PDA

View Full Version : Gurus, will HR 5921 end retrogression?


Jaime
06-23-2008, 08:19 PM
Hey Gurus, excuse my ignorance, but there is so much info floating around. Just a quick straightforward question:

If HR 5921 is enacted will that completely end EB-3 and EB-2 retrogression?

The bill calls for eliminating the per-country limit, so doesn't that effectively end retrogression by itself?

Any response would be really appreciated!!

grupak
06-23-2008, 08:28 PM
Hey Gurus, excuse my ignorance, but there is so much info floating around. Just a quick straightforward question:

If HR 5921 is enacted will that completely end EB-3 and EB-2 retrogression?

The bill calls for eliminating the per-country limit, so doesn't that effectively end retrogression by itself?

Any response would be really appreciated!!

Not a guru. The per country limit elimination is still within the 140K per yr based on PD.

Just eliminating per country limit will likely make the wait times equal for "every" immigrant similar not eliminate retrogression because demand is higher than supply. We also need more visa's to meet the demand. We need both these things.

IV has always tried to help every EB immigrant. These issues have been discussed in th past and no point starting another round again.

senthil1
06-23-2008, 08:30 PM
This will not eliminate Retrogession. But EB2 it will cut the PD by half and for EB3 marginal improvement in PD movement(May be an year or 2). But rest of world will be impacted negatively as they are enjoying priority now. Anyhow this bill combined with other 2 bills will almost eliminate the retrogession for EB2 and EB3 for everyone

Hey Gurus, excuse my ignorance, but there is so much info floating around. Just a quick straightforward question:

If HR 5921 is enacted will that completely end EB-3 and EB-2 retrogression?

The bill calls for eliminating the per-country limit, so doesn't that effectively end retrogression by itself?

Any response would be really appreciated!!

485Mbe4001
06-23-2008, 08:50 PM
The big question is IF the bill is enacted.

IMO, if this bill passes it will be a part of the other 2 bills (it will not pass standalone). it will help all parties if something is passed, everyone agrees that the current situation is a mess. The end result of the bill is never the same as the one it starts off with. There will be a number of compromises, horse-trading and sacrifices by 'concerned' lawmakers. I think we should worry about this when the bills go to the conference stage. Currently we should not waste time speculating about it. Last month there was a lot ROW/retrogressed blood spilt on this issue in a different thread.

Jaime
06-23-2008, 09:06 PM
This will not eliminate Retrogession. But EB2 it will cut the PD by half and for EB3 marginal improvement in PD movement(May be an year or 2). But rest of world will be impacted negatively as they are enjoying priority now. Anyhow this bill combined with other 2 bills will almost eliminate the retrogession for EB2 and EB3 for everyone

Thanks senthil, you are right, yet the combination of the bills will eliminate retrogression for people with STEM degrees only, right?

amsgc
06-23-2008, 09:09 PM
Jaime,

If people with STEM get out of the line, who does that make room for?!! :)

Think about it.

Thanks senthil, you are right, yet the combination of the bills will eliminate retrogression for people with STEM degrees only, right?

alterego
06-23-2008, 09:56 PM
AC21 recaptured about 230K visas. PDs were current for almost 4 yrs after that was enacted. So yeah visa recapture could make a huge difference. Eliminating per country caps would be tremendously helpful especially for EB3 India, but above all it would make the Visa bulletins a lot more predictable and even for all.
The STEM exemption bill, has a lot of Industry support and, it too would help by making way for the rest of the EB immigrants in the regular queue.
So in short they all help to speed up and streamline the process.

doxa
06-27-2008, 06:40 PM
This is an extremely bad bill.With India dominating not only the H1 visa quota and EB green cards applications but also body shops and “consulting” companies; eliminating the per country quota would massively and unfairly flood America with workers from India

Many defenders of the bill used flawed socio-economic reasons to justify their *shameful and selfish agenda. Unused visa for ROW (Other countries) is NOT because there are not enough skilled workers from other countries but because the uscis/dhs use the quota to conservatively hence at the end of the visa year there are still many quotas left. ROW priority date has never been current for a very long time

Would you prefer to work with 7 immigrants from India and OR 2 from India, 1 from Germany, 1 from Zimbabwe, 1 from Argentina, 1 from Slovakia and 1 from Burma? The bill will not only hurt professional immigrants from other countries but also will hurt diversity, the core and sacred believe of American people

ZeroComplexity
06-27-2008, 06:48 PM
Your logic would work only if H1-B is nationality based. How do you address the problem of thousands stuck in limbo? If you want diversity start that from point when a H1-B issued. We won't be in this mess if that' the case. Don't try to justify a flawed system for your selfish reasons.


This is an extremely bad bill.With India dominating not only the H1 visa quota and EB green cards applications but also body shops and “consulting” companies; eliminating the per country quota would massively and unfairly flood America with workers from India

Many defenders of the bill used flawed socio-economic reasons to justify their *shameful and selfish agenda. Unused visa for ROW (Other countries) is NOT because there are not enough skilled workers from other countries but because the uscis/dhs use the quota to conservatively hence at the end of the visa year there are still many quotas left. ROW priority date has never been current for a very long time

Would you prefer to work with 7 immigrants from India and OR 2 from India, 1 from Germany, 1 from Zimbabwe, 1 from Argentina, 1 from Slovakia and 1 from Burma? The bill will not only hurt professional immigrants from other countries but also will hurt diversity, the core and sacred believe of American people

diptam
06-27-2008, 06:54 PM
I would love to work with 1 Burma, 1 Saudi , 1 Mongolia , 1 Germany , 1 Spain ,1 South africa ,1 Peru , 1 India - if those countries can really provide that one (1)

If they can't Provide their head where as you have 6 in waiting in India isn't it pragmatic and more business sense to suck them in and keep going ?? Or Rather you would waste those 6 visas ? Since when 'Diversity' came in picture for Employment Based Immigration - that was the theme for Family Based Immigration.

If one particular country has more STEM qualified peoples and other do not its natural you would see more peoples from that country - no big surprise. Its just employability in a business.

This is an extremely bad bill.With India dominating not only the H1 visa quota and EB green cards applications but also body shops and “consulting” companies; eliminating the per country quota would massively and unfairly flood America with workers from India

Many defenders of the bill used flawed socio-economic reasons to justify their *shameful and selfish agenda. Unused visa for ROW (Other countries) is NOT because there are not enough skilled workers from other countries but because the uscis/dhs use the quota to conservatively hence at the end of the visa year there are still many quotas left. ROW priority date has never been current for a very long time

Would you prefer to work with 7 immigrants from India and OR 2 from India, 1 from Germany, 1 from Zimbabwe, 1 from Argentina, 1 from Slovakia and 1 from Burma? The bill will not only hurt professional immigrants from other countries but also will hurt diversity, the core and sacred believe of American people

alex77
06-27-2008, 06:54 PM
There is already a lottery of Green card every year to grant GCs to people from countries which has not sent 'enough' immigrants in US. It is called Diversity Visa (DV) Lottery and it is separate from Employment based Green Card. So your diversity argument is flawed. There is hardly any country in the world which has not sent immigrants here. Why to award 'Employment based' ' Green card to immigrant from a country that has not enough 'employable' workers in US? Why should US offer a short-cut to some immigrants based on their origin? Just because India, China, Mexico and Philipines have more skilled workers than other countries, they should not be punished by 'country-based' quota within Employment based category. That is injustice! If I have a business, I will hire most skilled worker no matter where they come from. How about you?

This is an extremely bad bill.With India dominating not only the H1 visa quota and EB green cards applications but also body shops and “consulting” companies; eliminating the per country quota would massively and unfairly flood America with workers from India

Many defenders of the bill used flawed socio-economic reasons to justify their *shameful and selfish agenda. Unused visa for ROW (Other countries) is NOT because there are not enough skilled workers from other countries but because the uscis/dhs use the quota to conservatively hence at the end of the visa year there are still many quotas left. ROW priority date has never been current for a very long time

Would you prefer to work with 7 immigrants from India and OR 2 from India, 1 from Germany, 1 from Zimbabwe, 1 from Argentina, 1 from Slovakia and 1 from Burma? The bill will not only hurt professional immigrants from other countries but also will hurt diversity, the core and sacred believe of American people

amsgc
06-27-2008, 07:02 PM
I wouldn't get into a discussion about the "core sacred belief of the American people" or of any country/culture because it is just no possibel to summarize hundreds of years of ideas and practices in a few sentences.

However, I will tell you this that it doesn't hinge on diversity. What has made America great is not diversity, but the emphasis on hard work and merit, and the belief that every man is equal and freedom is essential. Diversity is wonderful offshoot of adherance to the above ideas over a period of time.

This bill is bad only for you, and for those who could only worry about how it will adversely affect them. If you were to think like a true American, you would view this as another step towards the end of discrimination in the work place; at least, that is the impression I have got from my fellow co-workers, employers and friends.

Now, imagine the hypothetical scenario where India and China were to break up into several small countries. What would your stand be then? Would you advocate a policy with limitations on the number of people with a certain race that can be admitted to this country?



This is an extremely bad bill.With India dominating not only the H1 visa quota and EB green cards applications but also body shops and “consulting” companies; eliminating the per country quota would massively and unfairly flood America with workers from India

Many defenders of the bill used flawed socio-economic reasons to justify their *shameful and selfish agenda. Unused visa for ROW (Other countries) is NOT because there are not enough skilled workers from other countries but because the uscis/dhs use the quota to conservatively hence at the end of the visa year there are still many quotas left. ROW priority date has never been current for a very long time

Would you prefer to work with 7 immigrants from India and OR 2 from India, 1 from Germany, 1 from Zimbabwe, 1 from Argentina, 1 from Slovakia and 1 from Burma? The bill will not only hurt professional immigrants from other countries but also will hurt diversity, the core and sacred believe of American people

paskal
06-27-2008, 07:06 PM
This is an extremely bad bill.With India dominating not only the H1 visa quota and EB green cards applications but also body shops and “consulting” companies; eliminating the per country quota would massively and unfairly flood America with workers from India

Many defenders of the bill used flawed socio-economic reasons to justify their *shameful and selfish agenda. Unused visa for ROW (Other countries) is NOT because there are not enough skilled workers from other countries but because the uscis/dhs use the quota to conservatively hence at the end of the visa year there are still many quotas left. ROW priority date has never been current for a very long time

Would you prefer to work with 7 immigrants from India and OR 2 from India, 1 from Germany, 1 from Zimbabwe, 1 from Argentina, 1 from Slovakia and 1 from Burma? The bill will not only hurt professional immigrants from other countries but also will hurt diversity, the core and sacred believe of American people



hello doxa,

just wanted to point out a small error in your erasoning. the "extra" ROW green cards are ONLY in EB2- where ROW has ALWAYS been current, so speed of processing matters zilch.
in EB3 there are NO EXTRA OR SPILLOVER VISA NUMBERS because ROW is backlogged. so ROW never loses anything.
now the debate has been...shoudl teh "extra" EB2 numbers go to EB2 backlogged countries or EB3 backlogged countries (which includes ROW).
so in other words is it importand that EB2 gets it's full share of 1/3 of the green card numbers or is that trumped by country quota- so that even if overall EB2 allottment is less than mandated, the baclogged countries get no more than 7%.
at this momemt USCIS has decided that the EB2 designation triumphs. so any "extra" numbers after EB2 ROW is all done, should remain in EB2, not go to EB3.

btw as a matter of personal philosophy i don't like open exemptions with absolutely no strings. but the good argument for that has nothing to do with country of birth. as pointed out 50,000 green cards a year (more than 33%) of teh WHOLE EB allottment, are given to countries for diversity purposes- that is they exclude any high immigrant country. so it all balances out in the end.

also i personally think your fears are unfounded. things run in cycles, Y2K brought a huge boom of indi/china tech workers into the US. that cycle is now coming to an end. numerically you will always see a lot of chinese and indians in the pea sized EB category- they are 40% of the world- but it will not be quite like it was in this last decade. i'm curious to see what rebalancing takes place. humans are an interesting species.....

paskal
06-27-2008, 07:09 PM
Hey Gurus, excuse my ignorance, but there is so much info floating around. Just a quick straightforward question:

If HR 5921 is enacted will that completely end EB-3 and EB-2 retrogression?

The bill calls for eliminating the per-country limit, so doesn't that effectively end retrogression by itself?

Any response would be really appreciated!!

hey...long time no see amigo!

removing country quotas alone is no solution to the problem of retrogression. i think that is quite clear. we have always lobbied for a whole package of reforms. rep. lofgren has chosen to break up the current measures among three bills. we are strongly pushing for ALL 3 to pass together.
even then we won't be done. there will be a permanent silution with a new CIR...one day...and we willl ahve to be ready for it!

ZeroComplexity
06-27-2008, 07:10 PM
Exactly my point, the system should not use one criteria for H1B and another for EB green cards.



H1B is a much new concept based on Business need,Skills, employability compared to EB Green card which borrowed/copied from Old 1920'S concept of FAMILY based Immigration.

There is no quota/reservation/diversity obligation in business - whoever is more competitive and adds more value wins the Deal.

kmk2002
06-27-2008, 07:17 PM
Diversity should not precede over THE RIGHT TO EQUALITY. One has to be in that scenario to understand it!!!


This is an extremely bad bill.With India dominating not only the H1 visa quota and EB green cards applications but also body shops and “consulting” companies; eliminating the per country quota would massively and unfairly flood America with workers from India

Many defenders of the bill used flawed socio-economic reasons to justify their *shameful and selfish agenda. Unused visa for ROW (Other countries) is NOT because there are not enough skilled workers from other countries but because the uscis/dhs use the quota to conservatively hence at the end of the visa year there are still many quotas left. ROW priority date has never been current for a very long time

Would you prefer to work with 7 immigrants from India and OR 2 from India, 1 from Germany, 1 from Zimbabwe, 1 from Argentina, 1 from Slovakia and 1 from Burma? The bill will not only hurt professional immigrants from other countries but also will hurt diversity, the core and sacred believe of American people

belmontboy
06-27-2008, 07:19 PM
Would you prefer to work with 7 immigrants from India and OR 2 from India, 1 from Germany, 1 from Zimbabwe, 1 from Argentina, 1 from Slovakia and 1 from Burma? The bill will not only hurt professional immigrants from other countries but also will hurt diversity, the core and sacred believe of American people

Try telling this to your employer and you will be fired on grounds of discrimination.

As a skilled worker, you should be happy to work with skilled worker. Does it really matter where this skilled worker comes from?
who is stopping Burma, Argentina from *producing* skilled workers, not us though!

Please donot use the *diversity* word just bcoz u r not being benefitted by them.

kavita
06-27-2008, 07:27 PM
This is an extremely bad bill.With India dominating not only the H1 visa quota and EB green cards applications but also body shops and “consulting” companies; eliminating the per country quota would massively and unfairly flood America with workers from India

Many defenders of the bill used flawed socio-economic reasons to justify their *shameful and selfish agenda. Unused visa for ROW (Other countries) is NOT because there are not enough skilled workers from other countries but because the uscis/dhs use the quota to conservatively hence at the end of the visa year there are still many quotas left. ROW priority date has never been current for a very long time

Would you prefer to work with 7 immigrants from India and OR 2 from India, 1 from Germany, 1 from Zimbabwe, 1 from Argentina, 1 from Slovakia and 1 from Burma? The bill will not only hurt professional immigrants from other countries but also will hurt diversity, the core and sacred believe of American people

Do you really believe that the current system is creating diversity????
The only thing happening is the waiting line for retrogressed applicants is increasing. I don't think there will be less diversity than the current one, if country quotas are removed.

meridiani.planum
06-27-2008, 09:26 PM
Would you prefer to work with 7 immigrants from India and OR 2 from India, 1 from Germany, 1 from Zimbabwe, 1 from Argentina, 1 from Slovakia and 1 from Burma?

I would like to work with 7 smart, employable people that I can find quickly. Does not matter where they come from. I am in the business of making better products, beating out my competition and making money. I am not the united-nations general assembly, and I dont need representation from every continent in my office.


...also will hurt diversity, the core and sacred believe of American people

diversity is not the core and sacred belief of the american people. The american immigration system is built around:
- family re-unification (which is why ~900k visa's are in this category)
- employment based GC (the 150K).
the diversity lottery constitutes 50k of a nearly 1.1million immigration quota. Every immigration reform bill has voted to remove that 50k, and no one has objected. The people it brings neither unify families, nor do they meet a direct economic need. Its a useless idea and the sooner its gone (& those 50k added to teh EB quota) the better it is for the US in the long term. Diversity is not going to help the US lead in this century and beyond, its the ability to attract the best and brightest, and the ones who actually fill a need in its economy (Everyone from engineers, nurses, doctors, laborers, fruit-pickers)

bfadlia
06-28-2008, 03:08 AM
Both sides need to give a rest to two laughable arguments.. The ROW lamenting diversity and the retrogressed crying about fairness
As an ROW I do not care what country my co-workers come from, if Americans really have these limits for the sake of diversity they will reject this bill, none of us need to argue on their behalf or even claim to understand their laws motivations.
I am concerned however that many of my very qualified friends back home can't find a chance to come here or least wait several years for a scarce chance to come by while my Indian friends here tell me it was relatively much easier for them.. no one complained about the disparity then.. only at a later stage when ROWs finally got one advantage that people remember fairness.. Is it really fair to change the rules half way through the process.
Bottom line, IV adopted removing the country quota among other favorable bills, it should even itself out at the end, so we are all on board.. but people coming up with posts like saying there are not enough educated or skilled ROWs are not really helping convince us with their plight and then we spend days arguing then admins come and say the discussion is harmful and they will close the discussion.. it will be better to shut off the discussion from the beginning and not waste the time.

ZeroComplexity
06-28-2008, 03:34 PM
It was easy for Indians? This is the first time I am hearing that. The things people make up to justify something.....

It's not about getting a "chance" it's about get integrated into the place where you live. It's about making sothing permanent after spending significant part of our adult life in this country and still not being part of it on paper.



I am concerned however that many of my very qualified friends back home can't find a chance to come here or least wait several years for a scarce chance to come by while my Indian friends here tell me it was relatively much easier for them.. no one complained about the disparity then.. only at a later stage when ROWs finally got one advantage that people remember fairness.. Is it really fair to change the rules half way through the process.

kshitijnt
06-28-2008, 05:42 PM
Both sides need to give a rest to two laughable arguments.. The ROW lamenting diversity and the retrogressed crying about fairness
As an ROW I do not care what country my co-workers come from, if Americans really have these limits for the sake of diversity they will reject this bill, none of us need to argue on their behalf or even claim to understand their laws motivations.
I am concerned however that many of my very qualified friends back home can't find a chance to come here or least wait several years for a scarce chance to come by while my Indian friends here tell me it was relatively much easier for them.. no one complained about the disparity then.. only at a later stage when ROWs finally got one advantage that people remember fairness.. Is it really fair to change the rules half way through the process.
Bottom line, IV adopted removing the country quota among other favorable bills, it should even itself out at the end, so we are all on board.. but people coming up with posts like saying there are not enough educated or skilled ROWs are not really helping convince us with their plight and then we spend days arguing then admins come and say the discussion is harmful and they will close the discussion.. it will be better to shut off the discussion from the beginning and not waste the time.

It seems there is a difference of opinion in your view and my view on the definition of "qualified." If ROW members are qualified, they can apply for F1 visa for advanced degrees to US and seek direct employment with US employer after completing MS. Let me tell you most Indian people have very poor parents and are poor themselves to afford fees in US universities and they are solely admitted and granted aids based on their merit. Let me also tell you that a class of computer science graduates in US university comprises of 50% Indians. Can USA for its economic advantage put such a restriction on an country limit at H1? So why there is country restriction on GC? To allow lesser qualified ROW applicant for the sake of diversity? This argument favors only the ROW people, neither americans nor Indians.

paskal
06-28-2008, 09:08 PM
It seems there is a difference of opinion in your view and my view on the definition of "qualified." If ROW members are qualified, they can apply for F1 visa for advanced degrees to US and seek direct employment with US employer after completing MS. Let me tell you most Indian people have very poor parents and are poor themselves to afford fees in US universities and they are solely admitted and granted aids based on their merit. Let me also tell you that a class of computer science graduates in US university comprises of 50% Indians. Can USA for its economic advantage put such a restriction on an country limit at H1? So why there is country restriction on GC? To allow lesser qualified ROW applicant for the sake of diversity? This argument favors only the ROW people, neither americans nor Indians.



i think the point being made is thet ROW folks are not "lesser qualified"- and the point is quite correct. those who work in the US are all qualified- irrespective of country of origin. so repeating this "lesser qualified" bit is really not helpful. the issue of who gets a GC First is not the determinant of who gets the jobs. Now, there may be a basic sense of "unfairness" in the idea that i am being penalized simply because of my country of birth. that is fine. but it does not prove anything with regards to merit or ability.

also, bfadlia's point with "ease" of getting to the US has to do with a specific group of Indians, and unfortunately all Indians seem to get generalized/stereotyped into this caregory. he is stating that the presence of a large number of desi companies makes it easier for indians to get employment. that in itself is not a wrong statement. now you can deal with that in two ways:

1. if these companies are doing something wrong, it should be stopped, because in the lonfer run/bigger picture that would hurt all of us, indians/brazilians/indonesians...you get the point!

2. is it the fault of an individual that his/her countrymen have set up all these companies? should an individual be penalized for it. this gets complicated, because the answer per se is NO. however if the hiring practices of the comapnies are discriminatory- that is a problem.

personally, i am glad that we are liley to get some reform in the whole system once congress finally gets around to dealing with immigration. we need a clean up of those companies that game the sytem AND we need an end to the individual penalty for their land of birth.

sorry for the long spiel...just my 2c!

bfadlia
06-29-2008, 02:03 AM
i think the point being made is thet ROW folks are not "lesser qualified"- and the point is quite correct. those who work in the US are all qualified- irrespective of country of origin. so repeating this "lesser qualified" bit is really not helpful. the issue of who gets a GC First is not the determinant of who gets the jobs. Now, there may be a basic sense of "unfairness" in the idea that i am being penalized simply because of my country of birth. that is fine. but it does not prove anything with regards to merit or ability.

also, bfadlia's point with "ease" of getting to the US has to do with a specific group of Indians, and unfortunately all Indians seem to get generalized/stereotyped into this caregory. he is stating that the presence of a large number of desi companies makes it easier for indians to get employment. that in itself is not a wrong statement. now you can deal with that in two ways:

1. if these companies are doing something wrong, it should be stopped, because in the lonfer run/bigger picture that would hurt all of us, indians/brazilians/indonesians...you get the point!

2. is it the fault of an individual that his/her countrymen have set up all these companies? should an individual be penalized for it. this gets complicated, because the answer per se is NO. however if the hiring practices of the comapnies are discriminatory- that is a problem.

personally, i am glad that we are liley to get some reform in the whole system once congress finally gets around to dealing with immigration. we need a clean up of those companies that game the sytem AND we need an end to the individual penalty for their land of birth.

sorry for the long spiel...just my 2c!


Paskal, thanks for your understanding and your balanced outlook..
You are right, that "ease" part pertains only to IT, it is unfair to the non-IT people.. it happens that technology and IT were the biggest consumers of EB visas in the past 10-15 years and hence it had to shape the landscape of the current waiting lines.
There is nothing wrong with countrymen setting up many companies, but each party should look out to make their conscious decisions.. the company owner may not care that the workers he's hiring from one country may take longer time to get GC (or may be he prefers it that way to have longer control over them), what about the employee? If I'm offered an opportunity in a country where the current rules stipulate a per country limit and i know this will mean a longer wait for me and I accept the opportunity.. does it make a lot of sense that I later cry "no fair" and try to fix my problem at the expense of other groups who already made their life decisions based on the same current rules?
Kshitijnt, the scheme you described, of deliberately planning to use F1 as a vehicle to get to a permanent status, amounts in USCIS eyes to Immigration Fraud. F1 is not a dual intent visa. I hope you did not do this or advise you to at least not advertise that in a public forum.
Didn't I say it's better to lay off this discussion :)

paskal
06-29-2008, 04:07 AM
my friend,

IT is a big field and there are many different levels of work in IT. the "ease" you refer to cannot possibly include all IT. you believe this to be true of the outsourcing firms/body shoppers...and even presuming for a moment that you are absolutely correct- i think its unfair to brand all Indian IT workers with that brush, just like its unfair to presume that ROW folks are getting GC without equal qualifications just because they are getting it faster!

As someone pointed out below, many technology workers from India came here for an education and then decided to stay on. many of these folks work for the biggest American/multinational firms. why exactly are they suffering in long lines when their compatriots are whizzing through?

these generalization that are thrown about cause most of the problems in the immigration community. there are stereotypes about everyone...EB1, IT workers, ROW, Indians and EB3...and they are usually crap.

so lets steer clear....each individual has a distinct experience and a distinct story and more often than not its not because they are South Africans or Australians...or Indians!

Lets work to end retrogression. Country caps are simply one of the things we find to be not compatible with a 21st century world. They are certainly not all. without added Gc numbers, no one is going anywhere.

bfadlia
06-29-2008, 09:16 AM
my friend,

IT is a big field and there are many different levels of work in IT. the "ease" you refer to cannot possibly include all IT. you believe this to be true of the outsourcing firms/body shoppers...and even presuming for a moment that you are absolutely correct- i think its unfair to brand all Indian IT workers with that brush, just like its unfair to presume that ROW folks are getting GC without equal qualifications just because they are getting it faster!

As someone pointed out below, many technology workers from India came here for an education and then decided to stay on. many of these folks work for the biggest American/multinational firms. why exactly are they suffering in long lines when their compatriots are whizzing through?

these generalization that are thrown about cause most of the problems in the immigration community. there are stereotypes about everyone...EB1, IT workers, ROW, Indians and EB3...and they are usually crap.

so lets steer clear....each individual has a distinct experience and a distinct story and more often than not its not because they are South Africans or Australians...or Indians!

Lets work to end retrogression. Country caps are simply one of the things we find to be not compatible with a 21st century world. They are certainly not all. without added Gc numbers, no one is going anywhere.

That is cool.. at least you are not like the member who told me he never heard of the "ease" disparity and accused me of making it up..
I am open to statistics that show me my generalization was not realistic, take a look at the top H1 consumers in 2007:
Rank Employer Approved Petitions
1 Infosys Technologies 4,559
2 Wipro 2,567
3 Satyam Computer Services 1,396
4 Cognizant Tech Solutions 962
5 Microsoft 959
6 Tata Consultancy Services 797
7 Patni Computer Systems 477

Only 1 out of 7, Microsoft, has recruitment teams touring the US and the whole world to hire best talents.. giving equal opportunity to anyone regardless of their birth place, while the other 6 don't.. Is saying that 6 out of 7 makes a big majority really a stereotyped presumption..
Actually, I'd prefer you don't answer.. people are so polarized on this issue, it usually only turns into a purposeless debating competition.. There should be more useful things to do on a weekend :)

Legal
06-29-2008, 10:19 AM
Sure, every one knows Paskal is balanced. It seems you attempt to prsent yourself as a person with a balnced view. Hardly the case.

There is absolutely no justification whatsoever to justify or defend the country quota in employment based immigration. And 7% limit for countries with 1billion+ population at best is insane. The only defense comes from people who massively (unfairly) benefit from this at the expense of others.

I'm not in IT but know of several MDs, PhD from India and China are in the EB-2 long waiting line. Phd doesn't automatically give you EB-1 in case you didn't know, I know of at least one who got rejected, not enough for EB-1.

Problems with "body shops" and Indian IT companies who "abuse" the H1B system should be dealt with seperately.

Also in a super-capitalistic society like US, people from countries other than India are free and could have setup many compnies and hire many people from their own country. For example Bulgaria could have set up companies like the ones you listed and hire many Bulgarians.

Although I have tried to stay away from controversies, you want to enda the discussion by making a statement diminishing and attacking the legitimacy of grievances of many IV members here from India. Hardly a gentlemanly way to propose a weekend free of controversies!!!

bfadlia
06-29-2008, 01:16 PM
Sure, every one knows Paskal is balanced. It seems you attempt to prsent yourself as a person with a balnced view. Hardly the case.

There is absolutely no justification whatsoever to justify or defend the country quota in employment based immigration. And 7% limit for countries with 1billion+ population at best is insane. The only defense comes from people who massively (unfairly) benefit from this at the expense of others.

I'm not in IT but know of several MDs, PhD from India and China are in the EB-2 long waiting line. Phd doesn't automatically give you EB-1 in case you didn't know, I know of at least one who got rejected, not enough for EB-1.

Problems with "body shops" and Indian IT companies who "abuse" the H1B system should be dealt with seperately.

Also in a super-capitalistic society like US, people from countries other than India are free and could have setup many compnies and hire many people from their own country. For example Bulgaria could have set up companies like the ones you listed and hire many Bulgarians.

Although I have tried to stay away from controversies, you want to enda the discussion by making a statement diminishing and attacking the legitimacy of grievances of many IV members here from India. Hardly a gentlemanly way to propose a weekend free of controversies!!!

It is hard to argue with posts that come as a decision rather than an argument, like your "There is absolutely no justification whatsoever to defend the country quota" OK.. if you say so!!
How about you answer me, if the super capitalistic country you accepted an opportunity in already had the per country limit all along and you knew it will cause longer wait, why did you accept it.. how hypocritical is it to come then blame ROWs now for your suffering from your conscious decision?
I in no way belittled your grievances, I'm just saying it's not ROWs fault and should never be fixed at their expense.

grupak
06-29-2008, 01:41 PM
That is cool.. at least you are not like the member who told me he never heard of the "ease" disparity and accused me of making it up..
I am open to statistics that show me my generalization was not realistic, take a look at the top H1 consumers in 2007:
Rank Employer Approved Petitions
1 Infosys Technologies 4,559
2 Wipro 2,567
3 Satyam Computer Services 1,396
4 Cognizant Tech Solutions 962
5 Microsoft 959
6 Tata Consultancy Services 797
7 Patni Computer Systems 477

Only 1 out of 7, Microsoft, has recruitment teams touring the US and the whole world to hire best talents.. giving equal opportunity to anyone regardless of their birth place, while the other 6 don't.. Is saying that 6 out of 7 makes a big majority really a stereotyped presumption..
Actually, I'd prefer you don't answer.. people are so polarized on this issue, it usually only turns into a purposeless debating competition.. There should be more useful things to do on a weekend :)

Disclaimer: Not an engineer and have no idea about engineering schools in Egypt or the use of English in schools there.

According to this news article
http://www.csmonitor.com/2005/1220/p01s01-ussc.htm
Number of bachelor engineers produced: 137K (US), 112K (India), 351K(China).

AFAIK, English is the medium of instruction in Indian engineering and not necessarily so in China.

A "meaningful" comparison would be the number of English educated engineers produced in Egypt and India to the corresponding numbers in H1B. However, another important factor to keep in mind is the number/size of software firms doing business with US in India and Egypt.

This will give some quantifiable though not perfect numbers to compare between Egypt and India, in my opinion instead of anecdotal evidence.

it is ok
06-29-2008, 01:42 PM
Diversity should not precede over THE RIGHT TO EQUALITY. One has to be in that scenario to understand it!!!

With respect to everyone's arguments, fact is that countries like India and China are on roll, in ascendancy phase and their natives are enterprising, too. These people have earned whatever they have in US and elsewhere, by the stint of their hard-work and enterprise. They will continue to grow and prosper in US and elsewhere, irrespective of circumstances (H1B/GC problems et al). Also fact is that businesses of all sizes in US will continue to get best possible help from wherever and if these countries fit the bill, it will continue like this only. American business history has been replete with examples. This then has cascading effect on lawmakers. Emotion and other arguements play a very small part here.:cool:

amsgc
06-29-2008, 02:08 PM
Nobody is blaming folks from ROW for woes of the Indian and Chinese skilled immigrants, who are equally competent.

Today you are enjoying a benefit from the unfortunate shortsightedness in the making of a law, which originated back in 1952, and understandably worried of losing that advantage (it is human nature - we all get it :) )

At the time of the Mc Carran-Walter Act (1952), quotas were not specified by national origin, but through racial ethnic categories. However, this act was later amended in 1965, where new preference categories were established - family based, employment based etc. and the cap based on 'natural origin' gave way to country of origin. Note that the law states that the cap is on ALL immigration, and does not single out employment based. At that time, the world had not seen such free and fast movement of intellect across countries - which has been made possible by advances in technology. Also, people around the world have educated themselves better and are now in a position to avail of opportunities anywhere in the world. Therefore, the shortsightedness half a century ago is understandable. However, the world has changed dramatically and the laws need to keep up with them.

American laws are not designed to suit individuals from ROW India or China. They are continuously amended to meet the social and economic needs of the country. It is our job to apprise lawmakers on how America stands to lose more by these antiquated laws, than gain in way of its silly attempt to maintain racial diversity in the EB categories.

Let me ask you this simple question - What is your argument to a congressman to maintain the 7% cap on Employment based immigration? How does it benefit America today?


It is hard to argue with posts that come as a decision rather than an argument, like your "There is absolutely no justification whatsoever to defend the country quota" OK.. if you say so!!
How about you answer me, if the super capitalistic country you accepted an opportunity in already had the per country limit all along and you knew it will cause longer wait, why did you accept it.. how hypocritical is it to come then blame ROWs now for your suffering from your conscious decision?
I in no way belittled your grievances, I'm just saying it's not ROWs fault and should never be fixed at their expense.

Legal
06-29-2008, 02:39 PM
how hypocritical is it to come then blame ROWs now for your suffering from your conscious decision?
I in no way belittled your grievances, I'm just saying it's not ROWs fault and should never be fixed at their expense.

NO. The problem is your claim that the fix comes at your expense. This means you are entitled to something which is being taken away from you. You are not even recognizing your own entitlement mentality. No one from India and China are "blaming" the ROW applicants.

More accurate description of reality is , the law was set-up years ago when this was not an issue, and people are trying to fix the irrational and unfair/ discriminatory aspects of the law.

Your angry claim is solely based on the fact that your advantageous position could slip away. But then your advantageous situation came about at the expense of applicants from India and China.

tawlibann
06-29-2008, 02:55 PM
More accurate description of reality is , the law was set-up years ago when this was not an issue, and people are trying to fix the irrational and unfair/ discriminatory aspects of the law.


What do you mean by "when this was not an issue"? Are you implying that the law was created to impose a limit but they never actually expected this limit to be hit? Then why put the limit?

kshitijnt
06-29-2008, 04:06 PM
It is hard to argue with posts that come as a decision rather than an argument, like your "There is absolutely no justification whatsoever to defend the country quota" OK.. if you say so!!
How about you answer me, if the super capitalistic country you accepted an opportunity in already had the per country limit all along and you knew it will cause longer wait, why did you accept it.. how hypocritical is it to come then blame ROWs now for your suffering from your conscious decision?
I in no way belittled your grievances, I'm just saying it's not ROWs fault and should never be fixed at their expense.

bfadlia - Your last statement is a bit provocative. I could always take a view that those from ROW get inside this country later than us and get GC sooner than Indians and chinese. So ROW is already getting a ride at the expense of chinese and Indians. Why cant there be just one queue for all nationals? Why special queue for ROW?

To your another point, so many hundreds thousands have come here and used F1 as a vehicle of getting permanent residency. When you come on F1, your intention is always to go back, then you change from F1 --> H1 --> 485 --> Green card. This is not fraud in anyway as the applicant is petitioning to USCIS for approval of his new petition. In most cases applicants also travel out of the country to get a new visa stamp. At every time DOS and USCIS have an opportunity to deny visa or entry if this were a fraud. And trust me this is the best way to find a "stable" job in US and also get a GC. Infact there is a special H1B law that allows separate 20K quota for US educated students. So this method is also working in the interest of the US.

bfadlia
06-29-2008, 11:09 PM
glad i took some time off, Euro 2008 ended with a wonderful game between Spain and Germany.. definitely more rewarding than this..
Amsgc, I am no advocate for the 7% limit, I do not believe a country like India should have the same limit as say, no offense, Djibouti. I believe reliable statistics should be considered and weighed in for setting the limits. Having no limits at all is just the opposite extreme. Business has already shown unfairness in distributing the opportunities in the presence of limits. It's hard to imagine they will become more fair in a new system that has no limits. And in any case, I emphasize the NEW system part, for New applicants who have not agreed to start their cases within the existing rules.
Legal, I am not angry and did not make any angry statements, so chill out.. give me a straight answer for once, if u felt the current rules were very harmful for you and were unacceptable, why did you decide to accept them and start ur case under them? were u coerced in any way? what right do you have to act surprised now and demand a fix at whomever's expense?

amsgc
06-30-2008, 12:50 AM
I don't think you have answered the question I asked you. Perhaps you can complete the following:

"Dear Congressman, I support a limit on how many high skilled immigrants, who are currently gainfully employed by businesses across America, can come from a particular country because it increases America's competitiveness in the following ways ........"

If your reasons are:
- Some have gamed the system - then the smart thing to do is prevent abuse, not stop something good.
- It preserves diversity - there is a lottery system precisely for that reason. The US admits close to 1 million new immigrants each year, of which over 50% come in without any country quota related preference. Even if all 140K green cards go to Indians or chinese for the next 10 years, that's a mere 1.4Million - a tiny drop in an ocean of 300 Million. This diversity argument is a lame one, because it provides absolutely no threat to the racial/cultural character of America.

Looking forward to your response. By the way, I am from India, where are you from?

glad i took some time off, Euro 2008 ended with a wonderful game between Spain and Germany.. definitely more rewarding than this..
Amsgc, I am no advocate for the 7% limit, I do not believe a country like India should have the same limit as say, no offense, Djibouti. I believe reliable statistics should be considered and weighed in for setting the limits. Having no limits at all is just the opposite extreme. Business has already shown unfairness in distributing the opportunities in the presence of limits. It's hard to imagine they will become more fair in a new system that has no limits. And in any case, I emphasize the NEW system part, for New applicants who have not agreed to start their cases within the existing rules.
Legal, I am not angry and did not make any angry statements, so chill out.. give me a straight answer for once, if u felt the current rules were very harmful for you and were unacceptable, why did you decide to accept them and start ur case under them? were u coerced in any way? what right do you have to act surprised now and demand a fix at whomever's expense?

bfadlia
06-30-2008, 01:35 AM
I don't think you have answered the question I asked you. Perhaps you can complete the following:

"Dear Congressman, I support a limit on how many high skilled immigrants, who are currently gainfully employed by businesses across America, can come from a particular country because it increases America's competitiveness in the following ways ........"

If your reasons are:
- Some have gamed the system - then the smart thing to do is prevent abuse, not stop something good.
- It preserves diversity - there is a lottery system precisely for that reason. The US admits close to 1 million new immigrants each year, of which over 50% come in without any country quota related preference. Even if all 140K green cards go to Indians or chinese for the next 10 years, that's a mere 1.4Million - a tiny drop in an ocean of 300 Million. This diversity argument is a lame one, because it provides absolutely no threat to the racial/cultural character of America.

Looking forward to your response. By the way, I am from India, where are you from?

I don't think even the bodyshops gamed the systems, their practices were legal, but when you guys are talking fair, they were not fair, offering opportunities in only one country.. u don't need to convince me about the diversity argument, my first post in this thread i said the diversity argument is laughable..
so my answer would be mainly:
"Dear Congressman, I support a more accurate limit on how many high skilled immigrants, rewarding countries that have bigger number of highly educated and larger population, at the same time not letting a monopoly by unethical business in the absence of a limit ........"
i'm from Egypt.. pleasure to meet you and all the friends here..

amsgc
06-30-2008, 01:42 AM
Nice to meet you too, and thanks for responding.

So, your argument is: "To prevent the monopoly by unethical business in the absence of a limit".

This is a good reason to fix the system, but not good enough for the congressman to go and tell the american business that there are some bad apples doing business in america, because of which their business too should suffer.

So, would you agree that if all the abuse (which i don't think accounts for much) is put to and end, by way of more regulation, then there shouldn't be any country cap in the EB process?

I don't think even the bodyshops gamed the systems, their practices were legal, but when you guys are talking fair, they were not fair, offering opportunities in only one country.. u don't need to convince me about the diversity argument, my first post in this thread i said the diversity argument is laughable..
so my answer would be mainly:
"Dear Congressman, I support a more accurate limit on how many high skilled immigrants, rewarding countries that have bigger number of highly educated and larger population, at the same time not letting a monopoly by unethical business in the absence of a limit ........"
i'm from Egypt.. pleasure to meet you and all the friends here..

bfadlia
06-30-2008, 02:14 AM
Nice to meet you too, and thanks for responding.

So, your argument is: "To prevent the monopoly by unethical business in the absence of a limit".

This is a good reason to fix the system, but not good enough for the congressman to go and tell the american business that there are some bad apples doing business in america, because of which their business too should suffer.

So, would you agree that if all the abuse (which i don't think accounts for much) is put to and end, by way of more regulation, then there shouldn't be any country cap in the EB process?

yes certainly.. my disagreement with you is i do think the abuse accounts for much, and if it is such an easy task to regulate it, why hasn't that happened first.. what guarantees that fair recruiting regulations will ever be enacted after the limits are removed..
please let me sleep now :) peace

amsgc
06-30-2008, 10:42 AM
It is good to see that you have come around to agree that country caps are Nonsensical for American businesses.

So let's make those calls now and help improve the system :)

yes certainly.. my disagreement with you is i do think the abuse accounts for much, and if it is such an easy task to regulate it, why hasn't that happened first.. what guarantees that fair recruiting regulations will ever be enacted after the limits are removed..
please let me sleep now :) peace

bfadlia
06-30-2008, 11:33 AM
It is good to see that you have come around to agree that country caps are Nonsensical for American businesses.

So let's make those calls now and help improve the system :)

yes. it was a decent discussion here, but it had to come at the cost of red s for me..
congratulations to the guys who gave me these.. you win..
cheese :)