azure
03-20 12:34 PM
Not sure....but here is a related link.
http://domenici.senate.gov/news/record.cfm?id=251739
http://domenici.senate.gov/news/record.cfm?id=251739
waitingGC
01-22 08:38 PM
Thank you, IV core! You are great!
johnifanx98
04-23 09:53 AM
No bill was introduced in Senate. Where is the question of voting? If anti immigrants some how make waste these 2 weeks of time in Senate then there will not be enough time to discuss. Now 60% chance. If no bill is introduced in Senate before end of may it will come down to 40%.
http://www.immigrateusa.us/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=866&Itemid=63
http://www.immigrateusa.us/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=866&Itemid=63
purgan
04-26 02:52 PM
vikki76 may have gone a little overboard with the salary statement, but the rest is true....there is simply more information stored in govt databases for a foreign national, hence more rigorous screening is possible
more...
skynet2500
10-19 01:00 PM
Hello,
My EAD (based on I-485 for EB-3; PD - July 2003) expires in the first week of Nov and I applied for my renewal in August and got a notice stating that my application has been received and it will be processed.
I have not received the new EAD yet (status on the website says 'Initial review') and chances are that I may not get one before the current EAD expires.
Am I dead in the water? Both my wife and I need EAD as our H1 has expired and we have changed jobs.
Obviously I am worried sick,
Any help, pointers, suggestions are much appreciated.
Thanks,
Few Suggestions..
Contact USCIS to expedite the case. Usually they do it 90 days after they received the case. After this do the following..
- Contact ombudsman office
- Contact local senator office.
- Contact local congressman office
Good Luck.
My EAD (based on I-485 for EB-3; PD - July 2003) expires in the first week of Nov and I applied for my renewal in August and got a notice stating that my application has been received and it will be processed.
I have not received the new EAD yet (status on the website says 'Initial review') and chances are that I may not get one before the current EAD expires.
Am I dead in the water? Both my wife and I need EAD as our H1 has expired and we have changed jobs.
Obviously I am worried sick,
Any help, pointers, suggestions are much appreciated.
Thanks,
Few Suggestions..
Contact USCIS to expedite the case. Usually they do it 90 days after they received the case. After this do the following..
- Contact ombudsman office
- Contact local senator office.
- Contact local congressman office
Good Luck.
sriniks
12-07 06:01 PM
For the status question, your wife doesn't need EAD. Pending I-485 or AOS is a valid status to stay in the US. That said, some states like CA doesn't take I-485 receipt notice as a valid document for issuing license. They asked for EAD. So if your wife needs to drive she may have to get EAD.
For your second question, I assume the PD is still current. If thats the case, I would suggest taking infopass and find out the status. If you didn't get any satisfactory info, contact your senator/congressperson , ombudsman, open an SR etc. Don't sit idle waiting for USCIS to act.
Thank you yagw. Yes, the PD is current. Are there any restrictions on when we're eligible to take infopass? Like waiting for a certain period of time after the last appointment. For instance, when I called in, the representative refused to open an SR because it's not 90 days since our last appointment. Infopass is taken through the USCIS web site, right? The officer indicated we should be able to get a GC stamp in the passport until we get the card. It sounds odd to me. Anybody heard this happen before?
I wish I had applied for the EAD. I'm not sure what to do about the DL (we're indeed in CA). I'll try with the DMV and see if they'll renew without the EAD.
thanks!
srini
For your second question, I assume the PD is still current. If thats the case, I would suggest taking infopass and find out the status. If you didn't get any satisfactory info, contact your senator/congressperson , ombudsman, open an SR etc. Don't sit idle waiting for USCIS to act.
Thank you yagw. Yes, the PD is current. Are there any restrictions on when we're eligible to take infopass? Like waiting for a certain period of time after the last appointment. For instance, when I called in, the representative refused to open an SR because it's not 90 days since our last appointment. Infopass is taken through the USCIS web site, right? The officer indicated we should be able to get a GC stamp in the passport until we get the card. It sounds odd to me. Anybody heard this happen before?
I wish I had applied for the EAD. I'm not sure what to do about the DL (we're indeed in CA). I'll try with the DMV and see if they'll renew without the EAD.
thanks!
srini
more...
srkamath
06-28 05:46 PM
very useful perspectives from other organizations - thanks pappu... this election season will be very interesting.... i hope more rational.
bmeduru11
11-09 06:02 AM
Hi all,
Recently I recieved a RFE on ability to pay regarding my I-140.
I started working with a company in July 2006 and applying for I-140 in Nov 2006 with an existing labor of Nov 2004. My company is in losses all the time but I am getting more than proffered wage since I joined. Recently I received RFE regarding ability to pay and my attorney replied for it. Yesterday I received Intent to Deny notice as there is no evidence that company can pay me in 2005.
Please suggest me any options that I can do
Recently I recieved a RFE on ability to pay regarding my I-140.
I started working with a company in July 2006 and applying for I-140 in Nov 2006 with an existing labor of Nov 2004. My company is in losses all the time but I am getting more than proffered wage since I joined. Recently I received RFE regarding ability to pay and my attorney replied for it. Yesterday I received Intent to Deny notice as there is no evidence that company can pay me in 2005.
Please suggest me any options that I can do
more...
meridiani.planum
03-12 02:46 PM
the only way to extend the H1 is to:
- have an LC >365 days old
- her I-140 approved
Without either of those she does not qualify for H1 extensions. Best bet if EAD takes longer than 4 more months (should not, most people have got it within 90 days) and she cannot stop working for a while might be to try and recapture time spent abroad (to fully utilize the 6 years). If you were on vacation or travelling on business, hten all those days spent abroad can be used as additional H1 time. if thats been 4-5 months in ht elast 6 years, it might be worth recapturing...
WTF? A red-dot for this post??? Will the coward who marked me red for this please have the decency to explain why? I have deserved red on other posts (& even got some) but what on earth was wrong here?
- have an LC >365 days old
- her I-140 approved
Without either of those she does not qualify for H1 extensions. Best bet if EAD takes longer than 4 more months (should not, most people have got it within 90 days) and she cannot stop working for a while might be to try and recapture time spent abroad (to fully utilize the 6 years). If you were on vacation or travelling on business, hten all those days spent abroad can be used as additional H1 time. if thats been 4-5 months in ht elast 6 years, it might be worth recapturing...
WTF? A red-dot for this post??? Will the coward who marked me red for this please have the decency to explain why? I have deserved red on other posts (& even got some) but what on earth was wrong here?
senk1s
02-06 11:52 AM
H1-
cons:
H1 can be revoked by employer anytime, but they'll have to arrange for return transportation(in my opinion it is not as safe a fallback as it is commonly believed to be) - as always it depends on the employer
EAD:
pros:
One is never out of status till 485 is adjudicated adversely
cons:
H1 can be revoked by employer anytime, but they'll have to arrange for return transportation(in my opinion it is not as safe a fallback as it is commonly believed to be) - as always it depends on the employer
EAD:
pros:
One is never out of status till 485 is adjudicated adversely
more...
sunty
11-05 03:37 PM
You are not as bad as you think. Read USCIS guidance on the subject. If your I-140 is not approved by 180 days, you can still use AC21. In that case, the adjudicator while looking at your I-485, sees if filed I-140 was approvable. If so, you are good to go, provided you can prove that you have a new same/similar job offer.
For USCIS guidance see Page 3, Q1 at: http://www.ilw.com/immigdaily/news/2005,0520-ac21.pdf
Thanks jsb....I didn't know this....But I think its still better if I wait for 140 approval...Then atleast one other uncertainty will be removed from my GC journey...Hopefully it would only take a month or two more than normal processing time for my 140...If it gets delayed further, then I might use it anyways..It's nice to know though that I have an option..Thanks again
For USCIS guidance see Page 3, Q1 at: http://www.ilw.com/immigdaily/news/2005,0520-ac21.pdf
Thanks jsb....I didn't know this....But I think its still better if I wait for 140 approval...Then atleast one other uncertainty will be removed from my GC journey...Hopefully it would only take a month or two more than normal processing time for my 140...If it gets delayed further, then I might use it anyways..It's nice to know though that I have an option..Thanks again
Pagal
12-17 12:36 PM
Hello,
An approved H1-B petition is an approval for you to undertake employment within US, while a H1-B stamp is to allow you to knock on the US door (PoE) where an IO will decide whether to let you in or not.
There is no requirement that states that legally you must be working continuously within US if you are on H1-B (if anyone knows otherwise, he/she should post the appropriate link).
In short, you should not have any issue at all. The IO will ask why you were out of US and you can tell him/her that you were out 'cause you were consulting from India and not working in US for the past year. You should keep the new offer letter with you to prove to the IO that you have a new job within US now and that's why you want to enter the country.
Do consult a lawyer, but IMHO, you should be fine as a fiddle! :)
An approved H1-B petition is an approval for you to undertake employment within US, while a H1-B stamp is to allow you to knock on the US door (PoE) where an IO will decide whether to let you in or not.
There is no requirement that states that legally you must be working continuously within US if you are on H1-B (if anyone knows otherwise, he/she should post the appropriate link).
In short, you should not have any issue at all. The IO will ask why you were out of US and you can tell him/her that you were out 'cause you were consulting from India and not working in US for the past year. You should keep the new offer letter with you to prove to the IO that you have a new job within US now and that's why you want to enter the country.
Do consult a lawyer, but IMHO, you should be fine as a fiddle! :)
more...
getta05
03-27 10:40 PM
Oh no
Im on a L2 visa.
Im on a L2 visa.
wellwishergc
04-05 08:01 AM
Thank you for starting this thread.
I still feel that we need a separate bill for legal immigration or some amendments to the existing law to ease our plight. Clubbing us together with issues of 'undocumented workers' have two possible outcomes:
1) The bill does not clear at all. If there is so much resistance to the bill in the senate, imagine the resistance that it will receive in the house and the various voting processes that it has to go through.
2) The bill clears along with the provisions for the 'undocumented workers'. The USCIS is understaffed to handle the rush of applications that will flow in due to the passage of the bill, making the backlogs much more time-consuming than what it is today. Even though there would be enough visa numbers available, the wait times will nullify any mileage that is gained for legal immigration through the bill.
I think, passage of Frist bill with no 'guest worker' provisions for 'undocumented workers' or a separate bill altogether dedicated to legal immigration provisions are our safest bets.
Any thoughts?
All,
I posted another thread asking folks to thank core members for their sacrifice and great leadership. But at the same time few members like to "excercise their
freedom of voice" & We should all agree that constructive debate & sometimes criticism brings in new ideas and better path.
We should define ground rules for ourselves which will lead to efficient use of core members time:
1) Ensure that we make every effort to find answer before asking question/suggestion/complaint.
2) Keep one long thread without duplication.
3) Understand that Core members have job/family , so they have limited bandwidth .. please exercise patience.
4) Maintain civil constructive discourse, Which has a referanceble information if You want to send a link to a lawmaker or any other authority/influencer/potential volunteer or help someone become a wellwisher.
5) Understand the limitations of IV/lobbyist , So help them to make things happen & don't expect gurantees.
6) Never use derogatory remarks, even against proven distractors.
7) Please put forward only genuine concerns clearly to avoid misunderstanding
8) Ignore "whiners", But fully respect people with genuine concern/objection.
9) Please put forward only thoughts relevent to scope of current forum/discussion..
.. eg. "Discussing the gramatical mistake of someone's message is not relavent to this forum .." .
10) Always keep in mind that this is public forum , so It is our responsibility to show ourselves collectively in positive light
by not only passionate for our cause , But also professional in our responses.
Please add other ground rules, So that we can have a good platform to discuss our issues and influence the working of IV to begin with & US congress eventually.Thisshould be good forum for members like me, who can't fully participate because of demanding schedule, others please participate other ways too.
I still feel that we need a separate bill for legal immigration or some amendments to the existing law to ease our plight. Clubbing us together with issues of 'undocumented workers' have two possible outcomes:
1) The bill does not clear at all. If there is so much resistance to the bill in the senate, imagine the resistance that it will receive in the house and the various voting processes that it has to go through.
2) The bill clears along with the provisions for the 'undocumented workers'. The USCIS is understaffed to handle the rush of applications that will flow in due to the passage of the bill, making the backlogs much more time-consuming than what it is today. Even though there would be enough visa numbers available, the wait times will nullify any mileage that is gained for legal immigration through the bill.
I think, passage of Frist bill with no 'guest worker' provisions for 'undocumented workers' or a separate bill altogether dedicated to legal immigration provisions are our safest bets.
Any thoughts?
All,
I posted another thread asking folks to thank core members for their sacrifice and great leadership. But at the same time few members like to "excercise their
freedom of voice" & We should all agree that constructive debate & sometimes criticism brings in new ideas and better path.
We should define ground rules for ourselves which will lead to efficient use of core members time:
1) Ensure that we make every effort to find answer before asking question/suggestion/complaint.
2) Keep one long thread without duplication.
3) Understand that Core members have job/family , so they have limited bandwidth .. please exercise patience.
4) Maintain civil constructive discourse, Which has a referanceble information if You want to send a link to a lawmaker or any other authority/influencer/potential volunteer or help someone become a wellwisher.
5) Understand the limitations of IV/lobbyist , So help them to make things happen & don't expect gurantees.
6) Never use derogatory remarks, even against proven distractors.
7) Please put forward only genuine concerns clearly to avoid misunderstanding
8) Ignore "whiners", But fully respect people with genuine concern/objection.
9) Please put forward only thoughts relevent to scope of current forum/discussion..
.. eg. "Discussing the gramatical mistake of someone's message is not relavent to this forum .." .
10) Always keep in mind that this is public forum , so It is our responsibility to show ourselves collectively in positive light
by not only passionate for our cause , But also professional in our responses.
Please add other ground rules, So that we can have a good platform to discuss our issues and influence the working of IV to begin with & US congress eventually.Thisshould be good forum for members like me, who can't fully participate because of demanding schedule, others please participate other ways too.
more...
northstar1
07-26 02:25 PM
My company is going through a merger and it will be complete by third qtr of this year. I already filed my AOS on July 2nd.
I was told by my immigration attorney that if a buyer (new company) takeover all the immigration liabilities then I don't need to file an amendment. Is this correct?
yeah but the question is - assuming your PD becomes current and a visa number is available, will your i-485 be skipped over due to this new successor in interest i-140 pending approval, or is it simply looked at as supporting evidence, since you had a prior approved i-140, and the i-485 is therefore adjudicated.
What i'm trying to figure out is how the successor in interest i-140's are processed.
I was told by my immigration attorney that if a buyer (new company) takeover all the immigration liabilities then I don't need to file an amendment. Is this correct?
yeah but the question is - assuming your PD becomes current and a visa number is available, will your i-485 be skipped over due to this new successor in interest i-140 pending approval, or is it simply looked at as supporting evidence, since you had a prior approved i-140, and the i-485 is therefore adjudicated.
What i'm trying to figure out is how the successor in interest i-140's are processed.
byeusa
07-11 01:54 AM
Anything I can do to help?
Call UNINPAC and give an earful so that they don't mis spell IMMIGRATION.
Call UNINPAC and give an earful so that they don't mis spell IMMIGRATION.
more...
bmeduru11
11-09 01:50 PM
Can you tell me ur category (EB2 or EB3) and RFE received date?
EB2 with Nov'04 priority date
EB2 with Nov'04 priority date
aranya
03-09 03:07 PM
Hi,
Currently i am working for a for-profit company on F1-OPT until April-07 (when my OPT expires)
This company will file H1B for me on April 1st for start date of Oct 1st and consequently, i will be out of job for 5 months (May-Sept).
Previously the company said that they will put be on Leave of Absense (LOA) for this 5 month gap until my H1b start-date kicks off on Oct 1st but now,
they are telling me that i will be terminated at April but will be hired again on Oct 1st and they will not put me on LOA.
1. Is there any way i can protect my job as they are terminating me now and then promising me to re-hire again on Oct 1st?
2. Should i ask for a job offer later stating a new hire date of Oct 1st?
3. Anything i am missing here? -- concerned that they first told me i will be on LOA but now telling me i will be terminated and again re-hired.
Note: The company is paying for both atorney and H1b fees and for this 5 month gap, i will be on H4, so no need to leave US.
Will appreciate any feedback on my 3 questions/concerns above - than ks.
I was in a similar position a few years ago. I had to be at home for 1 month.
From that experience I know that your company is approaching the situation in the correct/legal fashion. It is illegal for the company to employ you (even on LOA without pay or benefits) once your OPT expires.
1] Most jobs are at-will meaning there is no real way to "protect your job".
2] If they are filing for your H1 then the company will be submitting a letter to the government saying that they intend to employ you starting October 1, you can ask for a copy of the letter.
3] They must have talked to their immigration attorney who set them straight about LOA etc.
As others mentioned, if the company is willing to spend 5k to get you a H1, they intend to employ you after October 1.
As for "back-up H1", you can definitely look for a job and get a H1 from a different company also but on October 1st you will have to choose where you want to work. Remember if you choose to get "back-up H1s", you are essentially screwing one company and also wasting one valuable H1 visa. You are being un-necessarily cautious if not downright paranoid. However, if you are person who believes in "back-up tickets", "back-up house" in case "back-up car" etc. then go ahead, look for "back-up H1s".
Good luck.
Currently i am working for a for-profit company on F1-OPT until April-07 (when my OPT expires)
This company will file H1B for me on April 1st for start date of Oct 1st and consequently, i will be out of job for 5 months (May-Sept).
Previously the company said that they will put be on Leave of Absense (LOA) for this 5 month gap until my H1b start-date kicks off on Oct 1st but now,
they are telling me that i will be terminated at April but will be hired again on Oct 1st and they will not put me on LOA.
1. Is there any way i can protect my job as they are terminating me now and then promising me to re-hire again on Oct 1st?
2. Should i ask for a job offer later stating a new hire date of Oct 1st?
3. Anything i am missing here? -- concerned that they first told me i will be on LOA but now telling me i will be terminated and again re-hired.
Note: The company is paying for both atorney and H1b fees and for this 5 month gap, i will be on H4, so no need to leave US.
Will appreciate any feedback on my 3 questions/concerns above - than ks.
I was in a similar position a few years ago. I had to be at home for 1 month.
From that experience I know that your company is approaching the situation in the correct/legal fashion. It is illegal for the company to employ you (even on LOA without pay or benefits) once your OPT expires.
1] Most jobs are at-will meaning there is no real way to "protect your job".
2] If they are filing for your H1 then the company will be submitting a letter to the government saying that they intend to employ you starting October 1, you can ask for a copy of the letter.
3] They must have talked to their immigration attorney who set them straight about LOA etc.
As others mentioned, if the company is willing to spend 5k to get you a H1, they intend to employ you after October 1.
As for "back-up H1", you can definitely look for a job and get a H1 from a different company also but on October 1st you will have to choose where you want to work. Remember if you choose to get "back-up H1s", you are essentially screwing one company and also wasting one valuable H1 visa. You are being un-necessarily cautious if not downright paranoid. However, if you are person who believes in "back-up tickets", "back-up house" in case "back-up car" etc. then go ahead, look for "back-up H1s".
Good luck.
Leo07
10-09 06:55 PM
Basically, the VB just says that "Even though you waited for however number of years, gone through all the pains with employers, you are NO closer to getting GC than you were a month ago"
How pathetic is our situation? Every time I think of it as the bottom,there is a new low next month? It's just a never ending tale.
How pathetic is our situation? Every time I think of it as the bottom,there is a new low next month? It's just a never ending tale.
aroranuj
06-27 04:06 PM
Has anyone had any luck getting your I-140 Receipt # by going on an Infopass Appt?
imm_pro
05-15 11:15 PM
This is awsome..also on the newsdesk..:):):):):)
Feinstein, Lofgren use Iraq spending bill to push for guest-worker program
05-15) 19:18 PDT Washington - -- Two of California's most immigrant-dependent industries - agriculture and Silicon Valley - are pushing narrow measures through Congress in an effort to employ foreign workers at opposite ends of the labor market, people who pick vegetables and the postgraduate engineers and scientists of Silicon Valley.
Sen. Dianne Feinstein attached a farm guest-worker program to the giant Iraq spending bill today in a last-ditch effort to remedy a shortage of workers in California's produce fields as the federal government continues to crack down on illegal immigration and the political climate proves hostile to more sweeping measures.
Rep. Zoe Lofgren, D-San Jose, teaming with Republicans, is pushing several bills to give permanent residence to top engineering talent.
"It's an emergency," Feinstein said of the farm worker situation. "If you can't get people to prune, to plant, to pick, to pack, you can't run a farm."
Her addition to the Iraq spending bill would give temporary legal status to 1.3 million farm workers over the next five years, but it would provide no path to citizenship or permanent residency. It passed the Senate Appropriations Committee 17 to 12 today.
Workers applying for the program would have to prove they had worked on U.S. farms for at least 150 days or 863 hours, or had earned at least $17,000, during the last four years. They would have to remain working in agriculture for the next five years, when the program would expire.
The move marks an end for now to efforts to give farm workers a path to citizenship after a sweeping immigration bill crashed in the Senate last June. Feinstein has been trying all year to attach a bill called AgJobs but has met nothing but dead-ends.
Western Growers, representing California farmers, and the United Farm Workers of American union joined in backing the bill. Western Growers President Tom Nassif said large growers are accelerating efforts to move their farming operations to Mexico. The 15 growers out of several hundred who responded to a survey and were willing to talk about their plans moved 84,000 acres worth of crop production to Mexico this year, twice as many acres as last year, Nassif said.
"Once the acreage moves to Mexico, it's there permanently," Nassif said. "Much of the remaining open space in California is agricultural land. If it's not farmed, we'd be growing condos or cementing it over with office buildings."
The tightening of the border has made it increasingly difficult, dangerous and expensive for laborers to return to the United States if they leave, disrupting the traditional circular flow of farm workers from Mexico to California's fields in the Salinas and Central valleys. Most farm workers arrive illegally, and farmers complain that an existing guest worker program called H2A is cumbersome and ineffective. Feinstein's bill would streamline that program's rules.
Growers are apprehensive about a new administration effort, temporarily stopped by a federal court, that would require employers to match workers with a valid Social Security number or be heavily fined. The Department of Homeland Security is refining the rule to get past court objections.
United Farmworkers President Arturo Rodriguez said farming is facing "a very real emergency" and applauded the bill as a "critical but temporary fix to a much larger problem."
Feinstein acknowledged that the chances of getting the bill all the way through Congress, even attached to war spending, is "uphill all the way."
On the other side of the Capitol, Rep. Zoe Lofgren, D-San Jose, is teaming with conservative Republicans to try to push similar discreetly targeted measures for Silicon Valley. She has dropped efforts for now to expand the controversial H-1B program for temporary high-skilled workers, which again this year ran out of its 85,000 visas on the first day they were released. Lofgren said the program needs changes, given its wide use by Indian offshoring companies.
Instead, Lofgren has introduced a passel of five small-bore immigration bills, among them one that would allow masters' and doctoral graduates from U.S. universities to apply immediately for permanent residence, skipping the H-1B program altogether.
"Most people would agree if you get your Ph.D in engineering from an American university, you've got something to offer this country," Lofgren said. "Right now, we have no ability to keep those people here ... we send them home to compete against Americans. It would make more sense to keep them here to help us compete."
Lofgren has even teamed up on one bill, to "recapture" unused permanent resident slots, with Rep. James Sensenbrenner, the Wisconsin Republican famous as the author of immigration crackdown legislation, never enacted, that was so harsh it led to the nation's first large-scale Latino protests in 2006.
"What's happened is that with the shortage of very high-level people, multinational companies are sending their project teams offshore," Lofgren said. "Not only the top hot-shot leading the team, but all the support jobs that go with that hot shot. Among the people I've met is a guy who spent four years at Harvard, seven at Stanford's engineering school, then did practical training and has been here six years on an H1B, and he's in limbo. He's an extremely talented person and has no idea what his future is going to be. He's being recruited in Australia and Europe, and he's ready to bail out. What he needs is not more temporary time."
Members of the Silicon Valley Leadership Group of business executives spent Thursday lobbying Congress on high-skilled immigration and tax breaks for solar energy and research and development.
"This is no time to say to high-skilled workers in a global economy that we don't want you," said Barry Cinnamon, chief executive of Akeena Solar in Los Gatos. "We're happy to have that argument with anyone."
E-mail Carolyn Lochhead at clochhead@sfchronicle.com
Feinstein, Lofgren use Iraq spending bill to push for guest-worker program
05-15) 19:18 PDT Washington - -- Two of California's most immigrant-dependent industries - agriculture and Silicon Valley - are pushing narrow measures through Congress in an effort to employ foreign workers at opposite ends of the labor market, people who pick vegetables and the postgraduate engineers and scientists of Silicon Valley.
Sen. Dianne Feinstein attached a farm guest-worker program to the giant Iraq spending bill today in a last-ditch effort to remedy a shortage of workers in California's produce fields as the federal government continues to crack down on illegal immigration and the political climate proves hostile to more sweeping measures.
Rep. Zoe Lofgren, D-San Jose, teaming with Republicans, is pushing several bills to give permanent residence to top engineering talent.
"It's an emergency," Feinstein said of the farm worker situation. "If you can't get people to prune, to plant, to pick, to pack, you can't run a farm."
Her addition to the Iraq spending bill would give temporary legal status to 1.3 million farm workers over the next five years, but it would provide no path to citizenship or permanent residency. It passed the Senate Appropriations Committee 17 to 12 today.
Workers applying for the program would have to prove they had worked on U.S. farms for at least 150 days or 863 hours, or had earned at least $17,000, during the last four years. They would have to remain working in agriculture for the next five years, when the program would expire.
The move marks an end for now to efforts to give farm workers a path to citizenship after a sweeping immigration bill crashed in the Senate last June. Feinstein has been trying all year to attach a bill called AgJobs but has met nothing but dead-ends.
Western Growers, representing California farmers, and the United Farm Workers of American union joined in backing the bill. Western Growers President Tom Nassif said large growers are accelerating efforts to move their farming operations to Mexico. The 15 growers out of several hundred who responded to a survey and were willing to talk about their plans moved 84,000 acres worth of crop production to Mexico this year, twice as many acres as last year, Nassif said.
"Once the acreage moves to Mexico, it's there permanently," Nassif said. "Much of the remaining open space in California is agricultural land. If it's not farmed, we'd be growing condos or cementing it over with office buildings."
The tightening of the border has made it increasingly difficult, dangerous and expensive for laborers to return to the United States if they leave, disrupting the traditional circular flow of farm workers from Mexico to California's fields in the Salinas and Central valleys. Most farm workers arrive illegally, and farmers complain that an existing guest worker program called H2A is cumbersome and ineffective. Feinstein's bill would streamline that program's rules.
Growers are apprehensive about a new administration effort, temporarily stopped by a federal court, that would require employers to match workers with a valid Social Security number or be heavily fined. The Department of Homeland Security is refining the rule to get past court objections.
United Farmworkers President Arturo Rodriguez said farming is facing "a very real emergency" and applauded the bill as a "critical but temporary fix to a much larger problem."
Feinstein acknowledged that the chances of getting the bill all the way through Congress, even attached to war spending, is "uphill all the way."
On the other side of the Capitol, Rep. Zoe Lofgren, D-San Jose, is teaming with conservative Republicans to try to push similar discreetly targeted measures for Silicon Valley. She has dropped efforts for now to expand the controversial H-1B program for temporary high-skilled workers, which again this year ran out of its 85,000 visas on the first day they were released. Lofgren said the program needs changes, given its wide use by Indian offshoring companies.
Instead, Lofgren has introduced a passel of five small-bore immigration bills, among them one that would allow masters' and doctoral graduates from U.S. universities to apply immediately for permanent residence, skipping the H-1B program altogether.
"Most people would agree if you get your Ph.D in engineering from an American university, you've got something to offer this country," Lofgren said. "Right now, we have no ability to keep those people here ... we send them home to compete against Americans. It would make more sense to keep them here to help us compete."
Lofgren has even teamed up on one bill, to "recapture" unused permanent resident slots, with Rep. James Sensenbrenner, the Wisconsin Republican famous as the author of immigration crackdown legislation, never enacted, that was so harsh it led to the nation's first large-scale Latino protests in 2006.
"What's happened is that with the shortage of very high-level people, multinational companies are sending their project teams offshore," Lofgren said. "Not only the top hot-shot leading the team, but all the support jobs that go with that hot shot. Among the people I've met is a guy who spent four years at Harvard, seven at Stanford's engineering school, then did practical training and has been here six years on an H1B, and he's in limbo. He's an extremely talented person and has no idea what his future is going to be. He's being recruited in Australia and Europe, and he's ready to bail out. What he needs is not more temporary time."
Members of the Silicon Valley Leadership Group of business executives spent Thursday lobbying Congress on high-skilled immigration and tax breaks for solar energy and research and development.
"This is no time to say to high-skilled workers in a global economy that we don't want you," said Barry Cinnamon, chief executive of Akeena Solar in Los Gatos. "We're happy to have that argument with anyone."
E-mail Carolyn Lochhead at clochhead@sfchronicle.com
No comments:
Post a Comment