They want to protect companies that are abusing the system. This set of Immigration lawyers want to side with companies that are under-cutting US workers and committing fraud.

It’s time for us to standup to speak for ourselves and tell everyone that immigration lawyers don't represent immigrants. When it comes to advocacy, immigration lawyers and their groups only represent their own special interest to design the system to keep more people in limbo for longer so that they can pocket more money through renewals and extension of applications for visas and work-permits while immigrants wait forever in their green card process. A large percentage of these immigration lawyers have a vested interest in keeping the immigration process slow and confusing. They will oppose streamlining or simplifying the process that would help employers and employees.

I think the IV position on the Grassley Amendment is really short sighted and will be deeply regretted over time. But I would not quit over a policy difference. I just can’t sit idly by and listen to my brethren – people that have dedicated their careers to helping immigrants (many being immigrants themselves) – painted as being greedy and anti-immigrant. I am personally insulted by this form of defamation and it strongly resembles the type of attack we usually hear from rabid anti-immigrants attacking us for advocating on behalf of immigrants. That this email originated from an immigrants rights advocacy group is simply shocking. You say you are only talking about “some lawyers” but I can tell you that the immigration bar sees this as an attack on all of us. The letter has circulated like wildfire across the immigration bar and I’m afraid IV’s reputation has been seriously damaged with a group that is composed of people that are naturally allied with most of your positions. And in Washington, finding allies is necessary in the long run to achieving anything. It’s also unfortunate because lashing out and defaming the immigration bar was unnecessary. You could have simply taken your position and just stated that you disagree with other groups, but stand by your decisions as representing the best interests of your members. Instead, you’ve hurt IV’s chances of finding friends in the future to help on issues that will be of concern to you.

Finally, It’s also odd that you have a Board of Advisors comprised of a number of immigration lawyers you consider to be trusted enough to include on a board of this sort, but we had to learn about your attack on immigration lawyers from other lawyers who heard about it online.

I wish the two of you well.
Regards,
Greg Siskind
Gregory Siskind, Attorney at Law
Siskind Susser - Immigration Lawyers
Telephone: 800-748-3819 or 901-682-6455
Fax: 800-684-1267 or 901-339-9604
Email: gsiskind@visalaw.com
Web: Guide To U.S. Immigration Law | Law Firm Assisting With Visas, Green Cards, Naturalization | Siskind Susser PC (http://www.visalaw.com)

crackjack9
11-05-2015, 11:23 PM
So what is this..... "wait wait you can't fire me, because I quit....." type of thingy :rolleyes:

Get real. If you oppose the core belief of any organization, you don't need to resign, you are fired. At that point, it doesn't matter as it is too late to say - wait wait you can't fire me, because I quit :rolleyes: :rolleyes::rolleyes::rolleyes: :D:D:D:D:D:D:D

Lol. sounds like it.
This cracked me up!

FrankUnderwood
11-05-2015, 11:25 PM
So what is this..... "wait wait you can't fire me, because I quit....." type of thingy :rolleyes:

Get real. If you oppose the core belief of any organization, you don't need to resign, you are fired. At that point, it doesn't matter as it is too late to say - wait wait you can't fire me, because I quit :rolleyes: :rolleyes::rolleyes::rolleyes: :D:D:D:D:D:D:D

His waterboys have abandoned him now. Nobody retweets his bull$$$ anymore. His fanboys have turned against him and asking why AILA didn't ask for EAD-140 during the conference.

Pretty much, he is screwed and lost all credibility. He may need to rewrite a new version of this book - The Lawyer's Guide to Marketing on the Internet

http://www.amazon.com/The-Lawyers-Guide-Marketing-Internet/dp/1590311183

-FU

abcdgc
11-05-2015, 11:47 PM
His waterboys have abandoned him now. Nobody retweets his bull$$$ anymore. His fanboys have turned against him and asking why AILA didn't ask for EAD-140 during the conference.

Pretty much, he is screwed and lost all credibility. He may need to rewrite a new version of this book - The Lawyer's Guide to Marketing on the Internet

The Lawyer's Guide to Marketing on the Internet: Gregory H. Siskind: 9781590311189: Amazon.com: Books (http://www.amazon.com/The-Lawyers-Guide-Marketing-Internet/dp/1590311183)

-FU

Why should there be a book about The Lawyer's Guide to Marketing on the Internet? :confused:

The answer is in 1 line. Tell the truth and uphold your oath, and don't engage in exploiting immigrants. Why do we need a book to say this 1 line? Is that what he wrote in that book? What a waste of ink and paper.

moon_walker333
11-06-2015, 10:25 AM
Mr. Aman Kapoor, you are my hero!!!

Thanks a lot for leading us million legal immigrants in the right direction and taking a stand on our behalf. You have our support all the way!!!

Godspeed!

vasu123
11-06-2015, 10:49 AM
seems like USCIS people are working on AC21 i140 portability, but not working on i140 EAD rule.

moon_walker333
11-06-2015, 11:11 AM
seems like USCIS people are working on AC21 i140 portability, but not working on i140 EAD rule.

Please share the source of info.

john_jony
11-06-2015, 02:11 PM
..
This has come many a times. I checked whether my current lawyer is affiliated or mentioned i n the aila site and thankfully was not. Will follow with my employer and if need be, will get the bad lawyers fired. They have no business to take our money and act against us. From what i read, greg and his kind are the scum of the planet and the very reason why general public dislikes lawyers and distrust law profession in general.
There is no point in talking about these guys except for the fact that this might help us in reinforcing our point of view and not the lawyers. In that context, I would caution Administrator2 to not get too much worked up and getting emotional about lawyers. As I said if you are using them to vent your frustration, reinforce your point of view and stressing your values, by all means go ahead. But by no means, let them get to you or your emotional/mental/physical well being.

DMX17
11-09-2015, 02:52 PM
Bump.....

In lawyer news.....read in hydrabadi (tooti footi).....


Aman ke baatan sun ke poori bhikari community me chakley lag gaey
Udhar twitter khaa saab logan ke busshat nikal diye re hum logan, una miya to chatri ho gaey ustad
Hum sab logan twitter me milke seedha chittad pe mari baap laatan

hil3182
11-19-2015, 03:55 PM
Got this by email, the AILA Report card (http://www.aila.org/infonet/aila-report-card-president-improve-immigration). Busy day at work, so my analysis is very preliminary, please feel free to dig deeper.

This is AILA's positions on our fixes:
Providing stability to employment based immigrants
In November 2014, DHS announced plans to provide better stability to the beneficiaries of approved employment-based immigrant visa petitions who are unable to move forward with an application for permanent residence due to the long visa backlogs.
Recommendation: DHS should move quickly and issue a proposed rule to ensure that approved, long-standing visa petitions remain valid in certain cases where the beneficiary seeks to change jobs or employers, and to provide other relief to workers facing lengthy green card delays

Portability for employment-based immigrants
In November 2014, DHS announced plans to clarify the types of job changes that constitute a “same or similar” job, thus allowing such workers to change jobs without jeopardizing their ability to apply for green cards.
Recommendation: DHS should issue guidance or regulations on portability that provides increased flexibility and stability to foreign workers while ensuring a more level playing field for U.S. workers. Such guidance or regulations should not include unnecessarily burdensome procedures or a lengthy application form, and under no circumstances should DHS seek to impose a fee on individuals or employers in making a “same or similar”
determination.

Translation: Let them change jobs more easily - we lost that battle already, but please please no EAD. We need them to pay the lawyer tax every three years - how are we going to feed our children :(

DMX17
11-19-2015, 04:04 PM
Any updates from the Conference follow-up call? Did anyone attend?

hil3182
11-19-2015, 04:12 PM
Any updates from the Conference follow-up call? Did anyone attend?

I heard that it was nothing substantial. Only questions were from backlogged asking about I140-EAD and only response was "wait for the regulation".

They didn't even know if it was coming through NRPM or Interim Rule with a comment period.

FrankUnderwood
11-19-2015, 04:12 PM
Any updates from the Conference follow-up call? Did anyone attend?

An American dude mentioned Aman Kapoor's video in the conference. Check out the recording and start listening from 20:00 to the end.

Lots of bashing the companies, USCIS and the lawyers

https://soundcloud.com/user844741555/call-13-33-34-out-8887901891amr/s-daNIc

Have fun :D

-FU

FrankUnderwood
11-19-2015, 04:14 PM
An American dude mentioned Aman Kapoor's video in the conference. Check out the recording and start listening from 20:00 to the end.

Lots of bashing the companies, USCIS and the lawyers

https://soundcloud.com/user844741555/call-13-33-34-out-8887901891amr/s-daNIc

Have fun :D

-FU

Actually start at 19:40. Brad is your guy

Tpathrose
11-19-2015, 04:15 PM
i dont think that is an american.

DMX17
11-19-2015, 04:39 PM
Translation: Let them change jobs more easily - we lost that battle already, but please please no EAD. We need them to pay the lawyer tax every three years - how are we going to feed our children :(

:D

To be fair, this is still better than everything else we saw before from AILA (at least no omission of the elephant :D). But again, careful on not shooting their own foot i.e. no mention of the word "work authorization" or "EAD". They want to use the word "other relief" for whatever that means.

I guess they did not read the tweets or the memo leaked by the lawyer who represents AILA on twitter or read his blog on AILA.

I take this as a good sign.

GC2022
11-19-2015, 08:03 PM
Was IV invited as a panalist previously to the CIS ombudsman ?

The person on that call mentions that she invited aman previously as a panelist.

hil3182
11-19-2015, 08:47 PM
Was IV invited as a panalist previously to the CIS ombudsman ?

The person on that call mentions that she invited aman previously as a panelist.

This is before my time, but yes, Aman apparently was. Here (http://content.govdelivery.com/attachments/USDHS/2013/10/22/file_attachments/246259/DHS%2BCIS%2BOmbudsman%2BThird%2BAnnual%2BConferenc e%2BFull%2BPublic%2BAgenda%2B%2B10%2B22.pdf) is a link to the schedule. If someone could ferret out a link to the video, I would be very interested

From the schedule:

1:30 p.m. – 3:00 p.m. Simultaneous Panel Discussions – Session I

Panel 1: Challenges in High Skilled Immigration: This panel will review high skilled immigration options (H-1Bs, L-1s, and the path to permanent residency) for employers and individuals. Panelists will discuss legal, policy, and operational challenges, and potential changes to the statutory framework governing temporary and permanent high skilled immigration.
Location: Washington Room
Moderator: Gary Merson, CIS Ombudsman’s Office
Panelists: Kate Augustia, U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) Aman Kapoor, Immigration Voice Lynden Melmed, Berry, Appleman & Leiden Karla Moran, USCIS


Aman has had a long day, I will touch base with him tomorrow and see if there is anything worthwhile to add.

hil3182
11-19-2015, 08:54 PM
Also, need to add that more than a few IV members are upset with me for not making the following points about the AILA report (http://www.aila.org/infonet/aila-report-card-president-improve-immigration):

The AILA report does not discuss unethical behavior by immigration lawyers - like delaying tactics to keep employees bound to the employer
The AILA report does not address the issue of abuse of Immigrants while stuck in backlog (or otherwise).


I don't think we will ever see an AILA report that addresses these things.

I am sure there are other things, that viewers should feel free to add to, but I hope my detractors are satisfied now :D.

Administrator2
11-19-2015, 11:03 PM
Some members emailed us complaining that AILA report falls short of their expectation. Rather than responding to each email individually, here is our response.

We find it funny and outrageous (both at the same time) that people are beating down on AILA for a report which has no meaning. Who cares about AILA's report and what they say. Immigrants with sound mind should stop expecting AILA or immigration lawyers to push for policy agenda that is in the best interest of immigrants. AILA is an association of Immigration Lawyers. It will be reasonable to expect that their goal would be to work in the best interest of immigration lawyers (not immigrants). The problem is that immigrants are unable to come out of their shell because many still seem to believe that AILA will push for policy agenda that is in the best interest of immigrants. We don’t think this is AILA’s fault. This is the fault of those “highly skilled” and "genius" immigrants, who are unable to parse this simple fact that AILA means “American Immigration Lawyers Association”. It does not say “American Immigration Lawyers Association for the betterment of immigrants”. It does not imply “American Immigration Lawyers Association for the best interest of immigrants”. It just means that it is an organization of around 14000 immigration lawyers whose purpose is to work in the best interest of it's member i.e. immigration lawyers. Why is it so difficult to understand this? And the only reason that this or any other organization might have any say in any process is because their membership contributes to that organization for representing them. Simple. Is that so difficult to understand?

Just imagine that for a moment if an immigration lawyer starts to expect NumberUSA to represent him. And every time NumberUSA comes out with a policy paper, that immigration lawyer would get upset because the policy paper would not be per the expectation of that immigration lawyer. Is it NumbersUSA’s fault? Or is it the fault of that immigration lawyer for expecting that NumberUSA will all of a sudden start working on something totally different for what that organization stands for?

Likewise, AILA or Greg or Cyrus are not at fault here. People who believe and expect that AILA will do anything for them, those people are at fault. Not only that, we have repeatedly, over a thousand times tried to explain this concept. We have come to the conclusion that those who cannot understand are either mentally incompetent to grasp a reasonable argument, or, they are totally insane to do the same thing over and over again expecting a different result.

We don’t care for AILA’s report, never have, and never will. Such silly and nonsense reports have no value, nothing.
There is no need to be angry about some useless report that no one cares for. Instead, if anything, you should be angry about why companies and immigration lawyers lobby against the provisions that will allow you to live a free life. Stop looking at people who are members of AILA as your savior, for they are the once who are responsible for the mess you are in. That is what we believe. Take it or leave it.

Now please stop wasting our time by asking us about some nonsense report from AILA. If you don’t change your ways, you and your families will be stuck in this current state for decades. Please wake up, and stop pandering to the people/groups who don’t want you and your families to live free. If you cannot see and understand this now, you will never understand.

RandomizedPrecision
11-19-2015, 11:44 PM
I used to think that IV is needlessly picking fights with these other groups (like AILA for e.g.) but I don't see it that way anymore especially after watching the Ombudsman Video and Aman's response in particular.

It is a simple thing in my mind.

An association Group is for the betterment of its members - like the AMA(American Medical Association) is for the Physicians. Similarly AILA is for the Immigration Lawyers. People might dispute that the AMA wants to keep people sick (so that the doctors benefit). However, every single issue they advocate for is to betterment of its members (the Doctors). If others benefit from that - that's a byproduct but not the primary goal. The same applies to AILA - if an issue that benefits immigrants benefits them too - they are your friends; otherwise they aren't.

So they advocate for things like more H1 visas, letting the Employer Control the 140 etc. because it clearly benefits their members. On an issue like I-140 EAD\AP etc. they're clearly not going to benefit - so all this nonsense with the "report" is just good ol lip-service and rhetoric.

It should be obvious to anyone that AILA will never come out publicly opposing I-140 - they just can't because they will be lynched by all the folks who can pick and choose lawfirms for their cases. Any AILA member will lose face and business opportunity and thereby AILA will lose membership. So I take this just some outward facing PR bullshit from AILA - nothing really stops them from back-channeling exactly the opposite message when they talk to the administration or decision makers in the government.

I think it'd be good for the legal immigrant community to coalesce around one umbrella group and for me IV is that one group. That's because I can't think of a single issue that a legal immigrant cares about that IV is against - the alignment is 100%.

You can take offense to the tone from IV Admin (and I don't speak for them) but you can't take offense with their positions and that's what should count at the end of the day.

Administrator2
11-20-2015, 12:13 AM
Words have meaning. When we go to the Hill (Congress) or Administration (DHS) asking for Job MOBILITY, companies and lawyers go there asking for job PORTABILITY

"Job MOBILITY" and "Job PORTABILITY" may sound the same, it may even rhyme, but it ain't the same.

Job Portability means - if you change job, then you port or take your priority date with you, so you can start your green card petition from scratch again with the new employer using the priority date from your GC petition from previous employer. But you will still have to maintain H1 (non-immigrant) status with the new employer and everything. This system is already in place. And AILA document advocates for Portability.

Job Mobility means - if your green card application is pending, you get EAD + AP after I140 so you can change jobs using the EAD. And your ongoing green card petition will continue as is, and you can file for AOS with another employer (which could be different from the original petitioning employer), so you never have to start your GC process all over again from scratch once your I-140 has been approved. So you no longer have to change jobs on H1 visa and will not have to apply for new H1 and new green card every time you change jobs after approval of I-140.

IV has been pushing for Job MOBILITY. That is what AC21 regulation ought to be about. And immigration lawyers and companies are trying to re-brand Job MOBILITY as Job PORTABILITY.

Look at AILA's document again. You CANNOT find the word 'MOBILITY' in that document. It only mentions PORTABILITY - meaning you will be slaves of H1 system for rest of your lives. Hey, if you have to file H1 and Green card over and over again, guess who benefits? IMMIGRATION LAWYERS.

But if immigrants will get EADs and APs (which you can file yourself), it will result in less number of H1 visa filing (for which lawyers charge 2000 to 8000 each) and less green card filings (for which lawyers charge $8000 to $20,000) as you will no longer have to re-apply for H1 and green card over and over again.

EAD+AP for I140 will mean immigration lawyers will get less work and immigration lawyers will make less money. So what does an organization of immigration lawyers do? They quietly push for agenda so that its members (immigration lawyers) get more work by more H1 and GCs re-filings, to ensure that members of their organization (immigration lawyers) make more money even when number of H1s and GCs are not increased by Congress. This is how organizations work to maximum the benefit of their members. Nothing wrong with that. We just want it to be transparent to the people/immigrants who are naive to believe that AILA's purpose is for a better system for immigrants.

RH_93
11-20-2015, 12:29 AM
Words have meaning. When we go to the Hill (Congress) or Administration (DHS) asking for Job MOBILITY, companies and lawyers go there asking for job PORTABILITY

"Job MOBILITY" and "Job PORTABILITY" may sound the same, it may even rhyme, but it ain't the same.

Job Portability means - if you change job, then you take your priority date with you, so you can start your green card petition from scratch again with the new employer using the priority date from your GC petition from previous employer. But you still will have to maintain H1 (non-immigrant) status with the new employer and everything. This system is already in place. And AILA document advocates for Portability.

Job Mobility means - if your green card application is pending, you get EAD + AP after I140 so you can change jobs using the EAD. And your ongoing green card petition will continue as is, and you can file for AOS with another employer (which could be different from the original petitioning employer), so you never have to start your GC process all over again from scratch once your I-140 has been approved. So you no longer have to change jobs on H1 visa and will not have to apply for new H1 and new green card every time you change jobs after approval of I-140.

IV has been pushing for Job MOBILITY. That is what AC21 regulation ought to be about. And immigration lawyers and companies are trying to re-brand Job MOBILITY as Job PORTABILITY.

Look at AILA's document again. You CANNOT find the word 'MOBILITY' in that document. It only mentions PORTABILITY - meaning you will be slaves of H1 system for rest of your lives. Hey, if you have to file H1 and Green card over and over again, guess who benefits? IMMIGRATION LAWYERS.

But if immigrants will get EADs and APs (which you can file themselves), it will result in less number of H1 visa filing (for which lawyers charge 2000 to 8000 each) and less green card filings (for which lawyers charge $8000 to $20,000) as you will no longer have to re-apply for H1 and green card over and over again.

EAD+AP for I140 will mean immigration lawyers will get less work and immigration lawyers will make less money. So what does an organization of immigration lawyers do? They quietly push for agenda so that its members (immigration lawyers) get more work by more H1 and GCs re-filings, to ensure that members of their organization (immigration lawyers) make more money even when number of H1s and GCs are not increased by Congress. This is how organizations work to maximum the benefit of their members. Nothing wrong with that. We just want it to be transparent to the people/immigrants who are naive to believe that AILA's purpose is for a better system for immigrants.

Wow..this is such an eye opener for me. Thanks much for the detailed explanation. We need to roast these lawyers on the differences. Bloody hell....Thanks again IV !!!!

DMX17
11-20-2015, 01:24 AM
I think most people have come to understand that AILA will not push for worker mobility. This is easy conclusion because this sounds as if AILA is neutral. Why should they, right?

What people do not want to or cannot believe is the claim that AILA/lawyers are actively working agaist worker mobility. This would paint AILA/lawyers as anti-backlog-immigrant or pro-backlog. And the backlog community remains conflicted and divided no matter how many times Admin2/Hil/others/I said it. When it comes to I140 EAD/AP only the backlog immigrants are for it. And there is no position called a neutral position.

My guess is that we will see them coming out as pro-I140 EAD/AP in public the closer we get to the rule. The two famous lawyers have many times with one telling people attacking AILA is attacking him. But this is directed at the immigrant followers and a marketing thing. So is the AILA report card.

FrankUnderwood
11-20-2015, 01:41 AM
I think most people have come to understand that AILA will not push for worker mobility. This is easy conclusion because this sounds as if AILA is neutral. Why should they, right?

What people do not want to or cannot believe is the claim that AILA/lawyers are actively working agaist worker mobility. This would paint AILA/lawyers as anti-backlog-immigrant or pro-backlog. And the backlog community remains conflicted and divided no matter how many times Admin2/Hil/others/I said it. When it comes to I140 EAD/AP only the backlog immigrants are for it. And there is no position called a neutral position.

My guess is that we will see them coming out as pro-I140 EAD/AP in public the closer we get to the rule. The two famous lawyers have many times with one telling people attacking AILA is attacking him. But this is directed at the immigrant followers and a marketing thing. So is the AILA report card.

AILA gets a grease of F'ing F by the immigrants

Jambo
11-20-2015, 03:48 AM
Words have meaning. When we go to the Hill (Congress) or Administration (DHS) asking for Job MOBILITY, companies and lawyers go there asking for job PORTABILITY

"Job MOBILITY" and "Job PORTABILITY" may sound the same, it may even rhyme, but it ain't the same.

Job Portability means - if you change job, then you port or take your priority date with you, so you can start your green card petition from scratch again with the new employer using the priority date from your GC petition from previous employer. But you will still have to maintain H1 (non-immigrant) status with the new employer and everything. This system is already in place. And AILA document advocates for Portability.

Job Mobility means - if your green card application is pending, you get EAD + AP after I140 so you can change jobs using the EAD. And your ongoing green card petition will continue as is, and you can file for AOS with another employer (which could be different from the original petitioning employer), so you never have to start your GC process all over again from scratch once your I-140 has been approved. So you no longer have to change jobs on H1 visa and will not have to apply for new H1 and new green card every time you change jobs after approval of I-140.

IV has been pushing for Job MOBILITY. That is what AC21 regulation ought to be about. And immigration lawyers and companies are trying to re-brand Job MOBILITY as Job PORTABILITY.

Look at AILA's document again. You CANNOT find the word 'MOBILITY' in that document. It only mentions PORTABILITY - meaning you will be slaves of H1 system for rest of your lives. Hey, if you have to file H1 and Green card over and over again, guess who benefits? IMMIGRATION LAWYERS.

But if immigrants will get EADs and APs (which you can file yourself), it will result in less number of H1 visa filing (for which lawyers charge 2000 to 8000 each) and less green card filings (for which lawyers charge $8000 to $20,000) as you will no longer have to re-apply for H1 and green card over and over again.

EAD+AP for I140 will mean immigration lawyers will get less work and immigration lawyers will make less money. So what does an organization of immigration lawyers do? They quietly push for agenda so that its members (immigration lawyers) get more work by more H1 and GCs re-filings, to ensure that members of their organization (immigration lawyers) make more money even when number of H1s and GCs are not increased by Congress. This is how organizations work to maximum the benefit of their members. Nothing wrong with that. We just want it to be transparent to the people/immigrants who are naive to believe that AILA's purpose is for a better system for immigrants.

Admin2,

I attended Aman's conference call this past Sunday and he talked about how IV believes in doing advocacy - by calling your congressman instead of going on Twitter.

Be that as it may, most people find out information through Twitter. Why doesn't IV write a blog about how immigration lawyers together with companies screw over immigrants? The media would pick it up instantly and a lot more people's eyes would be opened. All the idiots who contributed $25K to a now infamous lawyer will be saved from future idiocy.

bcci
11-20-2015, 09:31 AM
Words have meaning. When we go to the Hill (Congress) or Administration (DHS) asking for Job MOBILITY, companies and lawyers go there asking for job PORTABILITY

"Job MOBILITY" and "Job PORTABILITY" may sound the same, it may even rhyme, but it ain't the same.

Job Portability means - if you change job, then you port or take your priority date with you, so you can start your green card petition from scratch again with the new employer using the priority date from your GC petition from previous employer. But you will still have to maintain H1 (non-immigrant) status with the new employer and everything. This system is already in place. And AILA document advocates for Portability.

Job Mobility means - if your green card application is pending, you get EAD + AP after I140 so you can change jobs using the EAD. And your ongoing green card petition will continue as is, and you can file for AOS with another employer (which could be different from the original petitioning employer), so you never have to start your GC process all over again from scratch once your I-140 has been approved. So you no longer have to change jobs on H1 visa and will not have to apply for new H1 and new green card every time you change jobs after approval of I-140.

IV has been pushing for Job MOBILITY. That is what AC21 regulation ought to be about. And immigration lawyers and companies are trying to re-brand Job MOBILITY as Job PORTABILITY.

Look at AILA's document again. You CANNOT find the word 'MOBILITY' in that document. It only mentions PORTABILITY - meaning you will be slaves of H1 system for rest of your lives. Hey, if you have to file H1 and Green card over and over again, guess who benefits? IMMIGRATION LAWYERS.

But if immigrants will get EADs and APs (which you can file yourself), it will result in less number of H1 visa filing (for which lawyers charge 2000 to 8000 each) and less green card filings (for which lawyers charge $8000 to $20,000) as you will no longer have to re-apply for H1 and green card over and over again.

EAD+AP for I140 will mean immigration lawyers will get less work and immigration lawyers will make less money. So what does an organization of immigration lawyers do? They quietly push for agenda so that its members (immigration lawyers) get more work by more H1 and GCs re-filings, to ensure that members of their organization (immigration lawyers) make more money even when number of H1s and GCs are not increased by Congress. This is how organizations work to maximum the benefit of their members. Nothing wrong with that. We just want it to be transparent to the people/immigrants who are naive to believe that AILA's purpose is for a better system for immigrants.

Truly a masterpiece on it own. Thank you, Sir!!

sundeepreddym
11-20-2015, 10:06 AM
Very well stated Admin2. These are facts on the ground and if immigrant does not understand this or ignores this - I pray for their sanity. We IV volunteers understand the "wolf in sheep skin" attitude of Immigration lawyers.

greyhair
11-28-2015, 01:10 PM
Why does immigration lawyers dislike Democratic candidate Sanders. This is strange

https://twitter.com/gsiskind/status/669310024943067136
"Sanders endorsing more portability for H-1Bs is encouraging, but nothing on green cards for skilled workers.
https://berniesanders.com/issues/a-fair-and-humane-immigration-policy/
"

Administrator2
11-28-2015, 03:51 PM
Why does immigration lawyers dislike Democratic candidate Sanders. This is strange

https://twitter.com/gsiskind/status/669310024943067136
"Sanders endorsing more portability for H-1Bs is encouraging, but nothing on green cards for skilled workers.
https://berniesanders.com/issues/a-fair-and-humane-immigration-policy/
"

As we have highlighted earlier, lawyers like to beat down the drum to repeat "portability" over and over and over and over again. And they will never EVER say "job MOBILITY". But if you look at the Sen. Sanders campaign page - https://berniesanders.com/issues/a-fair-and-humane-immigration-policy/ - just try searching for the word "portability" (as this lawyer claimed), you will NOT find anything related to "portability".

Instead, if anything, Senator Sanders campaign website for President talks about the following key solutions:

1.) End the Economic Exploitation of Immigrant Workers
2.) Protect and Expand the Legal Rights of Immigrant Workers

But immigration lawyers never acknowledge that there is exploitation of immigrant workers. Instead, they put a spin on Candidate Sanders immigration policy position as "portability". Lawyers don't want immigrants to think beyond "portability" because we as explained above, "portability" forces you to file application again, getting more business for immigration lawyers.

There is an organized campaign to deny immigrants the rights so immigrants stay more attractive to employers over US workers. So the intended outcome is to make sure immigrants stay in backlogs so lawyers can use them as cash cow to refile green card and H1 petition over and over again. And in the process, US workers are discriminated at the marketplace.

This entire debate is NOT between Immigrant workers v/s US workers.
In IT, this debate is also NOT about Indian workers v/s Americans.

This debate is about immigration lawyers and handful of companies who game the system for their own profits. So the way real system unfold, the immigrant workers, American workers and the economy is screwed. But it works great for immigration lawyers and handful of companies.

If immigration lawyers tend to benefit from this business of exploitation and backlogs, then why would immigration lawyers bring up "exploitation", or "lack of rights of immigrants" etc. Immigration lawyers would rather stay the "Joseph Goebbels" course to repeat "portability" over and over again, making it look like as if everyone is talking about and wants "portability". But again Senator Sanders webpage doesn't even mention or even indirectly refers to "portability".

Anyone who speaks up against exploitation and asking for immigrant rights is a sworn enemy of immigration lawyers. That is how the real system works. And that is why, immigration lawyers are not a big fan of Senator Sanders. That is the real real why immigration lawyers don't like Senator Sanders' immigration policy position. These lawyers wrap their "Joseph Goebbels" message around their claim that "nothing on green cards for skilled workers" just so that ill informed immigrants who follow immigration lawyers will give them high-5. And the proof is - look at handful of idiots who re-tweeted and agreed with this immigration lawyer.

We think that the real problem is not immigration lawyers, but rather such ill informed people who become instruments of pushing for the twisted agenda of immigration lawyers instead of speaking up for the issues and agenda of skilled immigrants and to improve upon the over system so immigrants are not exploited when they are in backlogs for decades, and, Americans are not discriminated against in the marketplace.