conchshell
07-30 12:39 PM
I know that in these situations patience is virtue, but somehow in last couple of weeks my stress level is going really high. I am heavily suffering from COLTS, and these type of events just freak me out!!
wallpaper proberaum Photos from penus
lostinbeta
10-21 01:35 AM
Wow, very interesting. I have never heard of that before.
Well where I was thinking falls in those rules, according to that grid, it was #2.
Like I said though, put it where you want... don't mind me...just blurting stuff out.
Well where I was thinking falls in those rules, according to that grid, it was #2.
Like I said though, put it where you want... don't mind me...just blurting stuff out.
chanduv23
02-05 03:39 PM
I know the residency application process. I needed help in finding out any hospitals or institutions offering the observership programs.
Thanks
go to usmleforum.org , you will get excellent help there, it is most happening for FMGs , from what I hear, getting an observership needs recomendation, so start using your network to find any doctors. Observerships are generally not given to people without recomendation because of the HIPAA rules. You may be better off seeking a research position too, stick to New York City where you have a lot of community hospitals and are h1b friendly and you will definitely find some of your alumni, seniors etc... So start off now and try to get some leads.
Good Luck
One more piece of advice: Though u may find a lot of Indians/South Asians on h1b doing residencies, things are changing now, hospitals are now very choosy on h1bs and it is a challenge to secure a residency on h1b. A lot of H1bs are given to people with exceptional scores with experience and most of them go to people who have UK clinical experience (people worked 5 to 10 years in UK) as they seem to be a natural fit. So do your homework and work towards your target.
Thanks
go to usmleforum.org , you will get excellent help there, it is most happening for FMGs , from what I hear, getting an observership needs recomendation, so start using your network to find any doctors. Observerships are generally not given to people without recomendation because of the HIPAA rules. You may be better off seeking a research position too, stick to New York City where you have a lot of community hospitals and are h1b friendly and you will definitely find some of your alumni, seniors etc... So start off now and try to get some leads.
Good Luck
One more piece of advice: Though u may find a lot of Indians/South Asians on h1b doing residencies, things are changing now, hospitals are now very choosy on h1bs and it is a challenge to secure a residency on h1b. A lot of H1bs are given to people with exceptional scores with experience and most of them go to people who have UK clinical experience (people worked 5 to 10 years in UK) as they seem to be a natural fit. So do your homework and work towards your target.
2011 penus: Mmm! My two favourite
ita
01-23 08:30 PM
Suggestions.
1 Since the main reason behind the retrogression is the lack of Visa numbers I feel it would be a great idea to process the 485 applications , make a decision on the case and let the applicant know about the decision though the actual card can be mailed when the Visa Numbers become available . This would reduce the anxiety on behalf of the applicants and would also give USCIS ample time to process all the applications.
2. Yearly extension of EAD/AP is getting so expensive especially when one doesn't know how many years we have to keep doing the extensions.
It's a known fact that except for the July 07 bulletin EB3 India PD has hardly touched year 2002 since Dec 2004.
Some of the EB3 I folks with a 2005 PD, that I know have been issued one year extension on their EAD though they applied for the extensions in mid July(2008).
Example of EAD/AP anxiety:
AP document says that it should be used for emergency travel. This rule on AP
was formed at a time when 485 processing would take not more than 6 months.
In the present scenario with 485 processing taking years I think a person using EAD would end up using AP many times . Officers at the POE sometimes remind us the rule that AP should be used only in emergency and some of them give the person hard time if they believe the travel was not for emergency purpose.
I guess we are supposed to have a proof of emergency travel.
Though AC21 lets one change jobs 180 days after filing the 485 application with the I40 approved for more than 180 days when reentering the country some of the officer(s) sometimes ask the person if they are still with the same company that filed their GC.I don't know yet what they would do/say if one had changed their jobs because the people who were asked this question did not change their employer at that time. But the fact that they ask us this question makes us apprehensive about changing jobs.
With so many rules where most of them were formed long back it's making applicant's life increasingly tough as the applicants themselves don't want to do anything that would be construed/fall on the wrong side of the rules.We are forced to watch our steps multiple times even in the case of simple things like job changes,travelout of country etc.
When I repeatedly read about how USICS is inundated with 485 applications due to July 2007 bulletin I keep wondering why USCIS would want to increase it's work load every year with all these EAD/AP renewal applications.
Suggestion
Once upon a time when the 485 processing took like 6 months, EAD/AP had different meaning. In the present scenario when not many of us know how many more yeras it's going to be before (especially EB3 I folks) we get our GreenCard I would think it would be better to use the pending 485 application to change jobs and reenter the country.
This would save money/time for the applicant and lot of time for USICS.
Thank you.
1 Since the main reason behind the retrogression is the lack of Visa numbers I feel it would be a great idea to process the 485 applications , make a decision on the case and let the applicant know about the decision though the actual card can be mailed when the Visa Numbers become available . This would reduce the anxiety on behalf of the applicants and would also give USCIS ample time to process all the applications.
2. Yearly extension of EAD/AP is getting so expensive especially when one doesn't know how many years we have to keep doing the extensions.
It's a known fact that except for the July 07 bulletin EB3 India PD has hardly touched year 2002 since Dec 2004.
Some of the EB3 I folks with a 2005 PD, that I know have been issued one year extension on their EAD though they applied for the extensions in mid July(2008).
Example of EAD/AP anxiety:
AP document says that it should be used for emergency travel. This rule on AP
was formed at a time when 485 processing would take not more than 6 months.
In the present scenario with 485 processing taking years I think a person using EAD would end up using AP many times . Officers at the POE sometimes remind us the rule that AP should be used only in emergency and some of them give the person hard time if they believe the travel was not for emergency purpose.
I guess we are supposed to have a proof of emergency travel.
Though AC21 lets one change jobs 180 days after filing the 485 application with the I40 approved for more than 180 days when reentering the country some of the officer(s) sometimes ask the person if they are still with the same company that filed their GC.I don't know yet what they would do/say if one had changed their jobs because the people who were asked this question did not change their employer at that time. But the fact that they ask us this question makes us apprehensive about changing jobs.
With so many rules where most of them were formed long back it's making applicant's life increasingly tough as the applicants themselves don't want to do anything that would be construed/fall on the wrong side of the rules.We are forced to watch our steps multiple times even in the case of simple things like job changes,travelout of country etc.
When I repeatedly read about how USICS is inundated with 485 applications due to July 2007 bulletin I keep wondering why USCIS would want to increase it's work load every year with all these EAD/AP renewal applications.
Suggestion
Once upon a time when the 485 processing took like 6 months, EAD/AP had different meaning. In the present scenario when not many of us know how many more yeras it's going to be before (especially EB3 I folks) we get our GreenCard I would think it would be better to use the pending 485 application to change jobs and reenter the country.
This would save money/time for the applicant and lot of time for USICS.
Thank you.
more...
ca_immigrant
05-19 06:44 PM
I am also travelling with the family in June for a couple of months !
the murthy link and this thread over all is helpful !
Our company's lawyer mentioned that if the 485 gets approved while abroad then when I come back I just tell the officer at the entry point that I was out and do not have the card in hand. So I enter using AP.
I also asked him (and in another thread here ) if I can have the card mailed to India by a friend and he said yes, I can do that if I am comfortable with it.
On a different note , one other person mentioned to me that one has to be in the US when the 485 application is approved or else they can reject the application, but that does not sound true and nor I have heard anything like that from the lawyer or in any of the forums !!
the murthy link and this thread over all is helpful !
Our company's lawyer mentioned that if the 485 gets approved while abroad then when I come back I just tell the officer at the entry point that I was out and do not have the card in hand. So I enter using AP.
I also asked him (and in another thread here ) if I can have the card mailed to India by a friend and he said yes, I can do that if I am comfortable with it.
On a different note , one other person mentioned to me that one has to be in the US when the 485 application is approved or else they can reject the application, but that does not sound true and nor I have heard anything like that from the lawyer or in any of the forums !!
gcformeornot
02-01 09:28 AM
Friends,
Need help and suggestion.
To my surprise, today I got a electricity bill from Nov11 2008 to Jan23 2009 a total of :mad::mad::mad:$979.00 :mad::mad::mad:
I leave in a single bed room ground floor 785 Sq ft.
I have called the customer service for dispute and investigation.:mad::mad::mad:
Has any one encountered this kind of problems with electricity department. please enlighten !!!
:confused::confused::confused:
gas or electric? If its electric then considering record cold months of Dec and Jan..... .... don't know..... still looks on high side.....
Need help and suggestion.
To my surprise, today I got a electricity bill from Nov11 2008 to Jan23 2009 a total of :mad::mad::mad:$979.00 :mad::mad::mad:
I leave in a single bed room ground floor 785 Sq ft.
I have called the customer service for dispute and investigation.:mad::mad::mad:
Has any one encountered this kind of problems with electricity department. please enlighten !!!
:confused::confused::confused:
gas or electric? If its electric then considering record cold months of Dec and Jan..... .... don't know..... still looks on high side.....
more...
akred
07-25 02:40 AM
Go ahead and start the process if the company is willing to do it. Ultimately, the DOL, not the employer, will decide whether to deny the LC, certify it or sit on it for 5 years before certifying it.
2010 Jantes e penus Audi / VW
smuggymba
09-17 11:19 PM
FB spillover from a year gets added to overall EB quota of 140K for next year. And each category gets its proportional share of the spillover.
do we know how much it is for this year?
do we know how much it is for this year?
more...
helmet
06-27 08:54 AM
I have I140 approval notice, Where can I see the A#?
hair LTR 450 e penus holeshot
indianabacklog
06-15 04:00 PM
You should read the filing instruction. If anything is not applicable then it should be either "None" or "N/A".
If you just leave it blank, how do they know if you forgot to fill that value or your don't have A#.
If you have an I140 approval notice this has the A# on it. Only the principal applicant has this number, all dependents will have an A# on the receipt notice for the I 485 since it is used for the fingerprint appointment. However, you are correct this is just left blank if you do not have one!
If you just leave it blank, how do they know if you forgot to fill that value or your don't have A#.
If you have an I140 approval notice this has the A# on it. Only the principal applicant has this number, all dependents will have an A# on the receipt notice for the I 485 since it is used for the fingerprint appointment. However, you are correct this is just left blank if you do not have one!
more...
Brightsider
11-16 03:31 PM
Guys,
Am trying to find out the relevant parts of HR 2892 that extends that benefit to EB cases.
Havent been able to find it?
Apart from Shusterman's commentary, I havent seen anything about the extension of benefits of the 'widow's penalty' to EB cases.
Maybe I am not looking at the right doc.
But those of you who have been able to see it in the statute/law, could you please point it out .....by sending the url, or noting the section/article of the law or any other way.
Many thanks
Am trying to find out the relevant parts of HR 2892 that extends that benefit to EB cases.
Havent been able to find it?
Apart from Shusterman's commentary, I havent seen anything about the extension of benefits of the 'widow's penalty' to EB cases.
Maybe I am not looking at the right doc.
But those of you who have been able to see it in the statute/law, could you please point it out .....by sending the url, or noting the section/article of the law or any other way.
Many thanks
hot penus: crooksandqueens: (via
Sunx_2004
10-10 12:36 PM
My application reached NSC on July 17th, No updates yet..:mad:
more...
house Fotos de PENUS BRIDGSTONE
aray
09-16 02:48 PM
There is no risk. I recently traveled and came back on AP and I changed jobs and no longer work with sponsoring employer.
There is always a nut case if you are not lucky and will probably cause some grief, but will not stop you from entering US.
surabhi,
At the Port of Entry, were you asked if you are still working for the GC sponsoring employer? Did you have to show any documentation from new employer?
I am planning to travel to India in December on AP. I recently changed jobs.
Thanks in advance.
There is always a nut case if you are not lucky and will probably cause some grief, but will not stop you from entering US.
surabhi,
At the Port of Entry, were you asked if you are still working for the GC sponsoring employer? Did you have to show any documentation from new employer?
I am planning to travel to India in December on AP. I recently changed jobs.
Thanks in advance.
tattoo penus Pictures, penus Images,
casinoroyale
08-19 09:32 PM
Friends,
I don't create new threads without doing homework, so please bear with me here. After going through existing threads on this issue, I thought we need a dedicated thread for (only) H1-B stamping process (only) in Canada. The aim of this thread is to cover the following topics
1) nvars.com appointments for H1-B visa
2) Canada visitor visa application process & docs
3) Land or Air travel - issues & procedures
4) Entry into Canada & Return Entry into US experiences
5) Interview with Visa Officers
6) PIMS issues at consulates in Canada
7) 221(g) & Delays
8) AP (vs) H1-B Dilemma.
Here is another similar thread but covers H1, H4 at consulates all over the world (mostly Mexico, India, Canada).
http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/showthread.php?t=4192
I don't create new threads without doing homework, so please bear with me here. After going through existing threads on this issue, I thought we need a dedicated thread for (only) H1-B stamping process (only) in Canada. The aim of this thread is to cover the following topics
1) nvars.com appointments for H1-B visa
2) Canada visitor visa application process & docs
3) Land or Air travel - issues & procedures
4) Entry into Canada & Return Entry into US experiences
5) Interview with Visa Officers
6) PIMS issues at consulates in Canada
7) 221(g) & Delays
8) AP (vs) H1-B Dilemma.
Here is another similar thread but covers H1, H4 at consulates all over the world (mostly Mexico, India, Canada).
http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/showthread.php?t=4192
more...
pictures PENUS DONT DO IT MAN DONT
sobers
02-08 02:58 PM
Intel chairman calls for immigration reform (Financial Times/ Feb 7, 2005)
http://msnbc.msn.com/id/11221265/
Craig Barrett, chairman of Intel, the world's largest semiconductor maker, called for comprehensive immigration reform to make the US more competitive, during a live question-and-answer session on FT.com.
Mr Barrett, one of a number of technology leaders including Bill Gates to have criticised restrictions on foreign workers in the US, said the first step in simplifying the immigration process would be "to replace the current arbitrary quota system with an open market type approach".
The US's H1-B visa allows foreign engineers and scientists to work on a temporary basis in the US but is capped at 65,000 a year. Mr Barrett said this was inadequate: the current quota had been exhausted and there could be no new admissions until another came into effect in October this year.
Mr Barrett said demand was also greater than supply for green cards that allowed permanent employment, with the cap at 140,000 a year and long processing delays meaning individuals having to wait up to seven years to obtain one.
"These arbitrary caps undercut business's ability to hire and retain the number of highly educated people in the fields where we need to maintain our leading position," he said.
"Instead of arbitrary caps, a market-based approach that responds to demand is needed."
The tabular content relating to this article is not available to view. Apologies in advance for the inconvenience caused.
Mr Barrett was asked by an Intel employee why his company had stopped sponsoring its workers for green cards between 2001 and 2004. The Intel chairman said this was during the longest and deepest recession in the semiconductor industry. It had been waiting for business conditions to improve before resuming the process.
"We should just staple a green card to every advanced degree granted to a foreign national from a US university in science and engineering," he said in another answer.
Mr Barrett also advocated improvements in the US education system to make America more competitive in technology fields.
"Today, we compare ourselves to our neighbours � California to Arizona, Texas to Florida, etc. We do not compare ourselves to the rest of the world and recognise that the bar of achievement, the level necessary for competitiveness is continually being raised."
Craig Barrett: America should open its doors wide to foreign talent
--------
IV Moderators- please use this information in your presentations.
http://msnbc.msn.com/id/11221265/
Craig Barrett, chairman of Intel, the world's largest semiconductor maker, called for comprehensive immigration reform to make the US more competitive, during a live question-and-answer session on FT.com.
Mr Barrett, one of a number of technology leaders including Bill Gates to have criticised restrictions on foreign workers in the US, said the first step in simplifying the immigration process would be "to replace the current arbitrary quota system with an open market type approach".
The US's H1-B visa allows foreign engineers and scientists to work on a temporary basis in the US but is capped at 65,000 a year. Mr Barrett said this was inadequate: the current quota had been exhausted and there could be no new admissions until another came into effect in October this year.
Mr Barrett said demand was also greater than supply for green cards that allowed permanent employment, with the cap at 140,000 a year and long processing delays meaning individuals having to wait up to seven years to obtain one.
"These arbitrary caps undercut business's ability to hire and retain the number of highly educated people in the fields where we need to maintain our leading position," he said.
"Instead of arbitrary caps, a market-based approach that responds to demand is needed."
The tabular content relating to this article is not available to view. Apologies in advance for the inconvenience caused.
Mr Barrett was asked by an Intel employee why his company had stopped sponsoring its workers for green cards between 2001 and 2004. The Intel chairman said this was during the longest and deepest recession in the semiconductor industry. It had been waiting for business conditions to improve before resuming the process.
"We should just staple a green card to every advanced degree granted to a foreign national from a US university in science and engineering," he said in another answer.
Mr Barrett also advocated improvements in the US education system to make America more competitive in technology fields.
"Today, we compare ourselves to our neighbours � California to Arizona, Texas to Florida, etc. We do not compare ourselves to the rest of the world and recognise that the bar of achievement, the level necessary for competitiveness is continually being raised."
Craig Barrett: America should open its doors wide to foreign talent
--------
IV Moderators- please use this information in your presentations.
dresses penus.avi
desi3933
05-11 08:30 PM
desi3933,
Only if "if not otherwise entitled to an immigrant status and the immediate issuance of a visa under subsection (a), (b), or (c) of this section"
In this case they are eligible for FB2A. So it nullifies that.
......
>> In this case they are eligible for FB2A. So it nullifies that.
No they are not. because FB2A applies ONLY if primary applicant is green card holder and I-130 is approved for them. Both the conditions must be met BEFORE I-485 is filed.
If you don't agree with me then ask any attorney and post the response here. Hopefully that will make you see the reasoning.
______________________
Not a legal advice
US citizen of Indian origin
Only if "if not otherwise entitled to an immigrant status and the immediate issuance of a visa under subsection (a), (b), or (c) of this section"
In this case they are eligible for FB2A. So it nullifies that.
......
>> In this case they are eligible for FB2A. So it nullifies that.
No they are not. because FB2A applies ONLY if primary applicant is green card holder and I-130 is approved for them. Both the conditions must be met BEFORE I-485 is filed.
If you don't agree with me then ask any attorney and post the response here. Hopefully that will make you see the reasoning.
______________________
Not a legal advice
US citizen of Indian origin
more...
makeup Penis Enlargement Scams,Penis Enhancement scams,Penis Surgery,Penus
shanti
02-24 10:49 PM
Thank you all for your answers, and we could agree that there is not a clear straightforward guideline regarding the AC21. So I have the following doubts:
1- I really am not worried about the salary part, since the OCC code that the USCIS allocated for my labor certification pays in the area that I intend to work the same salary that their statistics show so that is fine. About the salary issue I talked with a couple of lawyer already,.
2- This is what I am concerned and is about the experience part. I read online that for porting a labor (or some situation of the kind before filing I-485) that you cannot use the experience gained on the labor sponsoring company but you could use anything before that employer.
Here is the question I have regarding that frozen experience clock:
a- Before coming to US I had 5 ys expeirence
b- WIth first H-1B sponsor company I worked 3 ys in U.S. until end of 2003
c- I joined my current employer B on H-1B and worked there all 2004 and they filed for labor in Feb 2005. So my question is.. as previous experience
I know I can count the three years with employer A since no labor there, but with employer B can I count that year before they filed for labor that I was under H-1b or I cannot count any experience gain before the labor was filed with employer B at all? I think that is the key question here.
1- I really am not worried about the salary part, since the OCC code that the USCIS allocated for my labor certification pays in the area that I intend to work the same salary that their statistics show so that is fine. About the salary issue I talked with a couple of lawyer already,.
2- This is what I am concerned and is about the experience part. I read online that for porting a labor (or some situation of the kind before filing I-485) that you cannot use the experience gained on the labor sponsoring company but you could use anything before that employer.
Here is the question I have regarding that frozen experience clock:
a- Before coming to US I had 5 ys expeirence
b- WIth first H-1B sponsor company I worked 3 ys in U.S. until end of 2003
c- I joined my current employer B on H-1B and worked there all 2004 and they filed for labor in Feb 2005. So my question is.. as previous experience
I know I can count the three years with employer A since no labor there, but with employer B can I count that year before they filed for labor that I was under H-1b or I cannot count any experience gain before the labor was filed with employer B at all? I think that is the key question here.
girlfriend Magmax Penus Enlarger
indyanguy
01-13 12:01 PM
Did your exp. letter have the number of hours (40hrs/ week) mentioned? I had an RFE for my I-140 as well (one of the points in the RFE was for exp.) . The exp. letters I submitted did not mention 40 hrs/ week. I got the letters reissued with 40 hrs/ week and that cleared the RFE. The RFE clearly mentioned that the exp. letter did not specify the number of hours worked per week.
Make sure that the exp. letters match the requirements and your experience in the the approved Labor Certification - if all the requirements do not match, that could be a reason for the RFE as well.
Yes! It clearly mentions 40 hours per week on the letters. They also have the skillset that is listed on the Labor.
Lawyer says they haven't even looked at the letters which is hard for me to believe. If we submit the letters again and the IO is not satisfied, do we get another chance or would it be a denial?
Make sure that the exp. letters match the requirements and your experience in the the approved Labor Certification - if all the requirements do not match, that could be a reason for the RFE as well.
Yes! It clearly mentions 40 hours per week on the letters. They also have the skillset that is listed on the Labor.
Lawyer says they haven't even looked at the letters which is hard for me to believe. If we submit the letters again and the IO is not satisfied, do we get another chance or would it be a denial?
hairstyles Penus usados - Grijo
joeshmoe
09-04 12:35 PM
Congratulations man!
now here is the stream of questions :)
Your Service Center?
GC approved with Priority date April 2001 or Dec 2004?
485 was for underlying labor PD of Dec 2004.
I had applied for different labor (different employee and different job) in April 2001 but that case went nowhere and had to apply for new one in Dec 04 without the possibility of transferring the earlier PD.
now here is the stream of questions :)
Your Service Center?
GC approved with Priority date April 2001 or Dec 2004?
485 was for underlying labor PD of Dec 2004.
I had applied for different labor (different employee and different job) in April 2001 but that case went nowhere and had to apply for new one in Dec 04 without the possibility of transferring the earlier PD.
vasu009
07-11 03:34 PM
Congresswoman Zoe Lofgren (D-CA), chair of the House Immigration Subcommittee, sent Secretary Chertoff a list of questions and a request for documents from USCIS to get to the bottom of the whole Visa Bulletin fiasco. The letter is very interesting not just because it puts a heck of a lot of pressure on DHS right now, but also because Lofgren's folks imply from the questions that USCIS was short circuiting established security clearance procedures to "pre-request" visa numbers from DOS. If it turns out full security clearances were not carried out, USCIS will either need to say that they had the legal justification (which would be a public relations disaster for the agency) or that they intended to complete the checks after the fact (which would be a direct violation of their own regulations). The only way to avoid answering the questions and to make this go away would be to eat crow and start working the case July cases.
http://blogs.ilw.com/gregsiskind/
Download letter_to_chertoff_re_visa_bulletin_issues_july_9_ 2007.pdf
http://blogs.ilw.com/gregsiskind/
Download letter_to_chertoff_re_visa_bulletin_issues_july_9_ 2007.pdf
sobers
02-09 08:58 AM
Discussion about challenges in America�s immigration policies tends to focus on the millions of illegal immigrants. But the more pressing immigration problem facing the US today, writes Intel chairman Craig Barrett, is the dearth of high-skilled immigrants required to keep the US economy competitive. Due to tighter visa policies and a growth in opportunities elsewhere in the world, foreign students majoring in science and engineering at US universities are no longer staying to work after graduation in the large numbers that they once did. With the poor quality of science and math education at the primary and secondary levels in the US, the country cannot afford to lose any highly-skilled immigrants, particularly in key, technology-related disciplines. Along with across-the-board improvements in education, the US needs to find a way to attract enough new workers so that companies like Intel do not have to set up shop elsewhere.
----------------------------------
America Should Open Its Doors Wide to Foreign Talent
Craig Barrett
The Financial Times, 1 February 2006
America is experiencing a profound immigration crisis but it is not about the 11m illegal immigrants currently exciting the press and politicians in Washington. The real crisis is that the US is closing its doors to immigrants with degrees in science, maths and engineering � the �best and brightest� from around the world who flock to the country for its educational and employment opportunities. These foreign-born knowledge workers are critically important to maintaining America�s technological competitiveness.
This is not a new issue; the US has been partially dependent on foreign scientists and engineers to establish and maintain its technological leadership for several decades. After the second world war, an influx of German engineers bolstered our efforts in aviation and space research. During the 1960s and 1970s, a brain drain from western Europe supplemented our own production of talent. In the 1980s and 1990s, our ranks of scientists and engineers were swelled by Asian immigrants who came to study in our universities, then stayed to pursue professional careers.
The US simply does not produce enough home-grown graduates in engineering and the hard sciences to meet our needs. Even during the high-tech revolution of the past two decades, when demand for employees with technical degrees was exploding, the number of students majoring in engineering in the US declined. Currently more than half the graduate students in engineering in the US are foreign born � until now, many of them have stayed on to seek employment. But this trend is changing rapidly.
Because of security concerns and improved education in their own counties, it is increasingly difficult to get foreign students into our universities. Those who do complete their studies in the US are returning home in ever greater numbers because of visa issues or enhanced professional opportunities there. So while Congress debates how to stem the flood of illegal immigrants across our southern border, it is actually our policies on highly skilled immigration that may most negatively affect the American economy.
The US does have a specified process for granting admission or permanent residency to foreign engineers and scientists. The H1-B visa programme sets a cap � currently at 65,000 � on the number of foreigners allowed to enter and work each year. But the programme is oversubscribed because the cap is insufficient to meet the demands of the knowledge-based US economy.
The system does not grant automatic entry to all foreign students who study engineering and science at US universities. I have often said, only half in jest, that we should staple a green card to the diploma of every foreign student who graduates from an advanced technical degree programme here.
At a time when we need more science and technology professionals, it makes no sense to invite foreign students to study at our universities, educate them partially at taxpayer expense and then tell them to go home and take the jobs those talents will create home with them.
The current situation can only be described as a classic example of the law of unintended consequences. We need experienced and talented workers if our economy is to thrive. We have an immigration problem that remains intractable and, in an attempt to appear tough on illegal immigration, we over-control the employment-based legal immigration system. As a consequence, we keep many of the potentially most productive immigrants out of the country. If we had purposefully set out to design a system that would hobble our ability to be competitive, we could hardly do better than what we have today. Certainly in the post 9/11 world, security must always be a foremost concern. But that concern should not prevent us from having access to the highly skilled workers we need.
Meanwhile, when it comes to training a skilled, home-grown workforce, the US is rapidly being left in the dust.
A full half of China�s college graduates earn degrees in engineering, compared with only 5 per cent in the US. Even South Korea, with one-sixth the population of the US, graduates about the same number of engineers as American universities do. Part of this is due to the poor quality of our primary and secondary education, where US students typically fare poorly compared with their international counterparts in maths and science.
In a global, knowledge-based economy, businesses will naturally gravitate to locations with a ready supply of knowledge-based workers. Intel is a US-based company and we are proud of the fact that we have hired almost 10,000 new US employees in the past four years. But the hard economic fact is that if we cannot find or attract the workers we need here, the company � like every other business � will go where the talent is located.
We in the US have only two real choices: we can stand on the sidelines while countries such as India, China, and others dominate the game � and accept the consequent decline in our standard of living. Or we can decide to compete.
Deciding to compete means reforming the appalling state of primary and secondary education, where low expectations have become institutionalised, and urgently expanding science education in colleges and universities � much as we did in the 1950s after the Soviet launch of Sputnik gave our nation a needed wake-up call.
As a member of the National Academies Committee assigned by Congress to investigate this issue and propose solutions, I and the other members recommended that the government create 25,000 undergraduate and 5,000 graduate scholarships, each of $20,000 (�11,300), in technical fields, especially those determined to be in areas of urgent �national need�. Other recommendations included a tax credit for employers who make continuing education available for scientists and engineers, so that our workforce can keep pace with the rapid advance of scientific discovery, and a sustained national commitment to basic research.
But we all realised that even an effective national effort in this area would not produce results quickly enough. That is why deciding to compete also means opening doors wider to foreigners with the kind of technical knowledge our businesses need. At a minimum the US should vastly increase the number of permanent visas for highly educated foreigners, streamline the process for those already working here and allow foreign students in the hard sciences and engineering to move directly to permanent resident status. Any country that wants to remain competitive has to start competing for the best minds in the world. Without that we may be unable to maintain economic leadership in the 21st century.
----------------------------------
America Should Open Its Doors Wide to Foreign Talent
Craig Barrett
The Financial Times, 1 February 2006
America is experiencing a profound immigration crisis but it is not about the 11m illegal immigrants currently exciting the press and politicians in Washington. The real crisis is that the US is closing its doors to immigrants with degrees in science, maths and engineering � the �best and brightest� from around the world who flock to the country for its educational and employment opportunities. These foreign-born knowledge workers are critically important to maintaining America�s technological competitiveness.
This is not a new issue; the US has been partially dependent on foreign scientists and engineers to establish and maintain its technological leadership for several decades. After the second world war, an influx of German engineers bolstered our efforts in aviation and space research. During the 1960s and 1970s, a brain drain from western Europe supplemented our own production of talent. In the 1980s and 1990s, our ranks of scientists and engineers were swelled by Asian immigrants who came to study in our universities, then stayed to pursue professional careers.
The US simply does not produce enough home-grown graduates in engineering and the hard sciences to meet our needs. Even during the high-tech revolution of the past two decades, when demand for employees with technical degrees was exploding, the number of students majoring in engineering in the US declined. Currently more than half the graduate students in engineering in the US are foreign born � until now, many of them have stayed on to seek employment. But this trend is changing rapidly.
Because of security concerns and improved education in their own counties, it is increasingly difficult to get foreign students into our universities. Those who do complete their studies in the US are returning home in ever greater numbers because of visa issues or enhanced professional opportunities there. So while Congress debates how to stem the flood of illegal immigrants across our southern border, it is actually our policies on highly skilled immigration that may most negatively affect the American economy.
The US does have a specified process for granting admission or permanent residency to foreign engineers and scientists. The H1-B visa programme sets a cap � currently at 65,000 � on the number of foreigners allowed to enter and work each year. But the programme is oversubscribed because the cap is insufficient to meet the demands of the knowledge-based US economy.
The system does not grant automatic entry to all foreign students who study engineering and science at US universities. I have often said, only half in jest, that we should staple a green card to the diploma of every foreign student who graduates from an advanced technical degree programme here.
At a time when we need more science and technology professionals, it makes no sense to invite foreign students to study at our universities, educate them partially at taxpayer expense and then tell them to go home and take the jobs those talents will create home with them.
The current situation can only be described as a classic example of the law of unintended consequences. We need experienced and talented workers if our economy is to thrive. We have an immigration problem that remains intractable and, in an attempt to appear tough on illegal immigration, we over-control the employment-based legal immigration system. As a consequence, we keep many of the potentially most productive immigrants out of the country. If we had purposefully set out to design a system that would hobble our ability to be competitive, we could hardly do better than what we have today. Certainly in the post 9/11 world, security must always be a foremost concern. But that concern should not prevent us from having access to the highly skilled workers we need.
Meanwhile, when it comes to training a skilled, home-grown workforce, the US is rapidly being left in the dust.
A full half of China�s college graduates earn degrees in engineering, compared with only 5 per cent in the US. Even South Korea, with one-sixth the population of the US, graduates about the same number of engineers as American universities do. Part of this is due to the poor quality of our primary and secondary education, where US students typically fare poorly compared with their international counterparts in maths and science.
In a global, knowledge-based economy, businesses will naturally gravitate to locations with a ready supply of knowledge-based workers. Intel is a US-based company and we are proud of the fact that we have hired almost 10,000 new US employees in the past four years. But the hard economic fact is that if we cannot find or attract the workers we need here, the company � like every other business � will go where the talent is located.
We in the US have only two real choices: we can stand on the sidelines while countries such as India, China, and others dominate the game � and accept the consequent decline in our standard of living. Or we can decide to compete.
Deciding to compete means reforming the appalling state of primary and secondary education, where low expectations have become institutionalised, and urgently expanding science education in colleges and universities � much as we did in the 1950s after the Soviet launch of Sputnik gave our nation a needed wake-up call.
As a member of the National Academies Committee assigned by Congress to investigate this issue and propose solutions, I and the other members recommended that the government create 25,000 undergraduate and 5,000 graduate scholarships, each of $20,000 (�11,300), in technical fields, especially those determined to be in areas of urgent �national need�. Other recommendations included a tax credit for employers who make continuing education available for scientists and engineers, so that our workforce can keep pace with the rapid advance of scientific discovery, and a sustained national commitment to basic research.
But we all realised that even an effective national effort in this area would not produce results quickly enough. That is why deciding to compete also means opening doors wider to foreigners with the kind of technical knowledge our businesses need. At a minimum the US should vastly increase the number of permanent visas for highly educated foreigners, streamline the process for those already working here and allow foreign students in the hard sciences and engineering to move directly to permanent resident status. Any country that wants to remain competitive has to start competing for the best minds in the world. Without that we may be unable to maintain economic leadership in the 21st century.
No comments:
Post a Comment