javadeveloper
07-20 09:51 PM
OK agreed , when it's a law we should abide by them.But what are the other options available for B? He can't be covered under 245(K) so this option is ruled out.He needs to forget about GC? Will it be helpful if he contacts good lawyer any hope? Or just rely on luck?
wallpaper free dragon wallpaper.
dipu76
06-01 05:53 PM
I just happened to see a copy of my labor approval. My current salary is less than the salary mentioned in labor approval. Do you know whether it is legally valid?. My salary is as per the LCA for H1.
realist
11-19 02:10 PM
Were none of the people who tried from May of this year on this thread unsuccessful in getting their sibling here? Please help
2011 3d dragon wallpaper no753
gcdreamer05
03-09 05:56 PM
Nice dream but come to reality, dont even dream of GC till year 2019...... (if it goes in current pace).
more...
varumo_varatho
11-08 10:43 AM
Speaking of my personal experience, Yes, you can get an emergency appointment as returning h1b's are eligible for such appointments. Just send an email directly to the consulate and request for emergency appointment stating that you have to return to your project. I have done it before
It is advisable to carry all the LCA's, just in case, though the VO might just look at the current one. I am sure you will be taking all the other docs required.
Best of luck
cheers !
It is advisable to carry all the LCA's, just in case, though the VO might just look at the current one. I am sure you will be taking all the other docs required.
Best of luck
cheers !
sam_hoosier
08-25 11:54 AM
Before someone gives you answer...can you answer this. Why someone should help you or provide any answer to you. In the last two years your post count is 5. So never participated in any drive, help fund raise....first IV need to get ride of selfish &*^%& like you. I wish and request others not to answer you...
Dude, you could have made the same point witout being rude. We claim to be educated people, trying to get a greencard based on our educational qualifications/skills. Lets try & demonstrate some civil behavior first :mad:
Dude, you could have made the same point witout being rude. We claim to be educated people, trying to get a greencard based on our educational qualifications/skills. Lets try & demonstrate some civil behavior first :mad:
more...
Riakapoor
09-16 04:10 PM
you can apply for UI - Unemployment insurance, NOT Unemployment benefit. The first is an insurance, the second a benefit that will impact your GC application.
Does that not effect our GC process at all? Do you know the time limit to apply for UI? I mean with in how many days after getting laid off can I apply for UI?
Thanks a ton!
Does that not effect our GC process at all? Do you know the time limit to apply for UI? I mean with in how many days after getting laid off can I apply for UI?
Thanks a ton!
2010 Free Gaze of the Dragon
iamgsprabhu
04-20 04:36 PM
I am now confused, do we have to pay for the EAD renewal fee, has some thing changed ? let me know the fee for renewal.
FYI: My 485 receipt date is Aug 12 2007.
FYI: My 485 receipt date is Aug 12 2007.
more...
cool_desi_gc
11-15 07:32 AM
My name was misspelt on my FP notice as well.when i went for FP couple of weeks back, they could not make the change there.I told them about the name misspelt, they informed that I have to call the 1-800 number and get it changed.
hair free dragon wallpaper. chinese
sw33t
05-31 11:46 AM
/\/\/\
more...
gcisadawg
04-07 05:08 PM
I did extended for my in-laws when they entered last time to US. When they entered next time they entered without any issues.
A quick question. Did you extend after the initial 6 month period? I had a friend who extended the original 3 months and received another 3 months.
rgds,
g
A quick question. Did you extend after the initial 6 month period? I had a friend who extended the original 3 months and received another 3 months.
rgds,
g
hot Free Dragon Wallpapers; free
Blog Feeds
07-09 12:30 PM
AILA Leadership Has Just Posted the Following:
While the 1986 Immigration Reform and Control Act (�IRCA�) prohibits employers from knowingly hiring or continuing to employ unauthorized workers, the Obama Administration�s decision to vigorously enforce employer sanction laws against employers, before providing a path to U.S. employers to legalize critical essential workers, is plain bad policy. �Immigration officers are investigating workplaces in every state in the US to check whether they are hiring illegal workers.� ICE launches workplace immigration crackdown (http://www.google.com/hostednews/ap/article/ALeqM5h_EhhmjIcqAzvJainjWnJTLRylXQD995P1T80)
We are in the midst of the �Great Recession� and U.S. industry is struggling to remain competitive. President Barack Obama�s strategy puts U.S. employers and industry between a rock and a hard place. While the law requires U.S. employers to verify, through a specific process, the identity and work authorization eligibility of all individuals, whether U.S. citizens or otherwise, it is practically impossible to obtain legal status for employers who discover undocumented workers in their workforce � even if they have been employed for decades. Immigrant Visa Numbers Hopelessly Encased In Amber (http://ailaleadership.blogspot.com/2009/06/immigrant-visa-numbers-hopelessly.html).
The diligent employer questioning the veracity of employment eligibility documents can face discrimination charges and vigorous enforcement by the U.S. Department of Justice, if for example, they check only Latino workers, or subject certain classes or worker to extra scrutiny. The U.S. Department of Justice Office of Special Counsel enforces the antidiscrimination provisions that protect most work-authorized persons from intentional employment discrimination based upon citizenship or immigration status, national origin, and unfair documentary practices relating to the employment eligibility verification process. The law prohibits retaliation against individuals who file charges and who cooperate with an investigation. Office of Special Counsel for Immigration-Related Unfair ... (http://www.usdoj.gov/crt/osc/)
No one knows how many of the 6,000,000 U.S. employers, as well as household employers, are familiar with, and in full compliance with the complex U.S. immigration law. Many employers are surprised when told the law requires ALL employers to complete an Employment Verification Form I-9 for any new employee hired after November 6, 1986, or face huge civil fines, and possible jail sentences. The I-9 Employee Verification form must be completed within three days of hire for all hires including U.S. citizens.
Vigorously enforcing this law without providing employers any way to keep essential workers puts employers struggling to make ends meet with the possibility of receiving huge fines, and even prison sentences if they "knowing continuing to hire five or more workers." Actual knowledge of the undocumented worker's status isn't always required, and "constructive knowledge" will suffice where the employer "should have known" of the worker's status. For example, if the employer tries to sponsor an undocumented worker for immigration benefits, the employer is presumed to know of the workers lack of immigration status. The Department of Homeland Security, through its enforcement division, Immigration and Customs Enforcements (ICE) has undertaken a massive new enforcement effort directed at employers large and small. More than 650 US businesses to have employee work files audited (http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/lanow/2009/07/more-than-650-businesses-nationwide-to-have-employee-work-files-inspected.html) Los Angeles Times - ?Jul 1, 2009.?
The focus on audit enforcement is clearly evidenced by the rising number of worksite audits, increased heavy civil penalties and likely continuing criminal prosecutions resulting from worksite violations. Immigration Focus Is on the Employers (http://www.nytimes.com/2009/07/02/us/02immig.html?ref=global-home) New York Times - ?Jul 1, 2009? �The Obama administration began investigations of hundreds of businesses on Wednesday as part of its strategy to focus immigration.�
While employers need to be extremely cautious and take steps to ensure that their employee verification papers are in order, the government needs to fix the immigration mess BEFORE pursuing this new aggressive policy of conducting ICE AUDIT "RAIDS�. Employers should be given an opportunity to pursue a legal path for essential workers before the Immigration and Customs Enforcement officers come �knocking at the door.�
http://www.latimes.com/news/local/la-me-immigemploy2-2009jul02,0,7434438.story (http://www.latimes.com/news/local/la-me-immigemploy2-2009jul02,0,7434438.story) Los Angeles Times: L.A. employers face immigration audits.
Many employers are caught in a Catch-22 when it comes to employee verification. �If you�re in the roofing business, if you�re in the concrete business, you don�t have American-born workers showing up at your door ... you have Hispanic workers showing up at your door, and they have what looks to be a legitimate Social Security card ... under our current law, if they have a card that looks legitimate and you don�t hire them because you suspect they are illegal, then you are guilty of discrimination and could be investigated by the U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission that�s the current system and it�s broken." Said Norman Adams, co-founder of Texans for Sensible Immigration Policy to the Houston Chronicle: Immigration crackdown goes after employers. http://www.chron.com/disp/story.mpl/special/immigration/6506722.html (http://www.chron.com/disp/story.mpl/special/immigration/6506722.html)
Vigorously enforcing these laws without providing an option to employers is plain bad policy and it could make our economic situation worse. My experience with the employer verification law is most employers are simply not familiar with all aspects of the complex immigration laws. Most employers don't know that if they question a legal worker�s documents, the U.S. Department of Justice (U.S.D.O.J.) may charge them with discrimination. The adverse impact on the economy and on the housing market could be serious. The substantial economic contribution of hard working immigrants is clear. Economic contributions of immigrants come in many forms in California. (http://topics.sacbee.com/California/) The California Immigrant Policy Center (http://topics.sacbee.com/California+Immigrant+Policy+Center/) estimates that the state's immigrants pay $30 billion in federal taxes, $5.2 billion in state income taxes, (http://topics.sacbee.com/state+income+taxes/) and $4.6 billion in sales taxes (http://topics.sacbee.com/sales+taxes/) each year. The Selig Center for Economic Growth (http://topics.sacbee.com/Selig+Center+for+Economic+Growth/) calculates that the purchasing power of Latino and Asian consumers in California (http://topics.sacbee.com/California/) totaled $412 billion in 2008 � nearly one-third of the state's total purchasing power. The U.S. Census Bureau (http://topics.sacbee.com/U.S.+Census+Bureau/) found that California (http://topics.sacbee.com/California/) businesses owned by Latinos and Asians constituted more than one-quarter of all businesses in the state as of 2002, employing 1.2 million people and generating sales and receipts of $183 billion. Where would our economy be without these immigrants? http://www.sacbee.com/opinion/story/1981220.html (http://www.sacbee.com/opinion/story/1981220.html) Sacramento Bee: Immigrants are not a fiscal drain.
Comprehensive immigration reform requires a path to legal status for the undocumented and an orderly system for future worker flows to allow U.S. industry to innovate and compete globally. It will require a complete overhaul of the government agencies that now mismanage a slew of immigration programs that could and should be the rejuvenating lifeblood of our nation. http://www.nytimes.com/2009/06/30/opinion/lweb30dream.html (http://www.nytimes.com/2009/06/30/opinion/lweb30dream.html) New York Times: Opening a Door to Young Immigrants.
The American Immigration Lawyers Association (AILA) understands the issues from a deep perspective, not merely from an emotional view. We believe that a sensible comprehensive immigration reform package will have to include smart enforcement, a path to citizenship for the 12 million undocumented immigrants currently living and working in the U.S., elimination of family and employment-based visa backlogs, adequate visas to meet the needs of U.S. families and businesses, a new visa program for essential workers to enable employers to legalize critically needed workers in agriculture, construction, and to provide future flows in certain areas including scientific fields, where as many as two thirds of our advanced degreed graduates are international students. We must also provide due process protections and restore the rule of law in immigration adjudications, and in our immigration courts. AILA Welcomes Obama's Proactive Push for Comprehensive Immigration Reform This Year (http://www.aila.org/content/default.aspx?docid=29372).https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/tracker/186823568153827945-4886898674742904565?l=ailaleadership.blogspot.com
More... (http://ailaleadership.blogspot.com/2009/07/ice-cracks-audit-whip.html)
While the 1986 Immigration Reform and Control Act (�IRCA�) prohibits employers from knowingly hiring or continuing to employ unauthorized workers, the Obama Administration�s decision to vigorously enforce employer sanction laws against employers, before providing a path to U.S. employers to legalize critical essential workers, is plain bad policy. �Immigration officers are investigating workplaces in every state in the US to check whether they are hiring illegal workers.� ICE launches workplace immigration crackdown (http://www.google.com/hostednews/ap/article/ALeqM5h_EhhmjIcqAzvJainjWnJTLRylXQD995P1T80)
We are in the midst of the �Great Recession� and U.S. industry is struggling to remain competitive. President Barack Obama�s strategy puts U.S. employers and industry between a rock and a hard place. While the law requires U.S. employers to verify, through a specific process, the identity and work authorization eligibility of all individuals, whether U.S. citizens or otherwise, it is practically impossible to obtain legal status for employers who discover undocumented workers in their workforce � even if they have been employed for decades. Immigrant Visa Numbers Hopelessly Encased In Amber (http://ailaleadership.blogspot.com/2009/06/immigrant-visa-numbers-hopelessly.html).
The diligent employer questioning the veracity of employment eligibility documents can face discrimination charges and vigorous enforcement by the U.S. Department of Justice, if for example, they check only Latino workers, or subject certain classes or worker to extra scrutiny. The U.S. Department of Justice Office of Special Counsel enforces the antidiscrimination provisions that protect most work-authorized persons from intentional employment discrimination based upon citizenship or immigration status, national origin, and unfair documentary practices relating to the employment eligibility verification process. The law prohibits retaliation against individuals who file charges and who cooperate with an investigation. Office of Special Counsel for Immigration-Related Unfair ... (http://www.usdoj.gov/crt/osc/)
No one knows how many of the 6,000,000 U.S. employers, as well as household employers, are familiar with, and in full compliance with the complex U.S. immigration law. Many employers are surprised when told the law requires ALL employers to complete an Employment Verification Form I-9 for any new employee hired after November 6, 1986, or face huge civil fines, and possible jail sentences. The I-9 Employee Verification form must be completed within three days of hire for all hires including U.S. citizens.
Vigorously enforcing this law without providing employers any way to keep essential workers puts employers struggling to make ends meet with the possibility of receiving huge fines, and even prison sentences if they "knowing continuing to hire five or more workers." Actual knowledge of the undocumented worker's status isn't always required, and "constructive knowledge" will suffice where the employer "should have known" of the worker's status. For example, if the employer tries to sponsor an undocumented worker for immigration benefits, the employer is presumed to know of the workers lack of immigration status. The Department of Homeland Security, through its enforcement division, Immigration and Customs Enforcements (ICE) has undertaken a massive new enforcement effort directed at employers large and small. More than 650 US businesses to have employee work files audited (http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/lanow/2009/07/more-than-650-businesses-nationwide-to-have-employee-work-files-inspected.html) Los Angeles Times - ?Jul 1, 2009.?
The focus on audit enforcement is clearly evidenced by the rising number of worksite audits, increased heavy civil penalties and likely continuing criminal prosecutions resulting from worksite violations. Immigration Focus Is on the Employers (http://www.nytimes.com/2009/07/02/us/02immig.html?ref=global-home) New York Times - ?Jul 1, 2009? �The Obama administration began investigations of hundreds of businesses on Wednesday as part of its strategy to focus immigration.�
While employers need to be extremely cautious and take steps to ensure that their employee verification papers are in order, the government needs to fix the immigration mess BEFORE pursuing this new aggressive policy of conducting ICE AUDIT "RAIDS�. Employers should be given an opportunity to pursue a legal path for essential workers before the Immigration and Customs Enforcement officers come �knocking at the door.�
http://www.latimes.com/news/local/la-me-immigemploy2-2009jul02,0,7434438.story (http://www.latimes.com/news/local/la-me-immigemploy2-2009jul02,0,7434438.story) Los Angeles Times: L.A. employers face immigration audits.
Many employers are caught in a Catch-22 when it comes to employee verification. �If you�re in the roofing business, if you�re in the concrete business, you don�t have American-born workers showing up at your door ... you have Hispanic workers showing up at your door, and they have what looks to be a legitimate Social Security card ... under our current law, if they have a card that looks legitimate and you don�t hire them because you suspect they are illegal, then you are guilty of discrimination and could be investigated by the U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission that�s the current system and it�s broken." Said Norman Adams, co-founder of Texans for Sensible Immigration Policy to the Houston Chronicle: Immigration crackdown goes after employers. http://www.chron.com/disp/story.mpl/special/immigration/6506722.html (http://www.chron.com/disp/story.mpl/special/immigration/6506722.html)
Vigorously enforcing these laws without providing an option to employers is plain bad policy and it could make our economic situation worse. My experience with the employer verification law is most employers are simply not familiar with all aspects of the complex immigration laws. Most employers don't know that if they question a legal worker�s documents, the U.S. Department of Justice (U.S.D.O.J.) may charge them with discrimination. The adverse impact on the economy and on the housing market could be serious. The substantial economic contribution of hard working immigrants is clear. Economic contributions of immigrants come in many forms in California. (http://topics.sacbee.com/California/) The California Immigrant Policy Center (http://topics.sacbee.com/California+Immigrant+Policy+Center/) estimates that the state's immigrants pay $30 billion in federal taxes, $5.2 billion in state income taxes, (http://topics.sacbee.com/state+income+taxes/) and $4.6 billion in sales taxes (http://topics.sacbee.com/sales+taxes/) each year. The Selig Center for Economic Growth (http://topics.sacbee.com/Selig+Center+for+Economic+Growth/) calculates that the purchasing power of Latino and Asian consumers in California (http://topics.sacbee.com/California/) totaled $412 billion in 2008 � nearly one-third of the state's total purchasing power. The U.S. Census Bureau (http://topics.sacbee.com/U.S.+Census+Bureau/) found that California (http://topics.sacbee.com/California/) businesses owned by Latinos and Asians constituted more than one-quarter of all businesses in the state as of 2002, employing 1.2 million people and generating sales and receipts of $183 billion. Where would our economy be without these immigrants? http://www.sacbee.com/opinion/story/1981220.html (http://www.sacbee.com/opinion/story/1981220.html) Sacramento Bee: Immigrants are not a fiscal drain.
Comprehensive immigration reform requires a path to legal status for the undocumented and an orderly system for future worker flows to allow U.S. industry to innovate and compete globally. It will require a complete overhaul of the government agencies that now mismanage a slew of immigration programs that could and should be the rejuvenating lifeblood of our nation. http://www.nytimes.com/2009/06/30/opinion/lweb30dream.html (http://www.nytimes.com/2009/06/30/opinion/lweb30dream.html) New York Times: Opening a Door to Young Immigrants.
The American Immigration Lawyers Association (AILA) understands the issues from a deep perspective, not merely from an emotional view. We believe that a sensible comprehensive immigration reform package will have to include smart enforcement, a path to citizenship for the 12 million undocumented immigrants currently living and working in the U.S., elimination of family and employment-based visa backlogs, adequate visas to meet the needs of U.S. families and businesses, a new visa program for essential workers to enable employers to legalize critically needed workers in agriculture, construction, and to provide future flows in certain areas including scientific fields, where as many as two thirds of our advanced degreed graduates are international students. We must also provide due process protections and restore the rule of law in immigration adjudications, and in our immigration courts. AILA Welcomes Obama's Proactive Push for Comprehensive Immigration Reform This Year (http://www.aila.org/content/default.aspx?docid=29372).https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/tracker/186823568153827945-4886898674742904565?l=ailaleadership.blogspot.com
More... (http://ailaleadership.blogspot.com/2009/07/ice-cracks-audit-whip.html)
more...
house Free blue dragon Wallpaper
shankar_thanu
07-27 09:10 AM
Very helpful man, thanks.
and yes, it would be helpful to have this somewhere in a prominent spot on IV..
and yes, it would be helpful to have this somewhere in a prominent spot on IV..
tattoo Free desktop dragon wallpapers
kewlchap
04-06 01:15 AM
Hello all,
Anyone knows if there is a certain length of time that I need to be employed with my GC sponsor after 485 approval?
I have heard 3-4 months, but I am wondering if there is legal time limit or if this is a "good faith" limit.
Appreciate responses.
Anyone knows if there is a certain length of time that I need to be employed with my GC sponsor after 485 approval?
I have heard 3-4 months, but I am wondering if there is legal time limit or if this is a "good faith" limit.
Appreciate responses.
more...
pictures Blue Dragon Mobile Wallpaper
JunRN
08-21 11:38 AM
Once they're through with July 2 or 3 filers, July 17th filers onwards will be next because there are just a handful who filed on July 4 to July 16. This news makes sense to me.
It seems Texas is moving fast now and so is Nebraska. We can see a big leap in the Receipting Up-date this coming Friday. Whew...mine is 2 receipting up-date away and got no privilege to see if checks got encashed because atty. paid the fees.
It seems Texas is moving fast now and so is Nebraska. We can see a big leap in the Receipting Up-date this coming Friday. Whew...mine is 2 receipting up-date away and got no privilege to see if checks got encashed because atty. paid the fees.
dresses free wallpaper,download free
beautifulMind
11-03 08:30 PM
The CIR bill is definitely coming back. Obama has mentioned it few times that solving the current immigration problem is one of his highest priority. Now we will need to wait and see what changes they can add to the existent CIR bill to help legals. But I would think most of the bill should remain the same since they have wasted a lot of time and effort in coming up with it
more...
makeup Dragon Ball Z Wallpapers
devamanohar
08-15 05:00 AM
Is it necessary to file second time with I-140 reciept?
What is the fee?
Do you have new form I-485 and I-765 (EAD)?
What is the fee?
Do you have new form I-485 and I-765 (EAD)?
girlfriend Free Firey Red Dragon
ps3539
03-22 01:59 AM
Do not think about your events.
Think about baby's life. Make him/ her a US Citizen.
That's a good gift you can give.
Think about baby's life. Make him/ her a US Citizen.
That's a good gift you can give.
hairstyles free dragon wallpapers.
bluekayal
08-20 05:41 PM
I spoke to a TSC Immigration Information Officer (not customer service). he says they have about 9000 service requests they are looking at. Generally they are not supposed to give status info, but this person does. He is a people-friendly officer.
mbartosik
09-12 07:34 PM
If you are on bench, not getting paid, your employer normally asks you to send him a letter stating that you are on vacation. This needs to be done every month. For the period you are on vacation, there may not be any pay stubs. Once you get any project, you will send your employer another letter saying that you are back and ready to work for them.
With this approach, you WILL NOT get any trouble from USCIS or anyone. If any RFP comes, then, employer will show these documents and clear the issues. I did this in the past and all my friends who were in different stages (like Labor filed, I-140 filed, 485 filed) also did and had no problems.
But as always it is advised that to talk to the lawyer who is working on your case is best suited to answer as that person is to submit the paper work.
If you are "on the bench" the employer is obligated to pay you.
If you state that you are on vacation when in fact your are "on bench", and later misrepresent being on the bench as vacation to USCIS you and your employer either committing fraud or conspiring to commit fraud.
The employer must allow for "on the bench" time in the salary quoted in the LCA that accompanies the I-129 for H1B. If "on the bench" time is not allowed for it probably invalidates the prevailing wage comparison.
If your employer does not allow for 'on the bench' time in the wage rates quoted, then there is a reasonable argument that you are not meeting prevailing wage, and are infact undercutting US wages (and then some of what Lou Dobbs says is right).
If you are a consultant you could drop the quoted salary on LCA (but must remain above prevailing wage) to allow for risk of "on the bench" or any other circumstances. That way there is money to cover any gap. However, that requires more trust in the middle man - employer.
I'm not sure if I've read it right, but it looks to me like you have made a public confession here.
Of course the period between projects is an ideal time for vacation, as there is no project schedule to deal with. So whether the law is being broken I guess depends on what the motivation is for the vacation, something that is hard to prove. If the employer says you are going to tell him that you are on vacation until he finds more work then that sounds illegal. If on the other hand if you say, "how about I take this opportunity for some vacation?", it is okay.
One would hope that USCIS expercise common sense. However, common sense could mean being suspicious of gaps because the system is clearly open to abuse.
With this approach, you WILL NOT get any trouble from USCIS or anyone. If any RFP comes, then, employer will show these documents and clear the issues. I did this in the past and all my friends who were in different stages (like Labor filed, I-140 filed, 485 filed) also did and had no problems.
But as always it is advised that to talk to the lawyer who is working on your case is best suited to answer as that person is to submit the paper work.
If you are "on the bench" the employer is obligated to pay you.
If you state that you are on vacation when in fact your are "on bench", and later misrepresent being on the bench as vacation to USCIS you and your employer either committing fraud or conspiring to commit fraud.
The employer must allow for "on the bench" time in the salary quoted in the LCA that accompanies the I-129 for H1B. If "on the bench" time is not allowed for it probably invalidates the prevailing wage comparison.
If your employer does not allow for 'on the bench' time in the wage rates quoted, then there is a reasonable argument that you are not meeting prevailing wage, and are infact undercutting US wages (and then some of what Lou Dobbs says is right).
If you are a consultant you could drop the quoted salary on LCA (but must remain above prevailing wage) to allow for risk of "on the bench" or any other circumstances. That way there is money to cover any gap. However, that requires more trust in the middle man - employer.
I'm not sure if I've read it right, but it looks to me like you have made a public confession here.
Of course the period between projects is an ideal time for vacation, as there is no project schedule to deal with. So whether the law is being broken I guess depends on what the motivation is for the vacation, something that is hard to prove. If the employer says you are going to tell him that you are on vacation until he finds more work then that sounds illegal. If on the other hand if you say, "how about I take this opportunity for some vacation?", it is okay.
One would hope that USCIS expercise common sense. However, common sense could mean being suspicious of gaps because the system is clearly open to abuse.
gc28262
07-01 05:55 PM
Here is a good link on non-compete clause. From what I heard, these clauses cannot be enforced in most of the cases.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Non-compete_agreement
I signed one last week knowing that it does not have much validity.
In doubt check with an attorney.
Hi All,
I had a previous empoyer A > Then a Prefered Vendor B > Then a Client C.
Now I have transferred my H1 to a Preferred Vendor X & Still working on same project with the Client C, but with a different contract all togeather.
Preferred Vendor X > the Client C
Now the issues is , my previous employeer A is harassing me ( Vendor B is having no problems) , asking for money or filing a legal case agaist me,as I have signed a non-compete agreement with them. Can he do so ?? what can be the worst consequences?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Non-compete_agreement
I signed one last week knowing that it does not have much validity.
In doubt check with an attorney.
Hi All,
I had a previous empoyer A > Then a Prefered Vendor B > Then a Client C.
Now I have transferred my H1 to a Preferred Vendor X & Still working on same project with the Client C, but with a different contract all togeather.
Preferred Vendor X > the Client C
Now the issues is , my previous employeer A is harassing me ( Vendor B is having no problems) , asking for money or filing a legal case agaist me,as I have signed a non-compete agreement with them. Can he do so ?? what can be the worst consequences?
Walang komento:
Mag-post ng isang Komento