rdehar
10-08 02:48 PM
This should be #1 priority of IV.
People have been waiting for their GCs since 2001, 2002 or 2003. My PD is 2004, and I absolutely want everyone with PD before me to get GC before me.
People who are opposing this idea are used to cutting lines -- most of them look like '06 and '07 wannabes ...
People have been waiting for their GCs since 2001, 2002 or 2003. My PD is 2004, and I absolutely want everyone with PD before me to get GC before me.
People who are opposing this idea are used to cutting lines -- most of them look like '06 and '07 wannabes ...
wallpaper This series is based on the
sangmami
07-02 08:49 AM
mine at local fedex facility at 8.05am at nebraska
desi3933
03-10 02:56 PM
Any lobbying for immigration is tough at the time of recession. I think you are trying to do advocacy effort. Without getting approval from core IV group it will not be any use as advocacy effort only will not work. Senators will note your concerns and will act only if some bill is introduced. You need lobbying with advocacy effort for changing any law. Lobbyists will lobby only at right time as if they do in wrong time it will backfire.
I agree.
_____________________
US citizen of Indian origin
I agree.
_____________________
US citizen of Indian origin
2011 photo: AP / Andrew Medichini
vdlrao
09-10 12:50 PM
How can contributing $1000.00 to immigration voice solves this problem? You are telling like a swami's in India, give me money I will do some pooja on your behalf and all your problems will be solved.
The money is not for me or for the Immigration Voice but for the lobbying to make the uscis or the government understand how the employment based GC system is outdated, and how the people who came to usa with an American Dream are being played by the rules not for days or weeks or months but for years and years. And procrastinating their American Dream because of the limitations they have during the GC process.
Active participation or contribution of 10 or 20 or 100 people wont be any effective unless and untill we all do it collectively.
The money is not for me or for the Immigration Voice but for the lobbying to make the uscis or the government understand how the employment based GC system is outdated, and how the people who came to usa with an American Dream are being played by the rules not for days or weeks or months but for years and years. And procrastinating their American Dream because of the limitations they have during the GC process.
Active participation or contribution of 10 or 20 or 100 people wont be any effective unless and untill we all do it collectively.
more...
feedfront
08-26 02:48 PM
Do you have Pritority Date written on your I-485's notice of action? It's blank for me.
apahilaj
01-06 08:38 PM
My infopass appointment was pretty quick. I guess it lasted for only 5 to 7 mins. I opened an SR in the month of September however I never received SR response letter from USCIS which they said they have sent me in the last week of October so I didn't have any SR letter to show him. I carried only receipts for 485,765 and 131 for myself and my wife. I asked IO that it's been more than 90 days since I received receipts for employment based 485 and haven't received FP yet. He asked me for Photo Id and receipts for myself and my wife. Then he asked whether I received work authorization (765) and travel document (131) or not. Then he entered our information (receipt no and confirmed my address as well as my attorney's address) and was searching something in his machine and said I will get my FP soon. I asked him is there any time line? He said within 3 weeks. That's it. He said they have received many applications in the month of July and Aug and that's why they are lagging. I guess this is it. I was out of USCIS office within 10 mins.
Thanks Parag, your post is helpful.
One quick question - I do not have original 485 receipts with me but have scanned copies of them which my lawyer has emailed me. If I print them out and take them to the infopass, is that sufficient or do they ask for the original receipts?
Thanks and good luck ahead!
Thanks Parag, your post is helpful.
One quick question - I do not have original 485 receipts with me but have scanned copies of them which my lawyer has emailed me. If I print them out and take them to the infopass, is that sufficient or do they ask for the original receipts?
Thanks and good luck ahead!
more...
sankap
07-09 11:58 PM
@desi3933:
1. From tax standpoint, W2 means the company (which could be fully/partly owned by you) is paying tax-at-source. On 1099, *you* do the taxes and hence the hourly rate on 1099 is typically more than that on W2. In fact, many staffing companies give you the option of working on a project or 1099 or W2. (Of course, the advantage of working on W2 is you can "transfer" your H-1B, if the company is willing to do that. But the advantage of working on 1099 or LLC is that you can deduct your business expenses, as a "Self-employed" or a Corporation.) Yes, you can be an owner of a corporation and file taxes as as a C-Corp or an S-Corp on W2, but not as a "Self-employed."
2. True, your I-140 petition is for a "permanent" (definition needed) and FT job, since the sponsoring company has (supposedly) an "intent" to hire the petitioner in the future. *But* AC21 provision helps you to change employers after 180 days of filing I-485, if your I-140 is approved. The new job has to be "same or similar" to the occupation your I-140 petition was filed for. The "permanent" intent of the original employer disappears under AC21 because you changed employers (or your original employer withdrew I-140, even though he had genuine "intent" at the time of I-140 filing to hire you in the future). I agree that "any memo (including Yates memo) supplements the existing federal regulations," but the Yates memo gives you the AC21 provision, which was a law signed by Pres. Bush.
3. It is wrong to *infer* that "AC-21 job must be of same type as I-140/labor job, hence must be permanent and full time." As I say in 2. above, the employer who filed your I-140 should have intent, *at I-140 filing time*, to hire you in the future. And that intent is not needed after 180 days of filing I-485 *and* approved I-140, regardless of whether your original employer continues or withdraws your I-140 petition.
4. You're wrong in your example of "A job with 6 year contract is a temporary job." I've often seen many "6-month contracts" getting extended to 1, 2, 3 years or indefinitely. Likewise, a "permanent" job may last a few months (e.g., because of a recession).
5. It is true that "all H-1B jobs are temporary in nature and called guest workers," but H-1B (compared with, say TN-1) is a dual intent visa. Once you file I-140, your intent (whether on H1 or EAD) becomes not that of a temporary visitor but as the one seeking a permanent stay in this country.
6. Again, it's wrong to assume that "most of full time exempt jobs in this country are permanent in nature." And even if they were permanent, in what sense?
7. On the link you cite, OFLC Frequently Asked Questions and Answers, the process for filing PERM is explained. The employer needs to fill out the Application for Permanent Employment Certification form. The PERM representation requirement does indeed say that "The job opportunity is for full-time, permanent employment for an employer other than the alien." First, how to judge a job as "permanent?" Second, just because the PERM has the requirement for a FT, "permanent" job, it doesn't imply that the "permanent" requirement would apply to the AC21 law.
I think we're running into into two issues here. The first one is related to semantics--i.e., what constitutes a "permanent" job? The second one is the *inference/assumption* that, because because I-140 requires you to be on a permanent, FT job (=sponsoring employer has "intent" to hire you in the future), your employment under AC21 provision should be "permanent".
7. Since you're *not* required to inform USCIS on your job changes, why "file AC21" (and stir things), or advise people to do so?
Sankap -
Please allow me to explain this in detail. Please feel free to verify this information with attorney of your choice.
1. W2 Self Employed simply means that one has controlling equity in the employer company. For example - I am employed by corp that is, in part, owned by me since I hold a % of shares. I get paid on W2, just like any other employee in the corp.
2. Any memo (including Yates memo) supplements the existing federal regulations. They do not replace them. In any case, memo does not have force of law. In case of contradictory info, memo must "bow" to federal regulations and court rulings.
3. I-140 is for permanent and full time job only. See Page 5 of
http://www.uscis.gov/files/form/i-140instr.pdf
4. Also, read this. It says 'Permanent Employment'
OFLC Frequently Asked Questions and Answers (http://www.foreignlaborcert.doleta.gov/faqsanswers.cfm#effdate1)
5. AC-21 job must be of same type as I-140/labor job, hence must be permanent and full time.
6. Permanent Job does not mean "forever", It simply means that duration of employment is not known. A job with 6 year contract is a temporary job (since duration is known), hence all H-1B jobs are temporary in nature and called guest workers. A permanent can be terminated at any time, at will, or as agreed notice by both parties.
7. One is not required to notify AC-21 job, but should e ready to respond to EVL RFE that can come any time.
8. Most of the full time exempt jobs in this country are permanent in nature.
___________________
Not a legal advice.
1. From tax standpoint, W2 means the company (which could be fully/partly owned by you) is paying tax-at-source. On 1099, *you* do the taxes and hence the hourly rate on 1099 is typically more than that on W2. In fact, many staffing companies give you the option of working on a project or 1099 or W2. (Of course, the advantage of working on W2 is you can "transfer" your H-1B, if the company is willing to do that. But the advantage of working on 1099 or LLC is that you can deduct your business expenses, as a "Self-employed" or a Corporation.) Yes, you can be an owner of a corporation and file taxes as as a C-Corp or an S-Corp on W2, but not as a "Self-employed."
2. True, your I-140 petition is for a "permanent" (definition needed) and FT job, since the sponsoring company has (supposedly) an "intent" to hire the petitioner in the future. *But* AC21 provision helps you to change employers after 180 days of filing I-485, if your I-140 is approved. The new job has to be "same or similar" to the occupation your I-140 petition was filed for. The "permanent" intent of the original employer disappears under AC21 because you changed employers (or your original employer withdrew I-140, even though he had genuine "intent" at the time of I-140 filing to hire you in the future). I agree that "any memo (including Yates memo) supplements the existing federal regulations," but the Yates memo gives you the AC21 provision, which was a law signed by Pres. Bush.
3. It is wrong to *infer* that "AC-21 job must be of same type as I-140/labor job, hence must be permanent and full time." As I say in 2. above, the employer who filed your I-140 should have intent, *at I-140 filing time*, to hire you in the future. And that intent is not needed after 180 days of filing I-485 *and* approved I-140, regardless of whether your original employer continues or withdraws your I-140 petition.
4. You're wrong in your example of "A job with 6 year contract is a temporary job." I've often seen many "6-month contracts" getting extended to 1, 2, 3 years or indefinitely. Likewise, a "permanent" job may last a few months (e.g., because of a recession).
5. It is true that "all H-1B jobs are temporary in nature and called guest workers," but H-1B (compared with, say TN-1) is a dual intent visa. Once you file I-140, your intent (whether on H1 or EAD) becomes not that of a temporary visitor but as the one seeking a permanent stay in this country.
6. Again, it's wrong to assume that "most of full time exempt jobs in this country are permanent in nature." And even if they were permanent, in what sense?
7. On the link you cite, OFLC Frequently Asked Questions and Answers, the process for filing PERM is explained. The employer needs to fill out the Application for Permanent Employment Certification form. The PERM representation requirement does indeed say that "The job opportunity is for full-time, permanent employment for an employer other than the alien." First, how to judge a job as "permanent?" Second, just because the PERM has the requirement for a FT, "permanent" job, it doesn't imply that the "permanent" requirement would apply to the AC21 law.
I think we're running into into two issues here. The first one is related to semantics--i.e., what constitutes a "permanent" job? The second one is the *inference/assumption* that, because because I-140 requires you to be on a permanent, FT job (=sponsoring employer has "intent" to hire you in the future), your employment under AC21 provision should be "permanent".
7. Since you're *not* required to inform USCIS on your job changes, why "file AC21" (and stir things), or advise people to do so?
Sankap -
Please allow me to explain this in detail. Please feel free to verify this information with attorney of your choice.
1. W2 Self Employed simply means that one has controlling equity in the employer company. For example - I am employed by corp that is, in part, owned by me since I hold a % of shares. I get paid on W2, just like any other employee in the corp.
2. Any memo (including Yates memo) supplements the existing federal regulations. They do not replace them. In any case, memo does not have force of law. In case of contradictory info, memo must "bow" to federal regulations and court rulings.
3. I-140 is for permanent and full time job only. See Page 5 of
http://www.uscis.gov/files/form/i-140instr.pdf
4. Also, read this. It says 'Permanent Employment'
OFLC Frequently Asked Questions and Answers (http://www.foreignlaborcert.doleta.gov/faqsanswers.cfm#effdate1)
5. AC-21 job must be of same type as I-140/labor job, hence must be permanent and full time.
6. Permanent Job does not mean "forever", It simply means that duration of employment is not known. A job with 6 year contract is a temporary job (since duration is known), hence all H-1B jobs are temporary in nature and called guest workers. A permanent can be terminated at any time, at will, or as agreed notice by both parties.
7. One is not required to notify AC-21 job, but should e ready to respond to EVL RFE that can come any time.
8. Most of the full time exempt jobs in this country are permanent in nature.
___________________
Not a legal advice.
2010 Photo (to order call 01775
jonty_11
01-21 01:58 PM
Not that anyone would do this purposefully...
What if due to recession you loose your job and cannot find one for 1 year..then once you find one similar in duties and Title as ur LC, you start working (effectively after a long time since you lost ur original job/sponsor)...and were unemployed for 1 yr...or so..but at time of GC approval you have a similar job as your Orig LC...How much of a problem could that be or is it just your luck, that USCIS may or maynot ask for paystubs W2s etc for the last one year????
What if due to recession you loose your job and cannot find one for 1 year..then once you find one similar in duties and Title as ur LC, you start working (effectively after a long time since you lost ur original job/sponsor)...and were unemployed for 1 yr...or so..but at time of GC approval you have a similar job as your Orig LC...How much of a problem could that be or is it just your luck, that USCIS may or maynot ask for paystubs W2s etc for the last one year????
more...
diptam
06-22 03:46 PM
Giving Pay stubs instead of FUTURE employment letter ?
That may be a RFE and then eventually you have to give that letter and do more bargaining with your employer...
Generally speaking two recent pay stubs are sufficient to verify that you remain with the same employer. It is possible that if your petition is pending for more than 10 or 12 months, either a job offer letter or additional pay stubs will be requested.
That may be a RFE and then eventually you have to give that letter and do more bargaining with your employer...
Generally speaking two recent pay stubs are sufficient to verify that you remain with the same employer. It is possible that if your petition is pending for more than 10 or 12 months, either a job offer letter or additional pay stubs will be requested.
hair By Peter Andrew
Hewa
11-17 04:10 PM
+1, plus friends
more...
pyaradesi
07-20 09:57 PM
I feel sorry for EB3 folks even though I'm under EB2. But I get upset when some of the EB2 folks don't even know the reason why they started getting green cards recently all of a sudden ( b'coz of roll over). They don't educate themselves and talk as if they deserve the green cards. If was a collective effort from IV and fellow immigrants that pressurised USCIS to follow the rules and reduce the backlogs.
Are you implying every person born in India in the EB2 owes a debt of gratitude to IV?
Why do people not deserve their greencards? If they followed the law, stood in line, and the government of the USA deemed them fit for a GC what else do you need for them to be deserving? Touch your feet and get your blessings?
Are you implying every person born in India in the EB2 owes a debt of gratitude to IV?
Why do people not deserve their greencards? If they followed the law, stood in line, and the government of the USA deemed them fit for a GC what else do you need for them to be deserving? Touch your feet and get your blessings?
hot By Peter Andrew
mnkaushik
08-27 01:32 PM
..f(p)light still seems to be wheeling on the runway as compared to NSC's soaring high approvals. Any thoughts?:confused:
May be just may be because TSC approved a lot of cases for the current PD 2 years ago and have less cases than NSC.
May be just may be because TSC approved a lot of cases for the current PD 2 years ago and have less cases than NSC.
more...
house Over the next couple of weeks,
GC08
05-06 06:24 PM
I think we should be careful about what we (Employment based immigrats, esp. those who are stuck in backlogs) support. I definitely do not support any reform that does not give us priority or does not eliminate employment based immigration backlogs.
I also think green card lottery, chain immigration, and refugee green cards should be eliminated and those visa numbers should be used for employment based immigrants because all these people can immigrate just like us through employment. We contribute more to the American society and should be given priority. I guess when we become American someday, we would like immigrants who contribute to our community too. Isn't that right? :)
I also think green card lottery, chain immigration, and refugee green cards should be eliminated and those visa numbers should be used for employment based immigrants because all these people can immigrate just like us through employment. We contribute more to the American society and should be given priority. I guess when we become American someday, we would like immigrants who contribute to our community too. Isn't that right? :)
tattoo By Peter Andrew
xyz_123
08-29 03:21 PM
My attorney received the receipt notice for I-485 application today.
Application was received by NSC on July 23rd.
PD - Jan 2004
Application was received by NSC on July 23rd.
PD - Jan 2004
more...
pictures By Peter Andrew
sanhari
07-26 09:43 AM
GCperm, Thank you for your inputs.
I actually got this input of contacting congressman to implement this change, from USCIS only(their blog). I will also contact the ones mentioned in your posting. I also request all EB folks affected by this spillover usage not based on priority date, to contact them in addition to their local congressman. Let's not leave any stone unturned to make this happen, to help us all out. If this happens soon to create an impact, we may see some light in the upcoming bulletins. So all of you please do your part to contact them today(if not done already), I am on it now.
Sanhari,
If we go with your feeling, and run the Campaign right way then following is summary.
1) What you mentioned was there is no need to Legislative change for your solution only Interpretation of INA need to be changed challenged.
2) EB3 Folks want only on using Fall Across / Down /UP visa's to be allocated based on PD, rather then category.
3) Removing Country quota will need legislative change and EB3 folks don't want to take it on hand at this time.
4) You and EB3 folks are good with division created by this Campaign.
Now, If above summary is true then You need to be doing following,
1) READ INA and Find where is violation or Incorrect interpretation in Applying VISA to EB2.
2) You need to be contacting DOS - Mr. Charles Oppenheim / Hillary Clinton their 2007 interpretation of Applying VISA to EB2.
3) You need to be contacting DOS Liaison to Challenge their 2007 interpretation of Applying VISA to EB2.
4) If EB3 Guys are confident of incorrect INA interpretation, collect Money and Prepare for Law-Suit if needed.
5) As there is no Legislative changes needed, there is no need to contact Law makers (Senators, House members).
6) There is no Process improvements so no need to reach out to USCIS ombudsman.
7) Its About VISA allocation by DOS, so contacting USCIS won't help either.
Now Contacts for DOS,
Followings are Contact Information for DOS Liaison,
Palma R. Yanni (dl), DOS Liaison Committee Chair, AILA Past President, Washington, DC Contact Information (http://www.palma-yanni.com/contact.htm)
Jerome G. Grzeca, DOS Liaison Committee Vice-Chair, AILA Board of Governors, Milwaukee, WI http://www.grzecalaw.com/contact_us.cfm
Following is the Link to Send email/Questions to Department of State.
Contact Us at the U.S. State Department (http://contact-us.state.gov/cgi-bin/state.cfg/php/enduser/ask.php?p_sid=4Eiijc*j&p_accessibility=0&p_redirect=&p_lva=264&p_sp=cF9zcmNoPSZwX3NvcnRfYnk9JnBfZ3JpZHNvcnQ9JnBfc m93X2NudD0xMTYsMTE2JnBfcHJvZHM9JnBfY2F0cz0mcF9wdj0 mcF9jdj0mcF9zZWFyY2hfdHlwZT1hbnN3ZXJzLnNlYXJjaF9ub CZwX3BhZ2U9MQ)
Following is the Contact information for DOS
http://www.state.gov/documents/organization/111781.pdf
Oppenheim, Charles W. CA/VO/F/IV L415(CHIEF SA-1 (202) 663-1087
Good Luck and God Bless.
I actually got this input of contacting congressman to implement this change, from USCIS only(their blog). I will also contact the ones mentioned in your posting. I also request all EB folks affected by this spillover usage not based on priority date, to contact them in addition to their local congressman. Let's not leave any stone unturned to make this happen, to help us all out. If this happens soon to create an impact, we may see some light in the upcoming bulletins. So all of you please do your part to contact them today(if not done already), I am on it now.
Sanhari,
If we go with your feeling, and run the Campaign right way then following is summary.
1) What you mentioned was there is no need to Legislative change for your solution only Interpretation of INA need to be changed challenged.
2) EB3 Folks want only on using Fall Across / Down /UP visa's to be allocated based on PD, rather then category.
3) Removing Country quota will need legislative change and EB3 folks don't want to take it on hand at this time.
4) You and EB3 folks are good with division created by this Campaign.
Now, If above summary is true then You need to be doing following,
1) READ INA and Find where is violation or Incorrect interpretation in Applying VISA to EB2.
2) You need to be contacting DOS - Mr. Charles Oppenheim / Hillary Clinton their 2007 interpretation of Applying VISA to EB2.
3) You need to be contacting DOS Liaison to Challenge their 2007 interpretation of Applying VISA to EB2.
4) If EB3 Guys are confident of incorrect INA interpretation, collect Money and Prepare for Law-Suit if needed.
5) As there is no Legislative changes needed, there is no need to contact Law makers (Senators, House members).
6) There is no Process improvements so no need to reach out to USCIS ombudsman.
7) Its About VISA allocation by DOS, so contacting USCIS won't help either.
Now Contacts for DOS,
Followings are Contact Information for DOS Liaison,
Palma R. Yanni (dl), DOS Liaison Committee Chair, AILA Past President, Washington, DC Contact Information (http://www.palma-yanni.com/contact.htm)
Jerome G. Grzeca, DOS Liaison Committee Vice-Chair, AILA Board of Governors, Milwaukee, WI http://www.grzecalaw.com/contact_us.cfm
Following is the Link to Send email/Questions to Department of State.
Contact Us at the U.S. State Department (http://contact-us.state.gov/cgi-bin/state.cfg/php/enduser/ask.php?p_sid=4Eiijc*j&p_accessibility=0&p_redirect=&p_lva=264&p_sp=cF9zcmNoPSZwX3NvcnRfYnk9JnBfZ3JpZHNvcnQ9JnBfc m93X2NudD0xMTYsMTE2JnBfcHJvZHM9JnBfY2F0cz0mcF9wdj0 mcF9jdj0mcF9zZWFyY2hfdHlwZT1hbnN3ZXJzLnNlYXJjaF9ub CZwX3BhZ2U9MQ)
Following is the Contact information for DOS
http://www.state.gov/documents/organization/111781.pdf
Oppenheim, Charles W. CA/VO/F/IV L415(CHIEF SA-1 (202) 663-1087
Good Luck and God Bless.
dresses By Peter Andrew
glus
05-23 12:01 PM
This is awesome, glus. Thanks again for putting these fax numbers together.
No problem...I think fax can be a strong messages since it is a hard copy and it has greater chances to get read quicker than e-mails.. Please take some time and fax them. Fax takes a minute to send if the line is not busy. Keep trying and fax them.
No problem...I think fax can be a strong messages since it is a hard copy and it has greater chances to get read quicker than e-mails.. Please take some time and fax them. Fax takes a minute to send if the line is not busy. Keep trying and fax them.
more...
makeup By Peter Andrew
gsc999
07-07 12:07 AM
Why not in DC... IF we really plan then we can do this in DC.. ? may be next weekend?
--
It would be great if we can coordinate nationally, that way we can synergize our efforts.
--
It would be great if we can coordinate nationally, that way we can synergize our efforts.
girlfriend Peter Andrew Bosch / Miami
mallikonnet
02-15 10:50 AM
Feb 15, 2011 08:50:00 PST
Transaction ID: 12V53395N71013416
Transaction ID: 12V53395N71013416
hairstyles By Peter Andrew
gcnirvana
07-20 11:59 AM
Thanks Zooom, for starting this thread. I've mentioned about IV Core's selfless service in our 'Thanks' thread couple of days ago but didn't know about the magnitude. $64k is helluva money and its just not right coming from one pocket to favor thousands of others. Aman and other core, day by day you raise above and beyond our imaginations as a leader and guide. We assure you that you will not pay another single dime from your pocket.
I pledge $100 to Reimburse the core team now and more later.
Although the thread title says "Reimburse the core team" and I know that the core team will not take any money (and do not expect the memebrs to reimburse them) from the fund that we are planning on creating here...Stilll by contributing to this fund we can make sure that core does not have to bear any out of pocket personal expense in future while working on "our" goal.
Lets see how many of us are actually inetested in contributing. Once we have the number we can set a realistic goal and divide amongst ourselves.
For that I suggest we give this thread good two days to develop and check other members responses...
So here is a chance for everyone to contribute to our own goal. Lets keep this going. Who ever is interested pls reply. I will do a final count after 2 days as suggested and take it from there....
Guys: Its good to see response...Pls reply with the text "In" and the amount.
Members,
I am sure most of us have already gone through this article but those who have not pls do so. This elablarately tells about the sacrifices our core team(especially Aman) had to make inorder to be where we are today...I am sure this will encourage you....
http://www.businessweek.com/bwdaily/...eek+exclusives
========================
Message from Pappu:
Aman has made more financial sacrifices and time sacrifices than anyone else. Not a single penny has been reimbursed to him for his trips to DC, food and stay in DC or car rental in DC. He even risked his job and went to DC on unpaid leave at critical times because lobbying was important for getting our work done. We in the core team know this and when we see the kind of contributions we get from members, we feel disappointed that our efforts are not valued. When we started the $20 contributions people felt $20 was too high and wanted $10 per month or less. The kind of work and effort that is needed to push a single provision is phenomenal and needs lot of capital. The more the better. Sometimes reading posts that say IV core is selfish also disappoints us. People do not know the effort that goes in getting anything done. This website is simply a tool for us to communicate to everyone. The big effort is the lobbying work. We hope the Buisnessweek article helps people realize our hard work and people value it by contributing to it and helping us in all action items.
"Members please pledge the amount. Do NOT pay right now. Since these funds are to be directed towards reimbursing the administrative costs of the core team , we are not going to be adding it to the IV funds. We are working on a strategy to get this amount across to the IV core team members. We will instruct you on how to make the payment, once we formulate a strategy"
I pledge $100 to Reimburse the core team now and more later.
Although the thread title says "Reimburse the core team" and I know that the core team will not take any money (and do not expect the memebrs to reimburse them) from the fund that we are planning on creating here...Stilll by contributing to this fund we can make sure that core does not have to bear any out of pocket personal expense in future while working on "our" goal.
Lets see how many of us are actually inetested in contributing. Once we have the number we can set a realistic goal and divide amongst ourselves.
For that I suggest we give this thread good two days to develop and check other members responses...
So here is a chance for everyone to contribute to our own goal. Lets keep this going. Who ever is interested pls reply. I will do a final count after 2 days as suggested and take it from there....
Guys: Its good to see response...Pls reply with the text "In" and the amount.
Members,
I am sure most of us have already gone through this article but those who have not pls do so. This elablarately tells about the sacrifices our core team(especially Aman) had to make inorder to be where we are today...I am sure this will encourage you....
http://www.businessweek.com/bwdaily/...eek+exclusives
========================
Message from Pappu:
Aman has made more financial sacrifices and time sacrifices than anyone else. Not a single penny has been reimbursed to him for his trips to DC, food and stay in DC or car rental in DC. He even risked his job and went to DC on unpaid leave at critical times because lobbying was important for getting our work done. We in the core team know this and when we see the kind of contributions we get from members, we feel disappointed that our efforts are not valued. When we started the $20 contributions people felt $20 was too high and wanted $10 per month or less. The kind of work and effort that is needed to push a single provision is phenomenal and needs lot of capital. The more the better. Sometimes reading posts that say IV core is selfish also disappoints us. People do not know the effort that goes in getting anything done. This website is simply a tool for us to communicate to everyone. The big effort is the lobbying work. We hope the Buisnessweek article helps people realize our hard work and people value it by contributing to it and helping us in all action items.
"Members please pledge the amount. Do NOT pay right now. Since these funds are to be directed towards reimbursing the administrative costs of the core team , we are not going to be adding it to the IV funds. We are working on a strategy to get this amount across to the IV core team members. We will instruct you on how to make the payment, once we formulate a strategy"
coolman
10-04 03:07 PM
Applied on July 19th,NSC..no news yet..
neerajkandhari
10-09 09:08 AM
I am july 2 filer
I believe 180 days are over around 31 dec 2007 for using AC21
I am planning to quit my job and go to india for max 3 mnths
I have a job offer and they are ready to hire me from 1 april 2008
what precautions should i take so i dont have problems while coming back
I am planning to use AP for travelling and EAD for working
I believe 180 days are over around 31 dec 2007 for using AC21
I am planning to quit my job and go to india for max 3 mnths
I have a job offer and they are ready to hire me from 1 april 2008
what precautions should i take so i dont have problems while coming back
I am planning to use AP for travelling and EAD for working
No comments:
Post a Comment