mysticblue
08-17 12:31 AM
I'm on a H1B status and was initially working for Company A, with an approved Visa. I joined Company B and initiated a H1 transfer to them. I am on their pay role, however am on bench since i joined them. Its been 5 months and my visa transfer with Company B is still in Pending. Now, I have an offer from Company C, and am thinking about joining them.
Meanwhile, since Company B has not been able to find work, they have indicated a termination of my employment if i'm not placed in the project by end of this month. I think i have no other optiion but to join Company C before my visa with Company B is cancelled. I have been advised to go for a premium processing of H1 to Company C, so that by the time i'm out of Company B, i have a good chance of having approved visa from Company C.
1. Is it legal to transfer my Visa to Company C while my Visa with Company B is still in progress. Note that I have worked with Company B for about 5 months.
2. Can I use approval notice from Company A and pay stubs from Company B to initiate premium transfer with Company C ?
3. If i initiate a transfer with Company C, and later Company B terminates my employment, what will happen to my pending visa with Company C?
4. Will H1 transfer with Company C get affected if USCIS gets to know that my pending transfer with Company B has been cancelled?
5. Will it make any difference if I resign from Company B (after initiating transfer with Company C), before Company B terminates my employment.? Are termination and resignation cases treated in the same way by USCIS ?
Please help, as i'm in a bit of a crisis about what decision to take. Any kind on response for the above would be appreciated.
Meanwhile, since Company B has not been able to find work, they have indicated a termination of my employment if i'm not placed in the project by end of this month. I think i have no other optiion but to join Company C before my visa with Company B is cancelled. I have been advised to go for a premium processing of H1 to Company C, so that by the time i'm out of Company B, i have a good chance of having approved visa from Company C.
1. Is it legal to transfer my Visa to Company C while my Visa with Company B is still in progress. Note that I have worked with Company B for about 5 months.
2. Can I use approval notice from Company A and pay stubs from Company B to initiate premium transfer with Company C ?
3. If i initiate a transfer with Company C, and later Company B terminates my employment, what will happen to my pending visa with Company C?
4. Will H1 transfer with Company C get affected if USCIS gets to know that my pending transfer with Company B has been cancelled?
5. Will it make any difference if I resign from Company B (after initiating transfer with Company C), before Company B terminates my employment.? Are termination and resignation cases treated in the same way by USCIS ?
Please help, as i'm in a bit of a crisis about what decision to take. Any kind on response for the above would be appreciated.
wallpaper emo hairstyles for guys
perm2gc
06-15 01:53 PM
can you guys suggest how to proceed with my cases... where i am totally screwed up.
When I started to work in usa I was working for an employer in NJ after an year I got a better job offer and started to work for another employer(for whom I have been working for last 2 years).
Last Month I applied for my I140 with current employer work experience letter and co-worker letter (of my ex-employer in NJ). Now that I have an RFE for my I140 requesting me to send employer experience letter of my ex-employer. When I called up my ex-employer he was rude to me and firmly denied to provide any letter and hanged up the phone. Due to this RFE I am not able to proceed with my I485. Please let me know how to proceed...Thanking you all in advance.
Call him and say that by law he has to give otherwise you will reply to RFE from USCIS stating the reason"ex-employer not giving the employement letter" with full details of the company.
When I started to work in usa I was working for an employer in NJ after an year I got a better job offer and started to work for another employer(for whom I have been working for last 2 years).
Last Month I applied for my I140 with current employer work experience letter and co-worker letter (of my ex-employer in NJ). Now that I have an RFE for my I140 requesting me to send employer experience letter of my ex-employer. When I called up my ex-employer he was rude to me and firmly denied to provide any letter and hanged up the phone. Due to this RFE I am not able to proceed with my I485. Please let me know how to proceed...Thanking you all in advance.
Call him and say that by law he has to give otherwise you will reply to RFE from USCIS stating the reason"ex-employer not giving the employement letter" with full details of the company.
arpu31
11-17 01:03 PM
I believe u can apply ur own H4. because u have the H1 approval from ur spouse. just download form from uscis website. there is complete instruction over there.
Thx
Thanks! But if I apply for my own H4, I would require my copy of I797 and the I94 attached to that. My employer doesnt provide me with the copy of those. Would the documents from my husband good enough to apply in US?
Arpu
Thx
Thanks! But if I apply for my own H4, I would require my copy of I797 and the I94 attached to that. My employer doesnt provide me with the copy of those. Would the documents from my husband good enough to apply in US?
Arpu
2011 Emo Girls Long Emo Hairstyles;
smuggymba
10-20 05:49 PM
you said u file ITIN for tax needs - why did u apply for job dude. ITIN doesn't get u a job. H4 can't work in USA...as simple as that. Hire a good lawyer and tax consultant.
Hello! I'm on H1B, and my spouse is on H4. We received an ITIN for my spouse for our taxpaying needs. My spouse managed to get employed using the ITIN. We filed a joint tax return this year. We received a letter from SS administration saying "We cannot put these earnings on your Social Security record until the name and SSN reported agree with our records." My lawyer says: "your spouse is now barred from GC, because when she's worked for more than X amount of days she became OOS."
When the time will come for my employer to process my GC, what consequences will my spouse's unauthorised employment have on Her ability to receive a Greencard? What are the ways to rectify the situation? Appeals? Special provisions/clauses? Cost?
Thank you,
Hello! I'm on H1B, and my spouse is on H4. We received an ITIN for my spouse for our taxpaying needs. My spouse managed to get employed using the ITIN. We filed a joint tax return this year. We received a letter from SS administration saying "We cannot put these earnings on your Social Security record until the name and SSN reported agree with our records." My lawyer says: "your spouse is now barred from GC, because when she's worked for more than X amount of days she became OOS."
When the time will come for my employer to process my GC, what consequences will my spouse's unauthorised employment have on Her ability to receive a Greencard? What are the ways to rectify the situation? Appeals? Special provisions/clauses? Cost?
Thank you,
more...
FebPerm
11-24 08:32 PM
Hi,
Do we have to go through each and every decision of AAO by clicking on the dates or else Is there any efficient way to do that.
Thanks
Do we have to go through each and every decision of AAO by clicking on the dates or else Is there any efficient way to do that.
Thanks
amslonewolf
08-15 11:45 PM
Hi -
Does anyone have good or bad experiences with Indian immigration officers in the airport with AP while coming back to US?
I mean, do these guys know what an AP is?
Is it better to get the H1B stamping done?
I am sure folks on this forum will be going to India for the winter vacations, so any responses would benefit a lot of people..
Does anyone have good or bad experiences with Indian immigration officers in the airport with AP while coming back to US?
I mean, do these guys know what an AP is?
Is it better to get the H1B stamping done?
I am sure folks on this forum will be going to India for the winter vacations, so any responses would benefit a lot of people..
more...
naturopathicpt
06-26 05:32 PM
I appreciate your reply but I cannot understand what you mean on your first response Atty. Prashanthi. Some of my questions on my first statement have not been answered.
2010 emo haircuts for guys
smisachu
08-04 09:41 AM
mee too!
more...
EkAurAaya
03-19 09:46 PM
I think you need to talk to the CPA for tax and not lawyer....
This came from a real estate lawyer... usually they know what they are talking about. But you are right, wont be a bad idea to run this by a CPA
This came from a real estate lawyer... usually they know what they are talking about. But you are right, wont be a bad idea to run this by a CPA
hair round faces long hair, Emo
raysaikat
06-20 06:13 PM
Hi,
I have Visa stamped in my passport till 2010 , my passport expires in July 2008 , so i was given I 94 till july 2008 when i last entered USA. I have renewed my passport . How do i change the dates in I 94 . I tried Def. Inspection sites in San francisco they say it cannot be done there . Can i travel to mexico and come back the same day and get a new I 94 .
Thanks
Kris.
You need to go out of the country and come back.
I have Visa stamped in my passport till 2010 , my passport expires in July 2008 , so i was given I 94 till july 2008 when i last entered USA. I have renewed my passport . How do i change the dates in I 94 . I tried Def. Inspection sites in San francisco they say it cannot be done there . Can i travel to mexico and come back the same day and get a new I 94 .
Thanks
Kris.
You need to go out of the country and come back.
more...
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)
hot 2011 long hair styles for men
chaukas
10-23 01:50 PM
buy a return ticket . Cathay Pacific has tickets valid for a year. They have no change fees etc. so you can change the return date whenever you want.
more...
house emo hair for guys.
sankar_203
08-04 02:51 PM
Hi,
I started working for my employer last year on H1b. I've also singed employee agreement contract which stated to work for my employer for a period of 1 year (2080 hrs). It also states that in case of improper termination of the contract, the employee is reponsible for the damages caused.
My employer is based in Texas and I am working in california.
After working for my employer for a client about 6 months, I've got an offer from the same client for a permanent position and that I need to transfer my h1 inorder to accept the offer.I transfered my H1.
Since then my employer is trying to scare me with notices through mails. My friends has told me not to accept either mail/phone from my employer. My employer tried to reach me several times through mail/email/phone but couldn't.
Recently one of my room mates accepted a letter from an unknown person (through my employer's advocate) without my knowledge. The mail is a NOT legal notice but a printed document stating the breach of employee agreement handed by a person.
The letter stated the same thing which is present in the employee agreement that in case of improper termination, the employee has to pay for the damages. The damages in the letter include the damages over $10,000 incurred by my employer as a result of the termination of contract.
It has also stated in case I do not pay for the damamges, my employer has no choice but to persue with the arbitration method of resolving this issue.
The same thing I shared with few of my friends and I had mixed responses. One was insisting to pay for the damages in order for a smooth transition. The other has told me to post in this forum to get valuable advice from the members.
Another friend has told me not to bother as my employer also breached the general labour acts such as not paying for me while on bench, taking fees for the filing of h1,not paying for the medical insurance (as stated in the employment agreement). I dont know how to proceed in this regard.
I've the following queries it would be great if I could get some answers/discussions/advice on the same.
1. Is my employer really trying to scare me so that I can pay them for the damamges?
May be
2. Or is my employer completely confident about the breach of agreement and indeed heading for legal action?
May be
3. If so how would I approach from here?
Consulting with an attorney
4. Has anybody similar experiences with their employers?
yes me and my friend did
5. Is it advisable to send any such letters (as my employer did) stating the breach of agreement by my employer (such as not paying while on bench etc) ?
Not at all advisable..patience is virtue in this matter..
6. Should I wait till I get any legal notices from my employer? (I am very much scared about this and I should'nt regret in future that I didn't react to it).
Need not..call him up or go to his office(i recommend this) because we sound different over the phone..try to talk him/her out on this matter..he violated some labor rules, it doesn't mean he/she cannot come after u on this matter..court and labor department are two separate issues..any evidence against him/her can only be used by the discretion of judge..there are several loop holes in this contract issues..by experience i have only got to know a few of them..don't be scared..coz that doesn't help u..finally sorry to tell that i am not able to help you in giving a straight answer..but please do contact a legal attorney in this matter..just consult him/her and get their first hand opinion..also talk to ur employer face to face(if possible) and tell him/her u made few mistakes and i have done one mistake..tell them to get it over with..if u run away from him, he/she thinks ur scared and will try to scare u more..lastly please do not lose ur control by threating / abusing with emails or voice mails or any of that kind..coz that can be used against u inspite of his/her mistake..
Good luck..keep us posted..btw when ur working in calif..which state tax ur paying..was it calif or texas??
I started working for my employer last year on H1b. I've also singed employee agreement contract which stated to work for my employer for a period of 1 year (2080 hrs). It also states that in case of improper termination of the contract, the employee is reponsible for the damages caused.
My employer is based in Texas and I am working in california.
After working for my employer for a client about 6 months, I've got an offer from the same client for a permanent position and that I need to transfer my h1 inorder to accept the offer.I transfered my H1.
Since then my employer is trying to scare me with notices through mails. My friends has told me not to accept either mail/phone from my employer. My employer tried to reach me several times through mail/email/phone but couldn't.
Recently one of my room mates accepted a letter from an unknown person (through my employer's advocate) without my knowledge. The mail is a NOT legal notice but a printed document stating the breach of employee agreement handed by a person.
The letter stated the same thing which is present in the employee agreement that in case of improper termination, the employee has to pay for the damages. The damages in the letter include the damages over $10,000 incurred by my employer as a result of the termination of contract.
It has also stated in case I do not pay for the damamges, my employer has no choice but to persue with the arbitration method of resolving this issue.
The same thing I shared with few of my friends and I had mixed responses. One was insisting to pay for the damages in order for a smooth transition. The other has told me to post in this forum to get valuable advice from the members.
Another friend has told me not to bother as my employer also breached the general labour acts such as not paying for me while on bench, taking fees for the filing of h1,not paying for the medical insurance (as stated in the employment agreement). I dont know how to proceed in this regard.
I've the following queries it would be great if I could get some answers/discussions/advice on the same.
1. Is my employer really trying to scare me so that I can pay them for the damamges?
May be
2. Or is my employer completely confident about the breach of agreement and indeed heading for legal action?
May be
3. If so how would I approach from here?
Consulting with an attorney
4. Has anybody similar experiences with their employers?
yes me and my friend did
5. Is it advisable to send any such letters (as my employer did) stating the breach of agreement by my employer (such as not paying while on bench etc) ?
Not at all advisable..patience is virtue in this matter..
6. Should I wait till I get any legal notices from my employer? (I am very much scared about this and I should'nt regret in future that I didn't react to it).
Need not..call him up or go to his office(i recommend this) because we sound different over the phone..try to talk him/her out on this matter..he violated some labor rules, it doesn't mean he/she cannot come after u on this matter..court and labor department are two separate issues..any evidence against him/her can only be used by the discretion of judge..there are several loop holes in this contract issues..by experience i have only got to know a few of them..don't be scared..coz that doesn't help u..finally sorry to tell that i am not able to help you in giving a straight answer..but please do contact a legal attorney in this matter..just consult him/her and get their first hand opinion..also talk to ur employer face to face(if possible) and tell him/her u made few mistakes and i have done one mistake..tell them to get it over with..if u run away from him, he/she thinks ur scared and will try to scare u more..lastly please do not lose ur control by threating / abusing with emails or voice mails or any of that kind..coz that can be used against u inspite of his/her mistake..
Good luck..keep us posted..btw when ur working in calif..which state tax ur paying..was it calif or texas??
tattoo Emo Hairstyles For Long Hair
newcomer
07-11 10:37 PM
Good one. Could also add the IV logo on it
more...
pictures long hair styles for men with
return_to_india
01-19 04:42 PM
In this land where honey and milk flows, i always have that anxiety of loosing ( by virtue of lay off ) 'affordable' health care coverage and i haven't fully read what all fine-print stuff BlueCross Prudent Buyer plan have. And i do have a chronic condition. Currently the monthly premium is around $500 for the 3 member family.
dresses facebook, Emo
delhirocks
06-17 05:38 PM
Thank you, guys! It is not clear whether Statistics is a STEM major, but I think it is reasonable that it is, since Statistics is a branh of Math. Some universities have Statistics departments and others have Statistics as a concentration in a Math graduate program.
15-2041.00 Statisticians under Mathematics
whats the big confusion all about
15-2041.00 Statisticians under Mathematics
whats the big confusion all about
more...
makeup Long Emo Hair Styles for
eb3retro
07-16 01:27 PM
Thanks Raj. I am sure this will be helpful to many other people here too. Appreciate your time to write it as points.
The porting of PD is during I-140 filing. So there isn't any day limits as to when you can join the new company. If you leave your current company the only thing that you can carry over is the PD from your approved I-140. So this is what you should do.
1. Join the new company (the client of your current company)
2. Have them file labor certification.
3. Once labor approved while filing new I-140 your attorney need to request port of PD from your previously approved I-140.
That is all it takes. This is a standard process.
Make sure to get a legible copy of the approved I-140, not the courtesy copy, you need the actual I-140 approval. On Courtesy copy they clearly say that, using that copy you cannot claim it as a proof of approval/any benefit out of that. So that is important.
Also get all your experience letters. The new attorney might ask for it at the stage of filing labor itself.
Hope this clears your hold up.
PM me if you need further clarification.
Good luck on your new job.
-Raj:)
The porting of PD is during I-140 filing. So there isn't any day limits as to when you can join the new company. If you leave your current company the only thing that you can carry over is the PD from your approved I-140. So this is what you should do.
1. Join the new company (the client of your current company)
2. Have them file labor certification.
3. Once labor approved while filing new I-140 your attorney need to request port of PD from your previously approved I-140.
That is all it takes. This is a standard process.
Make sure to get a legible copy of the approved I-140, not the courtesy copy, you need the actual I-140 approval. On Courtesy copy they clearly say that, using that copy you cannot claim it as a proof of approval/any benefit out of that. So that is important.
Also get all your experience letters. The new attorney might ask for it at the stage of filing labor itself.
Hope this clears your hold up.
PM me if you need further clarification.
Good luck on your new job.
-Raj:)
girlfriend Emo Guys Short Sexy Haircuts
hemasar
09-12 02:03 PM
My ETA is P-### .... I used the link and my status is IN PROCESS
hairstyles long emo hairstyle
Saralayar
03-18 05:11 PM
there is no status called 'EAD' .. it is AOS/I-485 which gives the status. EAD just gives you work authorization. Probably the person who you talked to didn't have much idea about immigration.
FYI, I just got H4 extension for my wife (she got her SSN after showing her EAD few months back). So when you say that , getting SSN automatically changes status, is incorrect. What changes the status is if your spouse starts WORKING using EAD.. then she forgoes her H4 status and switches to AOS/485.
You are correct. Getting a SSN with EAD has nothing to do with H4.
FYI, I just got H4 extension for my wife (she got her SSN after showing her EAD few months back). So when you say that , getting SSN automatically changes status, is incorrect. What changes the status is if your spouse starts WORKING using EAD.. then she forgoes her H4 status and switches to AOS/485.
You are correct. Getting a SSN with EAD has nothing to do with H4.
gctoget
09-26 12:22 PM
How long does it take to get EAD card by post after Finger printing is done?
chanduv23
10-09 05:34 PM
^^^^^^^^^^^^
No comments:
Post a Comment