PDA

View Full Version : EAD for I-140 Discussion


HumHongeKaamyaab
12-16-2015, 01:33 AM
Folks,
Starting this thread EXCLUSIVELY for discussions regarding EAD for I-140..starting with...does anyone know when the regulation will be published so we can read it? Or what the current status is? Thank you!

sidhupande
12-17-2015, 03:44 PM
The rule will come whenever it has to but folks need to stop spamming the USCIS meetings. I attended the call on same or similar job. People were asking questions in a broken English and could not complete a sentence without stammering. They ask irrelevant questions.

HumHongeKaamyaab
12-17-2015, 04:04 PM
The rule will come whenever it has to but folks need to stop spamming the USCIS meetings. I attended the call on same or similar job. People were asking questions in a broken English and could not complete a sentence without stammering. They ask irrelevant questions.

That is sad. I have sat through a couple of these calls and wondered myself why people cannot take 30 seconds before asking questions, to compose or even write down their questions and proof read them before asking.

sidhupande, is there a summary of the call you attended anywhere online and could you please share?

prince_nagi@yahoo.com
12-17-2015, 04:42 PM
looks like this is applicable for people with I140 approved and 485 pending .. how this will hlep all the other people.

greyhair
12-17-2015, 05:59 PM
looks like this is applicable for people with I140 approved and 485 pending .. how this will hlep all the other people.

Self centered stupidity and ignorance of people is deafening.

Why is it so difficult to understand that "Same or Similar Occupation Classification" memo is for those who have applied for I-485. The call was for memo ONLY.

As Admin said earlier, the regulation to allow us to file EAD after I-140 is called AC21 Regulation. AC21 Regulation is not yet published but it is expected to be out very soon.

It was very irritating to see so many participants ask the same question that why "same or similar" memo doesn't apply to those with approved I-140. It was not a mature conversation when people refuse to read or make themselves aware about the topic of the call before asking their questions. Such irresponsible behavior result in denial of a chance for others with legitimate question related to the subject. I had a question related to the memo but I did not get a chance to ask my question because most participants were talking about whether this memo applies to those who have not yet filed for I-485. What a waste of time.

sean231
12-17-2015, 07:18 PM
Totally agree in terms of people being dense regarding the purpose of the call and the items being discussed.

Aman brought up a great point regarding the career progression; however, the answer given was scary. Although they did agree that a person/applicant could go up to a higher level when it is a case of managing people with the same job roles that the applicant had in their PERM petition -- to Aman's question about the progression going up to a CEO level -- the answer was that they would consider only a case wherein the next job directly manages/supervises people in the same job classification as the PERM. My interpretation is that in this situation; only a one-level promotion would be considered valid; which might be okay for people whose entire GC journey is a matter of a couple of years -- but, would definitely kill the aspirations & capabilities of people whose GC saga goes on for multiple years as is the case for EB-I applicants.

On another note, there was a mention that applicants could proactively apply to USCIS regarding their new job offer kinda proving the same/similar aspect. It was just a mention and the person who said this (one of the panelists) did not elaborate. Not sure if that would be the on-going expectation.

HumHongeKaamyaab
12-23-2015, 11:29 AM
http://www.reginfo.gov/public/do/eAgendaViewRule?pubId=201510&RIN=1615-AC05

http://www.reginfo.gov/public/Forward?SearchTarget=RegReview&textfield=+1615-AC05

The Oh Law Firm (http://www.immigration-law.com/)

Looks like the review is complete..looking forward to being able to comment on this rule. Finally some action on this front!! :D

DMX17
12-23-2015, 12:03 PM
check my post here....

RIN: 1615-AC05 AKA I-140 EAD/Portability Proposed Rule - Immigration Voice (http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/forum16-iv-agenda-and-legislative-updates/3096626-rin-1615-ac05-aka-i-140-ead-portability-proposed-rule.html#post3594103)

Eadfor I140
12-23-2015, 12:10 PM
Is their work going on AC 21 EAD form ? If it is , Good news :)

http://www.reginfo.gov/public/do/PRAViewDocument?ref_nbr=201511-1615-011

thankstooptx
12-23-2015, 12:52 PM
Is their work going on AC 21 EAD form ? If it is , Good news :)

http://www.reginfo.gov/public/do/PRAViewDocument?ref_nbr=201511-1615-011

Not so much of a good news I guess.

http://www.reginfo.gov/public/do/PRAViewDocument?ref_nbr=201511-1615-011

HumHongeKaamyaab
12-23-2015, 01:23 PM
Not so much of a good news I guess.

http://www.reginfo.gov/public/do/PRAViewDocument?ref_nbr=201511-1615-011

Not sure I understand. Can you please explain what you mean? I followed the link also but didn't know why you think this is not good news?

thankstooptx
12-23-2015, 02:24 PM
Not sure I understand. Can you please explain what you mean? I followed the link also but didn't know why you think this is not good news?

From the " Instructions TOC " in the document is states that only people who have approved I-140's and facing compelling circumstances can apply for an EAD. I do understand that this may not be the final rule that gets published but it is awfully close to what
Administrator2 had mentioned about Lawyers "watering" down the EAD+AP for I140 rule. It appears this "compelling circumstances" is upon the sole discretion of the USCIS and if the application is denied you cannot appeal.

Having said that these forms may not be the one that gets submitted to federal register for comments. So there is a chance that I am overreacting. God, I hope this is not the final draft.

HumHongeKaamyaab
12-23-2015, 05:20 PM
From the " Instructions TOC " in the document is states that only people who have approved I-140's and facing compelling circumstances can apply for an EAD. I do understand that this may not be the final rule that gets published but it is awfully close to what
Administrator2 had mentioned about Lawyers "watering" down the EAD+AP for I140 rule. It appears this "compelling circumstances" is upon the sole discretion of the USCIS and if the application is denied you cannot appeal.

Having said that these forms may not be the one that gets submitted to federal register for comments. So there is a chance that I am overreacting. God, I hope this is not the final draft.

Looks like you were right...they won. The commoners lose again.

Toadie
12-23-2015, 05:46 PM
From the " Instructions TOC " in the document is states that only people who have approved I-140's and facing compelling circumstances can apply for an EAD. I do understand that this may not be the final rule that gets published but it is awfully close to what
Administrator2 had mentioned about Lawyers "watering" down the EAD+AP for I140 rule. It appears this "compelling circumstances" is upon the sole discretion of the USCIS and if the application is denied you cannot appeal.

Having said that these forms may not be the one that gets submitted to federal register for comments. So there is a chance that I am overreacting. God, I hope this is not the final draft.
Well another caveat is that, even if you get the EAD, the renewal will not be provided if your PD is not within a year of cut-off date in the VB. So obviously, people will keep on being on H1. pathetic.

HumHongeKaamyaab
12-23-2015, 05:52 PM
Well another caveat is that, even if you get the EAD, the renewal will not be provided if your PD is not within a year of cut-off date in the VB. So obviously, people will keep on being on H1. pathetic.

Agree - this is worse than pathetic. I guess all we can do is comment the crap out of this rule when it is finally published and available for public comment. We need to tell them that this is not correct.

2008candid
12-23-2015, 05:56 PM
This rule looks more scary. We are in BIG trouble, if this rule got implemented. Until now, EAD could be renewed without much issues, now who got EAD in 2007 also in trouble, I think.

Who is really getting benefited from this rule? Only lawyers, and desi consulting companies, no one else. BIG companies are not worried about candidates getting GC at least this is my experience. Employees will get screwed up with this for sure.

2008candid
12-23-2015, 06:00 PM
Adding with previous post, ONLY Indians and Chinese have to obey this rule, this is applicable for only for them. Is this land of freedom and opportunity? I don't know, I am here in US for last 9 years, came with family always had job, if I want to go back, I have nothing in my hand. I have to start from same ground as I was nine years ago. THIS IS MY AMERICAN DREAM.

rohan_vus123
12-23-2015, 06:14 PM
Adding with previous post, ONLY Indians and Chinese have to obey this rule, this is applicable for only for them. Is this land of freedom and opportunity? I don't know, I am here in US for last 9 years, came with family always had job, if I want to go back, I have nothing in my hand. I have to start from same ground as I was nine years ago. THIS IS MY AMERICAN DREAM.

Sorry only Indians now . Chinese are much better and things much worse for Indians now ...
Can same folks who worship lawyers blast them for why this happened ? Are we still in denial regarding the lawyers ? How many more examples are needed so that folks understand ?

HumHongeKaamyaab
12-23-2015, 06:33 PM
Adding with previous post, ONLY Indians and Chinese have to obey this rule, this is applicable for only for them. Is this land of freedom and opportunity? I don't know, I am here in US for last 9 years, came with family always had job, if I want to go back, I have nothing in my hand. I have to start from same ground as I was nine years ago. THIS IS MY AMERICAN DREAM.

Absolutely agree! This is a land of entrapment and Freedom is a marketing term used to lure people to this country. I feel like breaking something...this rule just continues the slavery. I am sad, disappointed and ANGRY. Let's tell them through comments that we will not stand up for it.

ascenZ
12-24-2015, 01:31 AM
Absolutely agree! This is a land of entrapment and Freedom is a marketing term used to lure people to this country. I feel like breaking something...this rule just continues the slavery. I am sad, disappointed and ANGRY. Let's tell them through comments that we will not stand up for it.

Let's stay optimistic and tread through this muddy water together. While this rule seems to be far away from what we would like it to be, it's better than nothing at all. At least this provides temporary relief for those H1-Bs who lose their job - although they need to find next employer who is willing to sponsor them. Devil is in the details - we do not know yet what the status will be for those who obtained EAD through this rule.

Also, I feel as though it won't be helpful to hurl angry invectives towards lawyers. Honestly, let's face it - America is corrupted as fuck. There is an army of lobbyiests, consisting of corporate lawyers, former politicians etcs, that makes sure every single regulation or piece of law is rigged in favor of big corporations.

We stakeholders need to scrutinize the rules once they're published. Devil is in the detail. Not only do we need to advocate for the real I-140 EAD, but we also need clarifications as for what's the legal status for the beneficiaries of these EADs.

Eadfor I140
12-24-2015, 01:43 AM
Beneficiary of an approved employment-based immigrant petition facing compelling circumstances--(c)(35). File Form I-765 along with documentation that you are in the United States in E-3, H-1B, H-1B1, O-1, or L-1 nonimmigrant status, that an Immigrant Petition for Alien Worker (Form I-140) was approved on your behalf, and you face compelling circumstances while you wait for your immigrant visa to become available. Please see the USCIS Web site at
Application for Employment Authorization | USCIS (http://www.uscis.gov/I-765)
for the most current information on where to file this benefit request. If you are requesting renewal of employment authorization under (c)(35), to qualify, the difference between your priority date and the date upon which immigrant visas are authorized for issuance for the principal alien's preference category and country of chargeability is 1 year or less according to the current Department of State Visa Bulletin.
H.
Proof you are in the United States in E-3, H-1B, H-1B1, O-1, or L-1 nonimmigrant status. Submit a copy of your Arrival-Departure Record (Form I-94) showing your admission as an E-3, H-1B, H-1B1, O-1, or L-1 nonimmigrant, or a copy of your current Form I-797 approval notice for Form I-129.
1.
2.
Proof of Your Approved Form I-140. Submit a copy of a Form I-797 approval notice for Form I-140 showing the Immigrant Petition has been approved for you.
Evidence you are facing compelling circumstances while you wait for your immigrant visa to become available.
Secondary Evidence. If you do not have the evidence listed in 1, 2, or 3 above, you may ask USCIS to consider other evidence ("secondary evidence") in support of your application for employment authorization.
5.
Felony or Misdemeanor. If you were ever convicted of a felony or two or more misdemeanors committed in the United States, you cannot be granted employment authorization under this eligibility category. USCIS will make the determination as to whether your crimes fall into either of these categories. You must, however, provide information and any supporting documentation on all crimes which you have committed or were convicted of in the United States so USCIS can make an appropriate decision.
6.
Court Disposition Records. If you were ever arrested, charged, and/or convicted for a criminal offense, you will need to provide court disposition records.

Eadfor I140
12-24-2015, 01:53 AM
Beneficiary of an approved employment-based immigrant petition facing compelling circumstances--(c)(35).

The language of new 765 does not sound like EAD . Can Admin check & give us comments to be pass about the rule.

This is election year & if we don't speak now, we may have to wait for election outcome .

Aim at ++++++++++++> EAD

With HR 213 next
is Pathway to ======> Go Green

ascenZ
12-24-2015, 02:02 AM
Let's brainstorm what needs to be carefully looked at and commented on. Off the top of my head, I have the following:

1. Remove the restrictive measure that asks petitioner to prove "compelling reasons". Ideally we want I-140 applicants be automatically granted EAD after approval - at bare minimum we need clear language on what the compelling reasons are. We need to push for the least restrictive standards possible, so our I-140 EAD applications do not end up in another bureaucratic rabbit hole when we need it most.

2. Clarification on the legal status for the beneficiaries of I-140 EAD. We want something similar to the AOS of 485 filers. Otherwise, if one must maintain legal H1-B status all the time, then this rule is completely redundant.

3. It rule does not provide amended I-131. In order words, we won't have Advance Parole. At a time when illegal immigrant dreamers can apply for Advance Parole, it is unfair for us to be treated as the lesser kind of immigrants.

4. We want those EADs to last as long as possible - DACA beneficaries have 3 year EADs renewable. If ours are to be less than that, then we need to call that out.

Eadfor I140
12-24-2015, 02:20 AM
1. Have to define what are the "compelling reasons" . It should not be just what officer think.

2. If we still need H1 then why their is EAD .

3. Does this rule is for helping us or sugar-coating.

4. Does make sense to get 2-3 years EAD with no fee like EAD issued during 2007.

RocketFast
12-24-2015, 11:30 AM
It is not yet clear whether changing jobs still needs new PERM+I-140. With the new rule, if we no longer need to apply for PERM+I-140 every time we change jobs, I feel it is still a win.

The language around EAD makes me believe that it is mainly for that duration wherein you lose your job and are in the lookout for a new job.

IMO, H1B transfers between companies are not really that painful. It is the thought of doing the PERM and I-140 again and again that is more of of a mental block (I have done this thrice already and have no stomach for doing this one more time).

Eadfor I140
12-24-2015, 02:59 PM
This is time for us to ask that why we have to go through same process of
H1 => Perm => I 140 when we aready have I 140

We are legally working here for decade & still have to follow old rule based on country of origin which were abolish in 1965.

We need media campaign to get support of other workers.

IV what we can do to start media campaign. We need strategy& media co-ordinator.

========Time is of the essence==============

HumHongeKaamyaab
12-24-2015, 06:49 PM
From Oh Law Blog: [Still doesnt look good :( ]

2/24/2015: Estimated New EAD Applications by I-140 Approved Foreign Worker and Their Family Members

It is interesting to learn that reportedly, the USCIS is estimating that the new I-140 EAD program that includes foreign workers themselves and their spouses and children will be 155,067, less than 179,000 estimated H-4 EADs that did not involve accompanying spoues or children. Therefore, it appears that the USCIS planner for I-140 EAD must be looking at a fairly limited number of foreign workers themselves would benefit from this reform for EAD. However, remember that 155,067 include only those I-140 portability using EAD. Since large number of I-140 portability beneficiaries may not change employment using EAD but using nonimmigrant status, when it comes to the impact in the send of total number of I-140 approved foreign workers changing employment will be very large in numbers! The planner may more look at its impact on mobility of I-140 approved foreign workers (portability) on the nation's economy and retaining talents in the U.S. In other words, from the perspectives of this reform, the focus of the reform may be placed on "portability" itself rather than additional "EADs" which will be taken more favorably by anti-immigration forces and labor union backers.
Any way, for those who seek EAD, the cost will be similar to DACA EAD applicants, including $380 (EAD fee) + Biometric Collection ($85) + Photo ($10).
I-140 EAD will have one other restriction other than 'compelling reasons' requirement and requirement of one year or less for visa cutoff date for EAD renewal: There will be no 90-day approval mandate and no accompanying interim EAD request available when the EAD is not issued within 90 days from the application. Ouch!
The proposed I-140 EAD regulation which is expected to be released sooner or later will be published with a 60-day comment period. Only god knows how long it will take for the USCIS to complete review of these comments and how long it will take to decide draft of the legally binding final regulation, which will again have to go through the OMB review and approval process. For the reasons, those who have attained I-140 approval will endure patience for them to see the legally binding final regulation of this reform come into light. Those who take advantage of the reform for change of employment have broadly two groups: One group intends to maintain their nonimmigrant status when they change job. The second group includes those who do not or cannot maintain their nonimmigrant status to port and work for another employer. For the first group, change of employment can be achieved fairly in a short time after the new regulation is in place, while those who want to change employment only with the EAD may take quite a long time to achieve that because of the EAD processing times. There is another caveat for the second group. They should learn from those who port to new employment after 180 days of filing of EB-485. Large of those EB-485s keep their nonimmigrant status even if they are eligible to get EAD and work on EAD because of the risk involved. If for some reasons (related to the employers or foreign workers themselves) pending EB-485 application is denied, the foreign workers immediately loses legal status and cannot apply for nonimmigrant status in the United States, while those who kept and worked on nonimmigrant status can keep their nonimmigrant status even if they face such mishaps and try again another green card proceeding. Which option one should take depends on specific facts of each individual case. They should seek legal counsel to learn which option fits better for himself or herself. The second group should consider the potential risk involved with the I-140 EAD renewal that will require another proof of 'compelling reasons' as well as less than one year to reach the visa cut-off date in the Visa Bulleltin.
Let's wait and see for now to see other catches or surprises we will find in the proposed regulation which will be published in the federal register sooner or letter.

Eadfor I140
12-24-2015, 07:45 PM
IV , Thanks your support for immigrant American workers. I know you guys will make our journey to I 140 EAD .


We will need attention of Media to our problems . Our kids who are American citizen suffering because of our decade wait of immigration visa. American Citizen life are affected.

HumHongeKaamyaab
12-25-2015, 01:02 AM
This is painful..theyre not even publishing the rule..does anyone know when they might publish it?

HumHongeKaamyaab
12-30-2015, 01:43 PM
The following is copied from OH LAW FIRM website:

"Inasmuch as he/she changes the employment after 180 days of I-140 approval, the new employer does not have to sponsor another PERM application and another I-140 petition to keep him or her without affecting his/her green card eligibility. One catch is that unlike the current law, the new employer will have to certify that the job is a same or similar job and the job will continue to exist through the time of approval of his/her green card application"

If this is really true, then it essentially means that we can move around the country with newer jobs MUCH more freely...only thing required will be transferring and maintaining H1-B status which at least at my company, we had to do ANYWAY regardless if you had EAD or not. So this is a big deal because you DO NOT have to file a NEW PERM+140 application if you switch jobs!!! This is NICE if true.

rohan_vus123
12-30-2015, 01:51 PM
The following is copied from OH LAW FIRM website:

"Inasmuch as he/she changes the employment after 180 days of I-140 approval, the new employer does not have to sponsor another PERM application and another I-140 petition to keep him or her without affecting his/her green card eligibility. One catch is that unlike the current law, the new employer will have to certify that the job is a same or similar job and the job will continue to exist through the time of approval of his/her green card application"

If this is really true, then it essentially means that we can move around the country with newer jobs MUCH more freely...only thing required will be transferring and maintaining H1-B status which at least at my company, we had to do ANYWAY regardless if you had EAD or not. So this is a big deal because you DO NOT have to file a NEW PERM+140 application if you switch jobs!!! This is NICE if true.

Thats wrong interpretation by that lawyers IMO ... See below text for yourself

"As noted above, DHS is proposing to amend its regulations governing
applications for adjustment of status to prohibit approval of such an application when the
approval of the immigrant visa petition on which the application is based has been
revoked. See proposed 8 CFR 245.25(a). DHS is also proposing, however, as discussed
in section IV.B., to amend its regulations governing revocation of petition approval so
that employment-based immigrant visa petitions that have been approved for 180 days or
more would no longer have such approval automatically revoked based only on
withdrawal by the petitioner or termination of the petitioner’s business. See proposed 8
CFR 205.1(a)(3)(iii)(C) and (D). As long as such an approval has not been revoked for
fraud, material misrepresentation, the invalidation or revocation of a labor certification,
or USCIS error, the petition would generally continue to be valid for purposes of section
204(j) job portability and certain status extension purposes under the immigration laws. Such a petition, however, cannot on its own serve as the basis for obtaining an
immigrant visa or adjustment of status as there is no longer a bona fide employment offer
related to the petition. Id. In such cases, the beneficiary will need a new immigrant visa
petition approved on his or her behalf, or a new offer of employment in section 204(j)
portability cases, in order to obtain an immigrant visa or adjust status."

HumHongeKaamyaab
12-30-2015, 02:02 PM
Thats wrong interpretation by that lawyers IMO ... See below text for yourself

"As noted above, DHS is proposing to amend its regulations governing
applications for adjustment of status to prohibit approval of such an application when the
approval of the immigrant visa petition on which the application is based has been
revoked. See proposed 8 CFR 245.25(a). DHS is also proposing, however, as discussed
in section IV.B., to amend its regulations governing revocation of petition approval so
that employment-based immigrant visa petitions that have been approved for 180 days or
more would no longer have such approval automatically revoked based only on
withdrawal by the petitioner or termination of the petitioner’s business. See proposed 8
CFR 205.1(a)(3)(iii)(C) and (D). As long as such an approval has not been revoked for
fraud, material misrepresentation, the invalidation or revocation of a labor certification,
or USCIS error, the petition would generally continue to be valid for purposes of section
204(j) job portability and certain status extension purposes under the immigration laws. Such a petition, however, cannot on its own serve as the basis for obtaining an
immigrant visa or adjustment of status as there is no longer a bona fide employment offer
related to the petition. Id. In such cases, the beneficiary will need a new immigrant visa
petition approved on his or her behalf, or a new offer of employment in section 204(j)
portability cases, in order to obtain an immigrant visa or adjust status."

BUMMER. I know ...I too read in the proposed rule now that one still needs an immigration petition. F***!!!!! I am frustrated as I would have gotten a good job offer if this were true. I have also emailed Oh Law firm to update their post. This sucks big time. Thanks for updating.

stuckinline
12-30-2015, 02:52 PM
For those of us who have not filed AoS and have I-140 approved for 180 days, my take is:

No I-140 revocation by employer.
Infinite H1-B renewals with any employer and without "same or similar" restrictions - which is one of the few good things I can see here.
No need to redo I-140 with the new employer until you are within "striking distance" of filing for AoS i.e. within (say) a year of your PD becoming current.
There is a curious silence on whether to redo PERM. Maybe PERM modernization (https://www.shipimmigration.com/modernization-taking-shape-perm-recruitment-changes/) will shed some light on this.
Misc safety valves like (short and hard to get) EAD and "Grace periods".


My takeaway is:

It is obvious that we are outgunned by lobbyists and special interests. This rule looks like it was written by AILA lobbyists to keep their membership employed and to minimize the damage to Companies. Kudos to IV who managed to deliver something amidst all this opposition. This is far short of what we wanted, but the ability to transfer H1 fearlessly, is a win.
We should push for removing the need for a new PERM when doing subsequent I-140's. Without having to redo PREM, I-140 is an easy document for most legitimate employers. I don't think anything else is possible - we will have to wait for guidance from IV as to what else they think is doable.
We should be focusing on HR.213 (https://www.congress.gov/bill/114th-congress/house-bill/213). The EO has taken a life of its own now and our ability to influence it is very limited.

DMX17
12-30-2015, 03:12 PM
No need to redo I-140 with the new employer until you are within "striking distance" of filing for AoS i.e. within (say) a year of your PD becoming current.



Where do you see this? I am sure, on reading the pages, that we will have to redo PERM +I-140 on employer change unless you already have filed I-485 and 180 days are gone.

This is the main win for AILA/lawyers and employers got more access to cheap H-1Bs for eternity. All other things are peanuts. Immigrants got peanuts, while AILA not only prevented losing their several billions $$ but in fact created more business opportunities for themselves by adding paperwork. In fact, they created more of a "moveable feast" for lawyers. They have reasons to celebrate the 31 st!

rohan_vus123
12-30-2015, 03:26 PM
Where do you see this? I am sure, on reading the pages, that we will have to redo PERM +I-140 on employer change unless you already have filed I-485 and 180 days are gone.

This is the main win for AILA/lawyers and employers got more access to cheap H-1Bs for eternity. All other things are peanuts. Immigrants got peanuts, while AILA not only prevented losing their several billions $$ but in fact created more business opportunities for themselves by adding paperwork. In fact, they created more of a "moveable feast" for lawyers. They have reasons to celebrate the 31 st!

I think he meant that now there is no urgency for one to do new PERM with a new employer all the time unless you are nearing your PD. Earlier on any every such change as office , employer,etc.. you have to redo GC each time to hold on to the PD lest 140 should be revoked.. Now it wont be necessary for PD retention . It wont really help by having another 140 approved ( you already have first 140 for PD retention) when one is not sure of sticking to that employer ...
Now that 140 can remain valid forever for H1 extension one can save money /time by not doing any interim GCs anymore until you see your PD in sight ( a year or 2 ) ... When your PD is insight then at that time file PERM again with the employer with whom you are at that point

Just my take on his opinion ....could be wrong ..

DMX17
12-30-2015, 03:35 PM
I think he meant that now there is no urgency for one to do new PERM with a new employer all the time unless you are nearing your PD. Earlier on any every such change as office , employer,etc.. you have to redo GC each time to hold on to the PD lest 140 should be revoked.. Now it wont be necessary for PD retention . It wont really help by having another 140 approved ( you already have first 140 for PD retention) when one is not sure of sticking to that employer ...
Now that 140 can remain valid forever for H1 extension one can save money /time by not doing any interim GCs anymore until you see your PD in sight ( a year or 2 ) ... When your PD is insight then at that time file PERM again with the employer with whom you are at that point

Just my take on his opinion ....could be wrong ..

Makes sense from a personal point of view. On the flip side, our friends (lawyers) are not so dumb and WILL advise the employers to not start GC process until 5 more years of "jail time". Could go either way. For first time PERM/I-140 we have one way to pressure employer (my H-1 time is ending!!) but the next employer has an answer "you have infinite time since you already have an approved I-140".

I guess one way to retire back home is just continue on H-1Bs forever and cash out that 401K and get the Fck out.

DMX17
12-30-2015, 03:38 PM
Makes sense from a personal point of view. On the flip side, our friends (lawyers) are not so dumb and WILL advise the employers to not start GC process until 5 more years of "jail time". Could go either way. For first time PERM/I-140 we have one way to pressure employer (my H-1 time is ending!!) but the next employer has an answer "you have infinite time since you already have an approved I-140".

I guess one way to retire back home is just continue on H-1Bs forever and cash out that 401K and get the Fck out.

Forgot to mention, our kids will sponsor us. Don't tell the employers how old your kids are!:D

stuckinline
12-30-2015, 03:48 PM
I think he meant that now there is no urgency for one to do new PERM with a new employer all the time unless you are nearing your PD. Earlier on any every such change as office , employer,etc.. you have to redo GC each time to hold on to the PD lest 140 should be revoked.. Now it wont be necessary for PD retention . It wont really help by having another 140 approved ( you already have first 140 for PD retention) when one is not sure of sticking to that employer ...
Now that 140 can remain valid forever for H1 extension one can save money /time by not doing any interim GCs anymore until you see your PD in sight ( a year or 2 ) ... When your PD is insight then at that time file PERM again with the employer with whom you are at that point

Just my take on his opinion ....could be wrong ..
That's exactly right.

The positive part of this system is no "same or similar" restrictions. For eg, if you are in IT and want to switch to Management Consulting, just get an H1-B sponsored and start the new job. When your time comes, get a new PERM for Management Consulting and redo the GC process.

We are back to where we were years 1-6 of our H1-B, which most of us might have forgotten was much better than this hell.


It isn't what we wanted, but it is definitely some relief. It is better than nothing.

There might be more relief coming on the PERM side of things when DOL releases PERM modernization regulations - so PERM might not be that big of a deal. As I said earlier, the regulation is curiously silent of whether a PERM will be needed or not.

stuckinline
12-30-2015, 03:53 PM
Makes sense from a personal point of view. On the flip side, our friends (lawyers) are not so dumb and WILL advise the employers to not start GC process until 5 more years of "jail time". Could go either way. For first time PERM/I-140 we have one way to pressure employer (my H-1 time is ending!!) but the next employer has an answer "you have infinite time since you already have an approved I-140".

The pressure goes both ways - right. The employer is going to say, "I am going to pay you 10K less because we have to spend $$$ on lawyers for the expensive GC process".

I would prefer the proposed new system where it just costs 2K to change jobs and if you get close to your PD, you can blackmail your employer into doing I-140 :D - or finding a new job.

I guess one way to retire back home is just continue on H-1Bs forever and cash out that 401K and get the Fck out.
If we can do HR.213 (https://www.congress.gov/bill/114th-congress/house-bill/213), there is no need for that.

kaca
12-30-2015, 04:02 PM
While it will be good to get HR 213 passed it is not going to clear the backlog. 85% of 40,000 visas is about 34000. For the date to become current from 2008 to 2016 it will take many years even if we get 34,000 EB2 visa each year for Indians. Mean while lot of EB3 will be porting to EB2 as well. So it will be 5 to 6 more years to become current.
A better solution would be in addition to HR 213 we need the rule to eliminate defendants from being counted for the visa numbers also if they can recapture the unused visas so far then we have a good change of getting GC. Paul Ryan is not going to bring up the HR 213 until the 2016 elections.

stuckinline
12-30-2015, 04:08 PM
While it will be good to get HR 213 passed it is not going to clear the backlog. 85% of 40,000 visas is about 34000. For the date to become current from 2008 to 2016 it will take many years even if we get 34,000 EB2 visa each year for Indians. Mean while lot of EB3 will be porting to EB2 as well. So it will be 5 to 6 more years to become current.
A better solution would be in addition to HR 213 we need the rule to eliminate defendants from being counted for the visa numbers also if they can recapture the unused visas so far then we have a good change of getting GC. Paul Ryan is not going to bring up the HR 213 until the 2016 elections.

Yes, there are obvious and better solutions, but we need to think in terms of what is politically possible. HR.213 (https://www.congress.gov/bill/114th-congress/house-bill/213) is the only thing that can be passed in this environment. Anything that increases net immigration - like recapture or dependent exemption will not go anywhere outside of CIR.

Even Democrats will oppose recapture/dependent exemption because it doesn't solve undocumented problem and they want to use it as a pressure point for the undocumented.

tapanhp
12-30-2015, 04:44 PM
Did anyone see anything on what, according to the proposed rule, would happen to a previously revoked I-140 (due to employer withdrawing the approved I-140)?

If such an I-140 was withdrawn by employer before the proposed rule goes in to effect, would the employee still be able to avail these benefits for job portability?

DMX17
12-30-2015, 04:59 PM
The pressure goes both ways - right. The employer is going to say, "I am going to pay you 10K less because we have to spend $$$ on lawyers for the expensive GC process".

I would prefer the proposed new system where it just costs 2K to change jobs and if you get close to your PD, you can blackmail your employer into doing I-140 :D - or finding a new job.


If we can do HR.213 (https://www.congress.gov/bill/114th-congress/house-bill/213), there is no need for that.

I guess what you said applies to IT consulting where they place someone for some time to do certain project with the maximum charge rate possible as they make it rain temporarily. I am not in IT/consulting. Not all have that much bargaining power in the employer-employee dealings.

In the jobs I apply (or dream of getting), they want long-term employees with no immigration hassle. The fact that they will have to either now or later go through immigration process ends my application right there in most cases. So basically, I have to stick with employers who are willing to do H-1B/GC process and it is the same rut. This is where HR policies are (or will be made in light of this new rule) handy and they will be designed by lawyers.

So while I see your point and possibility of endless H-1B renewals, I think it does not help people like me who were hoping to jump out of this rut. I-140 EAD/AP would have greatly helped.

DMX17
12-30-2015, 05:02 PM
Did anyone see anything on what, according to the proposed rule, would happen to a previously revoked I-140 (due to employer withdrawing the approved I-140)?

If such an I-140 was withdrawn by employer before the proposed rule goes in to effect, would the employee still be able to avail these benefits for job portability?

Previously revoked I-140s are long gone in heaven. When the rule goes in effect, from that day onward, they will not be able to revoke "then-valid" I-140s.

You best forget that I-140 that got away before the rule!

HumHongeKaamyaab
12-30-2015, 05:11 PM
Oh Law Firm website has now retracted their note about NEW PERM and I-140 not being required. Ive been emailing them and telling them that this is not as good a news as the EB community was hoping for. Oh well...(no pun intended)...I had wished for some good news for the next year...no such thing is happening.

stuckinline
12-30-2015, 05:16 PM
I guess what you said applies to IT consulting where they place someone for some time to do certain project with the maximum charge rate possible as they make it rain temporarily. I am not in IT/consulting. Not all have that much bargaining power in the employer-employee dealings.

In the jobs I apply (or dream of getting), they want long-term employees with no immigration hassle. The fact that they will have to either now or later go through immigration process ends my application right there in most cases. So basically, I have to stick with employers who are willing to do H-1B/GC process and it is the same rut. This is where HR policies are (or will be made in light of this new rule) handy and they will be designed by lawyers.

So while I see your point and possibility of endless H-1B renewals, I think it does not help people like me who were hoping to jump out of this rut. I-140 EAD/AP would have greatly helped.
I think we are all going to have to get good at explaining the nuances of immigration law to perspective employers.

HumHongeKaamyaab
12-30-2015, 05:40 PM
I guess what you said applies to IT consulting where they place someone for some time to do certain project with the maximum charge rate possible as they make it rain temporarily. I am not in IT/consulting. Not all have that much bargaining power in the employer-employee dealings.

In the jobs I apply (or dream of getting), they want long-term employees with no immigration hassle. The fact that they will have to either now or later go through immigration process ends my application right there in most cases. So basically, I have to stick with employers who are willing to do H-1B/GC process and it is the same rut. This is where HR policies are (or will be made in light of this new rule) handy and they will be designed by lawyers.

So while I see your point and possibility of endless H-1B renewals, I think it does not help people like me who were hoping to jump out of this rut. I-140 EAD/AP would have greatly helped.

Right there with you DMX17!!! I have nothing to do with IT either and earlier this year had a company offer me more than 40% of what I make and would have been a leadership position managing a team of about 20. I worked hard to get to that level of expertise in my field and now when the time is right, the opportunity is available, guess what threq up a red flag..my FRIGGIN IMMIGRATION STATUS! They had a policy of not filing for green cards or H1Bs. I remember crying that night not because of the money, because I felt that everything I worked for, everything I stood for ..was shut down cos I wasnt born here OR was born in a country which suffers from backlogs. This is a company everyone has heard of and I was finally going to be part of it. I went through 6 rounds of interviews and when the final intake/HR round was going on, imagine my heart rate when the HR person said "Oh my god..I am so sorry...we dont sponsor foreign nationals". They gave me a t-shirt and sent me home. I work in the water sector which is deemed to be part of critical infrastructure in the US and is afforded a 'protected' status (along with other thing such as defense, agriculture, finance, education etc.).

Point is not the money, or the position I lost out on...point is that an eternally optimistic guy like me for the first time in my life was brought to his knees due to something out of his control...and that is a gut wrenching feeling that I hope no one ever has to go through. I am not applying to top B-schools OUTSIDE of the US becuase I have a MS degree, and used up my OPT and if I got ANOTHER Masters degree, I will not get an OPT.

Freedom is one thing that this country sells well and then does an equally good job of 'Bait and Switch'. Bravo USA I must hand it to you...you are nothing but one big greedy corporation and I cannot wait to say goodbye to you. Take your freedom and show it up your fat lazy freedom piece of shi* a**.

HumHongeKaamyaab
12-30-2015, 05:44 PM
Right there with you DMX17!!! I have nothing to do with IT either and earlier this year had a company offer me more than 40% of what I make and would have been a leadership position managing a team of about 20. I worked hard to get to that level of expertise in my field and now when the time is right, the opportunity is available, guess what threq up a red flag..my FRIGGIN IMMIGRATION STATUS! They had a policy of not filing for green cards or H1Bs. I remember crying that night not because of the money, because I felt that everything I worked for, everything I stood for ..was shut down cos I wasnt born here OR was born in a country which suffers from backlogs. This is a company everyone has heard of and I was finally going to be part of it. I went through 6 rounds of interviews and when the final intake/HR round was going on, imagine my heart rate when the HR person said "Oh my god..I am so sorry...we dont sponsor foreign nationals". They gave me a t-shirt and sent me home. I work in the water sector which is deemed to be part of critical infrastructure in the US and is afforded a 'protected' status (along with other thing such as defense, agriculture, finance, education etc.).

Point is not the money, or the position I lost out on...point is that an eternally optimistic guy like me for the first time in my life was brought to his knees due to something out of his control...and that is a gut wrenching feeling that I hope no one ever has to go through. I am not applying to top B-schools OUTSIDE of the US becuase I have a MS degree, and used up my OPT and if I got ANOTHER Masters degree, I will not get an OPT.

Freedom is one thing that this country sells well and then does an equally good job of 'Bait and Switch'. Bravo USA I must hand it to you...you are nothing but one big greedy corporation and I cannot wait to say goodbye to you. Take your freedom and show it up your fat lazy freedom piece of shi* a**.

TYPO: "I am NOW applying to top B-schools OUTSIDE of the US becuase I have a MS degree, and used up my OPT and if I got ANOTHER Masters degree, I will not get an OPT.

kaca
12-30-2015, 06:24 PM
I feel bad for you and for most of us. It is called as Karma. In India people suffer from the Reservation system. It is there regardless of the economic status of the person. Then people try hard to make it to US from India. Pakistanis and Bangladeshis don't suffer from backlog and they get GC in no time where as Indians suffer the worst. There is one solution though. If India gets divided into multiple countries then all our backlog problems would be solved :) Just joking don't wish that to happen.

FrankUnderwood
12-30-2015, 06:35 PM
So finally, the b@st@rds at AILA and the lawyer lobby was successful in beating the sh*t out of our pants.

Thanks to all the losers who have been feeding these crooked pieces of crappy lobbyists/lawyers.

The only step to be taken from this point is to rally behind HR213.

-FU

jaggu bhai
12-30-2015, 07:33 PM
12/30/2015: I-140 Portability Posting Withdrawn for Error. SAME WEBSITE says this too.

freedomForAll
12-30-2015, 09:33 PM
Friends - It is clear from today that there are clear roadblocks in getting EADs/APs for backlogged folks like me and everyone here.

I was wondering this :-
1) Most of us want GCs to start businesses/startups or private practices. Have you guys explored doing this overseas while working here and saving money for that? IN fact, it might be cheaper and easier if you have trustworthy friends or family to do them in India/China or Australia(they have excellent immigration system based on what I heard).

I dont know how much you can send abroad for investment but I am sure a lawyer( only for their advise and nothing more :) ).

If we actually do something like this( sure that this is already happening) and post comments clearly telling them that this hurting the US economy, then perhaps they will think about it).

We get 2 things from this - If they listen and give us EAD/AP , then good for everyone . If they dont, then atleast you move with your plans to send money overseas while earning money in the US . Right :)

Does not matter where you start your practise or business these days. Why wait 10-30 years to do this. Why not just do it? The only difference will be that we will do it in another country. let this country loose its edge. If USCIS/DHS does not care, why should we ?

My intention is to find what works for our dreams here rahter than just waiting and whining. Dont get me wrong. I hate the lobbies that blocked all this and I know very clearly of what happened. Just follow the money and you will know the answer. IV seems to be the only one convincing enough for me which shows things happening behind our backs and trying to get this.

IV - You are fantastic guys! The fact that you got this much in spite of all those blockages in here, is like climbing the Himalayas . You guys rock! We will get better than them some day :)

I will call my congressman again and ask for HR 213 support. No harm in trying.

JustADesi
12-30-2015, 10:41 PM
The new propose EAD rule is expected to out soon ( as early as tomorrow according to THE OH LAW FIRM )

The new rule required compelling circumstances for applying & renewal.



p) Eligibility for employment authorization in compelling circumstances(1)
Eligibility of principal alien. An individual who is the principal beneficiary of an
approved immigrant petition for classification under sections 203(b)(1), 203(b)(2) or
203(b)(3) of the Act may be eligible to receive employment authorization, upon
application, if:
(i) In the case of an initial request for employment authorization, the individual is
in E-3, H-1B, H-1B1, O-1, or L-1 nonimmigrant status at the time the application for
employment authorization is filed;
(ii) An immigrant visa is not immediately available to the principal beneficiary
based on his or her priority date at the time the application for employment authorization
is filed; and
(iii) USCIS determines, as a matter of discretion, that the principal beneficiary
demonstrates compelling circumstances that justify the issuance of employment
authorization.
(2) Eligibility of spouses and children. The family members, as described in
section 203(d) of the Act, of a principal beneficiary, who are in nonimmigrant status at
152
the time the principal beneficiary applies for employment authorization under paragraph
(p)(1) of this section, are eligible to apply for employment authorization provided that the
principal beneficiary has been granted employment authorization under paragraph (p) of
this section and such employment authorization has not been terminated or revoked.
Such family members may apply for employment authorization concurrently with the
principal beneficiary, but cannot be granted employment authorization until the principal
beneficiary is so authorized. The validity period of employment authorization granted to
family members may not extend beyond the validity period of employment authorization
granted to the principal beneficiary.
(3) Subject to paragraph (p)(5) of this section, an alien may be eligible to receive
renewal of employment authorization under paragraph (p) of this section, upon
application, if:
(i) He or she is the principal beneficiary of an approved immigrant petition for
classification under sections 203(b)(1), 203(b)(2) or 203(b)(3) of the Act and either:
(A) USCIS determines, as a matter of discretion, that the principal beneficiary
continues to demonstrate compelling circumstances that justify the issuance of
employment authorization, or
(B) The difference between the principal beneficiary’s priority date and the date
upon which immigrant visas are authorized for issuance for the principal beneficiary’s
preference category and country of chargeability is 1 year or less according to the current
Department of State Visa Bulletin; or
153
(ii) Is a family member, as described under paragraph (p)(2) of this section, of a
principal beneficiary satisfying the requirements under paragraph (p)(3)(i) of this section,
except that the family member need not be maintaining nonimmigrant status at the time
the principal beneficiary applies for renewal employment authorization under paragraph
(p) of this section.

gnh
01-04-2016, 08:39 PM
TYPO: "I am NOW applying to top B-schools OUTSIDE of the US becuase I have a MS degree, and used up my OPT and if I got ANOTHER Masters degree, I will not get an OPT.

You knew the condition of the GC quota for Indians a long time back.. So no point in crying now

HumHongeKaamyaab
01-04-2016, 11:03 PM
You knew the condition of the GC quota for Indians a long time back.. So no point in crying now

No I didnt before coming to the US but thanks for rubbing it in...typical of us Indians isnt it...you should be commenting on EAD for I-140 rule..not stating the obvious..

casinoking
01-04-2016, 11:47 PM
You knew the condition of the GC quota for Indians a long time back.. So no point in crying now
Condition of GC was not the same 10 years ago or may be 20 yrs ago. Judging someone retroactively is not correct.

gnh
01-05-2016, 10:16 AM
No I didnt before coming to the US but thanks for rubbing it in...typical of us Indians isnt it...you should be commenting on EAD for I-140 rule..not stating the obvious..

My only point is far too many comments on the rule are sob stories . No one cares about sob stories of high paid H1B workers who want to get paid even more thro the rule changes .

If more comments would be based on what giving H1B workers more flexibility would mean to the American economy it would be more beneficial IMO. And the fact that the current situation depresses wages of American workers by keeping us bound with these restrictive rules.

And yes I already commented on the rule.

DMX17
01-05-2016, 10:53 AM
My only point is far too many comments on the rule are sob stories . No one cares about sob stories of high paid H1B workers who want to get paid even more thro the rule changes .

If more comments would be based on what giving H1B workers more flexibility would mean to the American economy it would be more beneficial IMO. And the fact that the current situation depresses wages of American workers by keeping us bound with these restrictive rules.

And yes I already commented on the rule.

I agree with this. But a good meaningful personal story (e.g. how you are not able to contribute to economy/start up a company etc) can be a good way to start (no matter it is useful or not). Just my opinion.

Back to American workers....


This rule ignores the majority population i.e. American workers. Cost benefit analysis is rigged as it is presented as if immigrants are a cost to employers and there is a “turn over cost” (which would conversely and rightly also prove there is "retention benefit"). In my opinion, the most important reason (but less talked about) was mentioned albeit rarely as “raise wages for all Americans” (from the President’s memo back in Nov 2014). You may be thinking that your job, as an individual, is not depressing wages but as a whole this is a system designed to achieve just that and majority immigrants are used as tool without their knowledge (mind you not “some people” as lawyers would want you to believe i.e. “there are always bad apples”). As Aman said, we did not wake up one day in our home country and thought to ourselves “how about going to America and depress wages there?” We had no clue then and most still have no clue!

Shourie
01-05-2016, 11:16 AM
Right there with you DMX17!!! I have nothing to do with IT either and earlier this year had a company offer me more than 40% of what I make and would have been a leadership position managing a team of about 20. I worked hard to get to that level of expertise in my field and now when the time is right, the opportunity is available, guess what threq up a red flag..my FRIGGIN IMMIGRATION STATUS! They had a policy of not filing for green cards or H1Bs. I remember crying that night not because of the money, because I felt that everything I worked for, everything I stood for ..was shut down cos I wasnt born here OR was born in a country which suffers from backlogs. This is a company everyone has heard of and I was finally going to be part of it. I went through 6 rounds of interviews and when the final intake/HR round was going on, imagine my heart rate when the HR person said "Oh my god..I am so sorry...we dont sponsor foreign nationals". They gave me a t-shirt and sent me home. I work in the water sector which is deemed to be part of critical infrastructure in the US and is afforded a 'protected' status (along with other thing such as defense, agriculture, finance, education etc.).

Point is not the money, or the position I lost out on...point is that an eternally optimistic guy like me for the first time in my life was brought to his knees due to something out of his control...and that is a gut wrenching feeling that I hope no one ever has to go through. I am not applying to top B-schools OUTSIDE of the US becuase I have a MS degree, and used up my OPT and if I got ANOTHER Masters degree, I will not get an OPT.

Freedom is one thing that this country sells well and then does an equally good job of 'Bait and Switch'. Bravo USA I must hand it to you...you are nothing but one big greedy corporation and I cannot wait to say goodbye to you. Take your freedom and show it up your fat lazy freedom piece of shi* a**.

I am in exactly same position. I don't have anything to do with IT and I have had offers from companies which would give any one in my field wet dreams at night. I managed to convince everyone to hire me based on my credentials, all the while dreading about the last question from the HR about the visa sponsorship. It has been an amazing test of endurance and patience, just in hope that someday I would wake up happy and wouldn't be scared of that last question. Seeing how well the illegal immigrants were getting treated, including the drug peddlers and gang members, I expected I would be treated a little better.

I guess I have lost the gumption even to apply for any new opportunity now. I guess it is simply insulting your intelligence when you know you have all the credentials, but you won't be hired. I don't know how many here feel like that ,but this feeling seems like resignation to fate.

The thing that miffed me most is that after crafting the whole fucking rule, how after any rational analysis did the USCIS people or any of the retards who crafted it came to a conclusion that this gives people with approved I-140 any respite. Well, I used to like liberal people but I guess they are just a bunch of bleeding hearts liberal retards who want to advance the communist agenda by making sure that there is no surplus and everybody shares their produce. Don't work hard there ain't no reward for that. Unbelievable fucking thing but true.

HumHongeKaamyaab
01-05-2016, 01:47 PM
I am in exactly same position. I don't have anything to do with IT and I have had offers from companies which would give any one in my field wet dreams at night. I managed to convince everyone to hire me based on my credentials, all the while dreading about the last question from the HR about the visa sponsorship. It has been an amazing test of endurance and patience, just in hope that someday I would wake up happy and wouldn't be scared of that last question. Seeing how well the illegal immigrants were getting treated, including the drug peddlers and gang members, I expected I would be treated a little better.

I guess I have lost the gumption even to apply for any new opportunity now. I guess it is simply insulting your intelligence when you know you have all the credentials, but you won't be hired. I don't know how many here feel like that ,but this feeling seems like resignation to fate.

The thing that miffed me most is that after crafting the whole fucking rule, how after any rational analysis did the USCIS people or any of the retards who crafted it came to a conclusion that this gives people with approved I-140 any respite. Well, I used to like liberal people but I guess they are just a bunch of bleeding hearts liberal retards who want to advance the communist agenda by making sure that there is no surplus and everybody shares their produce. Don't work hard there ain't no reward for that. Unbelievable fucking thing but true.

Well said. Unbelievable yet true. Sorry to hear about your situation too. I just wish I knew all of this back in India before thinking of coming here. Even the HR people felt bad for me when this happened to me. I went to Kellogg MBA program office to show my resume and was told I have a 'Strong' profile..BUT my "hireability" (Yeah, that is a word they use) is affected due to my immigration status i.e. if we accept you, chances you will not find a job because no one will want to hire an immigrant and take on their paperwork, SO even though you are capable, you can adversely affect our hiring stats, so bye bye now.