reddog
01-14 02:49 PM
This bill if and when passed would let anyone in the US apply for an AOS.
Ahead of us(i doubt it).
This is just a rebranded version of something the dems were interested last time round.
Ahead of us(i doubt it).
This is just a rebranded version of something the dems were interested last time round.
wallpaper Tattoo of Wolf Paws
amitjoey
06-30 01:13 PM
I am not sure about this but one thng can certainly happen with Admin Fix.
Porting of applicant who have stayed long enough in (EB3 to EB2). EB3 15 years experience and still counting and stuck and uncertain porting rules and AC21 doesn't make sense at all.
Or
AC21 rules or some other fix giving relief to people stuck in GC unnecessarily.
USCIs can make these fixes but they dont want to do it. Its simple
I wish it was so easy. USCIS cannot just do fixes on their own. Getting the administration to support us and get some fixes is what IV is working on.
I wish more people had come to the advocacy event. They would have seen first hand what amount of hard work has been put in. The kind of commitment and personal sacrifices members have put in to not only get the ball rolling on the admin fixes but also building relationships on the hill.
Porting of applicant who have stayed long enough in (EB3 to EB2). EB3 15 years experience and still counting and stuck and uncertain porting rules and AC21 doesn't make sense at all.
Or
AC21 rules or some other fix giving relief to people stuck in GC unnecessarily.
USCIs can make these fixes but they dont want to do it. Its simple
I wish it was so easy. USCIS cannot just do fixes on their own. Getting the administration to support us and get some fixes is what IV is working on.
I wish more people had come to the advocacy event. They would have seen first hand what amount of hard work has been put in. The kind of commitment and personal sacrifices members have put in to not only get the ball rolling on the admin fixes but also building relationships on the hill.
desi3933
06-18 03:11 PM
My wife's H4 expires on Oct 1, 2007......We plan to file our I-485 by July 16, 2007.......I am sure it will take atleast 90 days to get her EAD.....whats her status between Oct1,2007 till the time EAD gets approved?......Will she be in valid status during that period?
She will be in AOS Pending status after Oct 1st, 2007 due to pending I-485 application. EAD does not provide any status.
What is your status? I assume H1-B. You can file for H1 and H4 extensions.
Please check and verify details with your attorney/lawyer. This is NOT a legal advice.
----------------------------------
Permanent Resident since May 2002
She will be in AOS Pending status after Oct 1st, 2007 due to pending I-485 application. EAD does not provide any status.
What is your status? I assume H1-B. You can file for H1 and H4 extensions.
Please check and verify details with your attorney/lawyer. This is NOT a legal advice.
----------------------------------
Permanent Resident since May 2002
2011 Tribal Squid Tattoo by
gunsnkars
07-19 02:05 PM
// you are right on the money!!But i don't see any use for guys with PD>2006 coz anyway they would have to wait for more than 3 years to file their spouses bcoz of retrogression. y not wait for PD's to bcum current at a later date and apply together..GET IT!!! //
Only use applying for 485 now single is to be eligible to apply for EAD anytime. And if your spouse decides to study (F1) or work (H1), you can apply and get your EAD and use it. Once the PDs become Current, you can add her case (AOS) and her EAD too at that time.
If you think that your spouse would remain on H4 no matter what, then you are correct, there is no use filing 485 alone now.
What say ???
"you can apply and get your EAD and use it" what does that mean???your wife can still change her status after coming here on H-4 irrespective of whether you have applied/not applied your 485. EAD is of no use to you coz u r already working...It is only of good use if your wife can work!!!
Only use applying for 485 now single is to be eligible to apply for EAD anytime. And if your spouse decides to study (F1) or work (H1), you can apply and get your EAD and use it. Once the PDs become Current, you can add her case (AOS) and her EAD too at that time.
If you think that your spouse would remain on H4 no matter what, then you are correct, there is no use filing 485 alone now.
What say ???
"you can apply and get your EAD and use it" what does that mean???your wife can still change her status after coming here on H-4 irrespective of whether you have applied/not applied your 485. EAD is of no use to you coz u r already working...It is only of good use if your wife can work!!!
more...
bkam
04-26 04:50 AM
This is one step ahead in the long jurney.
vin13
04-08 03:02 PM
EB-3 unavailable until october when the next fiscal year begins :(
more...
qplearn
10-10 03:32 PM
How much did EB2 Ind moved? I think EB-2 china moved too? correct me if I am wrong
India EB-2 moved by approx 6 months. China EB-2 did not move. Actually, EB-2 India has gone back to where it was before it became unavailable last year. Unfortunately, we may not see a lot of further movt in EB-2 India if all those labor numbers (cleared) are correct. But this is good news for those who applied for labor in late 2002, but their application was pending for a horrendous amount of time and just got cleared. They can get EADs.
India EB-2 moved by approx 6 months. China EB-2 did not move. Actually, EB-2 India has gone back to where it was before it became unavailable last year. Unfortunately, we may not see a lot of further movt in EB-2 India if all those labor numbers (cleared) are correct. But this is good news for those who applied for labor in late 2002, but their application was pending for a horrendous amount of time and just got cleared. They can get EADs.
2010 wolf tattoo design. wolf
chanduv23
09-22 02:37 PM
My I485 is still pending (> 180 days filed on July27th '07). I have my renewed EAD valid for the next 2 years. I have been out of project for 4 months and my employer , who filed my GC, terminated my health coverage too. Iam using my COBRA option.
Recently, i have applied for a perm position using EAD . I explained to the client about by current status of GC. They wanted to know what they are supposed to do for it. I told them i need to 'invoke' a law called AC21.(pardon my ignorance if iam wrong) inorder to transfer my pending application.
Now the big question is, how do i initiate this whole process?
I really apreaciate all your suggestions.
Invoking AC21 is easy, but you need to know what you can expect and how to resolve it
(1) If you decided to change to new employer using EAD - there is nothing you need to do. Just join and work.
(2) As employer is asking what they need to do - tell them they need to provide an AC21 letter of support - you can find various formats on the web.
(3) Your new job must be in same or similar category.
(4) Call customer service to verify your address on file - also hire a personal attorney and make sure they file g 28 and have them on file too for USCIS communication
(5) Your AC21 letter may/may not reach your file depending on the service center, officer and a lot of other factors.
(6) Usually most AC21 cases go through just fine unless your ex employer requests a revoke on i 140 - in such a situation you may get an RFE, NOID or a straight denial on 485 - nothing to worry about - you can resolve all these and you will find yourself back on track.
Hope this helps
Recently, i have applied for a perm position using EAD . I explained to the client about by current status of GC. They wanted to know what they are supposed to do for it. I told them i need to 'invoke' a law called AC21.(pardon my ignorance if iam wrong) inorder to transfer my pending application.
Now the big question is, how do i initiate this whole process?
I really apreaciate all your suggestions.
Invoking AC21 is easy, but you need to know what you can expect and how to resolve it
(1) If you decided to change to new employer using EAD - there is nothing you need to do. Just join and work.
(2) As employer is asking what they need to do - tell them they need to provide an AC21 letter of support - you can find various formats on the web.
(3) Your new job must be in same or similar category.
(4) Call customer service to verify your address on file - also hire a personal attorney and make sure they file g 28 and have them on file too for USCIS communication
(5) Your AC21 letter may/may not reach your file depending on the service center, officer and a lot of other factors.
(6) Usually most AC21 cases go through just fine unless your ex employer requests a revoke on i 140 - in such a situation you may get an RFE, NOID or a straight denial on 485 - nothing to worry about - you can resolve all these and you will find yourself back on track.
Hope this helps
more...
sathishav
03-09 12:24 PM
Here is the timeline for folks that are not serious
EB2 India: Waiting for July - October spillovers thinking that most EB2 will be current. The prediction threads have hyped this a lot. Many will benefit this year. But many will miss this bus too. Some from those who will miss this bus, would be back wanting to do something in Nov - May timeframe. Others will waste their time on predictions and trackers and make those site owners rich.
EB3 India: Many who filed in July 2007 are still happy with EAD status. They worry and contact IV only if their I140 is revoked, I485 denied or if EAD renewal is delayed. Some still sulk or want to blame someone (even IV) for their delays. Those who have not filed I485 yet are few in number. Many new Eb3s still do not know the extent of the backlogs. With time they will slowly learn about the backlogs and wait times. When they suffer due to lack of EAD, they will all make noise on IV asking for some action. This is the reason why the I485 filing action item thread is still weak and pre-mature. I would give another 2 years for the non-I485 folks to have retrogression sink in.
Retrogression is not going away. If it goes away, only applicants will benefit from it. And these applicants are too weak and small in number to even raise their voice. So why would anyone pass a law to make these people happy that do not even want any law changed. After 2 years all the folks who are not participating in advocacy days and contributing, will contribute to IV. At that time, if we in core are still around, would rather ask them to lead the effort if they can and if they are really serious. The current advocacy day campaign and contributions are a measure of seriousness for us to plan our next agenda items.
Agree with Pappu.
We maybe happy now with EAD, but, we never know. Consider this, as per Yates memo
This memo is just a "interim guidance" and NOT a law. That does not make me very comfy. If it is a law, we can always appeal in court. Not sure about an "interim guidance "
It also clearly mentions, "this is an interm guidance and the final law can be more restrictive".
In the Yates memo, the 180 day rule is very Lenient , which many of us interpreted or will interpret in our favor.
EB2 India: Waiting for July - October spillovers thinking that most EB2 will be current. The prediction threads have hyped this a lot. Many will benefit this year. But many will miss this bus too. Some from those who will miss this bus, would be back wanting to do something in Nov - May timeframe. Others will waste their time on predictions and trackers and make those site owners rich.
EB3 India: Many who filed in July 2007 are still happy with EAD status. They worry and contact IV only if their I140 is revoked, I485 denied or if EAD renewal is delayed. Some still sulk or want to blame someone (even IV) for their delays. Those who have not filed I485 yet are few in number. Many new Eb3s still do not know the extent of the backlogs. With time they will slowly learn about the backlogs and wait times. When they suffer due to lack of EAD, they will all make noise on IV asking for some action. This is the reason why the I485 filing action item thread is still weak and pre-mature. I would give another 2 years for the non-I485 folks to have retrogression sink in.
Retrogression is not going away. If it goes away, only applicants will benefit from it. And these applicants are too weak and small in number to even raise their voice. So why would anyone pass a law to make these people happy that do not even want any law changed. After 2 years all the folks who are not participating in advocacy days and contributing, will contribute to IV. At that time, if we in core are still around, would rather ask them to lead the effort if they can and if they are really serious. The current advocacy day campaign and contributions are a measure of seriousness for us to plan our next agenda items.
Agree with Pappu.
We maybe happy now with EAD, but, we never know. Consider this, as per Yates memo
This memo is just a "interim guidance" and NOT a law. That does not make me very comfy. If it is a law, we can always appeal in court. Not sure about an "interim guidance "
It also clearly mentions, "this is an interm guidance and the final law can be more restrictive".
In the Yates memo, the 180 day rule is very Lenient , which many of us interpreted or will interpret in our favor.
hair YinYang wolf tattoo by
senthil1
01-21 02:51 PM
EB3 was like that most of the time. If you go back to 1995 all of the categories were current. China had cut off dates as more chinese than Indians were coming. From there number of H1bs were increased gradually.From 1997 they put cutoff dates and by the time 1999 things got worsened and there were 4 year waiting time and Many people were leaving country because of 6 year Cap of H1b. 1999 first time h1b cap was reached and 40% of them were Indians. In 1999 and 2000 demand for IT was so high and unemployment was record low US economy was in internet Boom. So congress realized that they need to do something. So they increased H1b(for 3 years) and recapture of GC and also AC21 was done. After Dot com Bust everything changed and outsourcing was so much and Indians were using 60% of H1b and equal number of L1. Still Indian H1b and L1 are increasing as there are more Indian consulting companies than H1b Cap numbers. So it will become worse for EB3 as there are so many restrictions of Eb2 unless congress increases GC quota. But it is going to be tough for any immigration reform as economy is very bad and unemployment is increasing. But if there is CIR there is a good chance of recapture bill to pass with CIR. Otherwise AC 21 is only way to survive here for those who filed I485.It is going to be challenging for those who not filed I485 as they have to survive as well they need to maintain immigration status
i am getting frustrated to see the bulletin everymonth and it never moves.
people applied in 2006 got their GCs. one of collegue ROW got when applied in 2007.
dont know whom to blame. why cant they understand our problems.
r they least bothered.
my PD is oct 2003-EB3
i am getting frustrated to see the bulletin everymonth and it never moves.
people applied in 2006 got their GCs. one of collegue ROW got when applied in 2007.
dont know whom to blame. why cant they understand our problems.
r they least bothered.
my PD is oct 2003-EB3
more...
RandyK
09-23 10:07 AM
I started calling the list.... I called last week as well.
I will update when I am done with calling everyone on the list.
I will update when I am done with calling everyone on the list.
hot Wolf, Wolves, tattoos, grunge,
vinodmp
02-06 03:07 PM
I am looking for help in wrongful I485 denial of 485 with AC21 .
below is my situation .
Company A :
Pd: 12/31/2003
Category : EB2 India
Labor cert approved : 3/30/2004
I 140 RD : 4/13/2006
I140 approved DT: 9/21/2006
I 485 sent : 7/2/2007
I 485 RD : 7/5/2007
I485 ND : 7/13/2007
Finger print : 9/2/2007
Company B :
joined Date: 2/14/2008 (after 6 months)
Filed AC21 by company attorney
contacted congressman's office when PD become current for more than a year but no approval. Got response that it is pending in extended review.
Left Company B to move South side because of health issue ( winter) .
Company B understood the situation and left in good terms with them.
Company C ( Full time )
joined Date: 12/14/2009
Used EAD .
I140 LUD: 1/29/2010
I485 denial email : 25/2010
Thanks
-vinod
below is my situation .
Company A :
Pd: 12/31/2003
Category : EB2 India
Labor cert approved : 3/30/2004
I 140 RD : 4/13/2006
I140 approved DT: 9/21/2006
I 485 sent : 7/2/2007
I 485 RD : 7/5/2007
I485 ND : 7/13/2007
Finger print : 9/2/2007
Company B :
joined Date: 2/14/2008 (after 6 months)
Filed AC21 by company attorney
contacted congressman's office when PD become current for more than a year but no approval. Got response that it is pending in extended review.
Left Company B to move South side because of health issue ( winter) .
Company B understood the situation and left in good terms with them.
Company C ( Full time )
joined Date: 12/14/2009
Used EAD .
I140 LUD: 1/29/2010
I485 denial email : 25/2010
Thanks
-vinod
more...
house Japanese Wolf Tattoo For Men(2
qplearn
10-12 12:56 PM
Yes, I used nycgal's and made little modification to the intro part. Picked up the IV intro from our home page. Also emphasized on the skilled-immigrants rather than just legal immigrants. Still need to send it to Mr.Sturgeon.
Thanks.
Thanks.
tattoo paw print tattoo grey wolf
john2255
07-21 08:17 AM
If you look at THOMAS it actually shows that Yeas are 55 and Nays are 40
So the bill passed the voting ....
but it failed because it was ruled "out-of-order" and hence rejected ...
I dont know why it was ruled out of order ... maybe because it was attached to the defence spending bill so it was not the right place to put in this kind of amendment....
I hope that Yeas mean YES and Nay mean "NO" or I need to get my head examined
Kindly note,
This particular Cornyn amendment (S.Amdt. 2339) offered to attach to H.R. 2669 (College Cost Reduction Act of 2007 ), but the motion was failed due to lack of 5 votes.(55 YEAS and 40 NAYs. Require 3/5 majority) HR.2669 is passed by both Senate and house and sent for conference to resolve the difference between house and senate versions and president is sure to sign the bill and thus would become the law in another few days. This amendment does not have anything to do with defence bill or with SKILL bill. Following is the actions taken by congress of HR 2669.
IF THE AMENDMENT HAD PASSED WE WOULD HAVE GOT ATLEAST 240,000 RECAPTURED, UNUSED VISAS OF PREVIOUS YEARS IN ANOTHER FEW DAYS.
H.R.2669
Title: To provide for reconciliation pursuant to section 601 of the concurrent resolution on the budget for fiscal year 2008.
Sponsor: Rep Miller, George [CA-7] (introduced 6/12/2007) Cosponsors (31)
Related Bills: H.RES.531
Latest Major Action: 7/20/2007 Resolving differences -- Senate actions. Status: Senate insists on its amendment, asks for a conference, appoints conferees Kennedy; Dodd; Harkin; Mikulski; Bingaman; Murray; Reed; Clinton; Obama; Sanders; Brown; Enzi; Gregg; Alexander; Burr; Isakson; Murkowski; Hatch; Roberts; Allard; Coburn.
House Reports: 110-210
MAJOR ACTIONS:
6/12/2007 Introduced in House
6/25/2007 Reported (Amended) by the Committee on Education and Labor. H. Rept. 110-210.
7/11/2007 Passed/agreed to in House: On passage Passed by recorded vote: 273 - 149 (Roll no. 613).
7/20/2007 Passed/agreed to in Senate: Passed Senate with an amendment by Yea-Nay Vote. 78 - 18. Record Vote Number: 272.
7/20/2007 Resolving differences -- Senate actions: Senate insists on its amendment, asks for a conference, appoints conferees Kennedy; Dodd; Harkin; Mikulski; Bingaman; Murray; Reed; Clinton; Obama; Sanders; Brown; Enzi; Gregg; Alexander; Burr; Isakson; Murkowski; Hatch; Roberts; Allard; Coburn.
So the bill passed the voting ....
but it failed because it was ruled "out-of-order" and hence rejected ...
I dont know why it was ruled out of order ... maybe because it was attached to the defence spending bill so it was not the right place to put in this kind of amendment....
I hope that Yeas mean YES and Nay mean "NO" or I need to get my head examined
Kindly note,
This particular Cornyn amendment (S.Amdt. 2339) offered to attach to H.R. 2669 (College Cost Reduction Act of 2007 ), but the motion was failed due to lack of 5 votes.(55 YEAS and 40 NAYs. Require 3/5 majority) HR.2669 is passed by both Senate and house and sent for conference to resolve the difference between house and senate versions and president is sure to sign the bill and thus would become the law in another few days. This amendment does not have anything to do with defence bill or with SKILL bill. Following is the actions taken by congress of HR 2669.
IF THE AMENDMENT HAD PASSED WE WOULD HAVE GOT ATLEAST 240,000 RECAPTURED, UNUSED VISAS OF PREVIOUS YEARS IN ANOTHER FEW DAYS.
H.R.2669
Title: To provide for reconciliation pursuant to section 601 of the concurrent resolution on the budget for fiscal year 2008.
Sponsor: Rep Miller, George [CA-7] (introduced 6/12/2007) Cosponsors (31)
Related Bills: H.RES.531
Latest Major Action: 7/20/2007 Resolving differences -- Senate actions. Status: Senate insists on its amendment, asks for a conference, appoints conferees Kennedy; Dodd; Harkin; Mikulski; Bingaman; Murray; Reed; Clinton; Obama; Sanders; Brown; Enzi; Gregg; Alexander; Burr; Isakson; Murkowski; Hatch; Roberts; Allard; Coburn.
House Reports: 110-210
MAJOR ACTIONS:
6/12/2007 Introduced in House
6/25/2007 Reported (Amended) by the Committee on Education and Labor. H. Rept. 110-210.
7/11/2007 Passed/agreed to in House: On passage Passed by recorded vote: 273 - 149 (Roll no. 613).
7/20/2007 Passed/agreed to in Senate: Passed Senate with an amendment by Yea-Nay Vote. 78 - 18. Record Vote Number: 272.
7/20/2007 Resolving differences -- Senate actions: Senate insists on its amendment, asks for a conference, appoints conferees Kennedy; Dodd; Harkin; Mikulski; Bingaman; Murray; Reed; Clinton; Obama; Sanders; Brown; Enzi; Gregg; Alexander; Burr; Isakson; Murkowski; Hatch; Roberts; Allard; Coburn.
more...
pictures Two Wolves Tattoo
bugsbunny
04-21 02:20 PM
also if one spouse's parents are here...its not easy to move back purely for the other spouse's parents
dresses tribal wolf tattoos. 94%
funny
10-01 10:58 PM
From what I can gather, from the immigration perspective:
1. If you are on H1 - You can technically start a business but since you cannot "work" towards it, in practice it's almost impossible
2. If you are on H1 and have an EAD - You can start a business. But if you use your EAD, you are no longer on H1. (There are contradicting views on using EAD for PT while still maintaining H1. For now, this is a grey area)
3. If you are on EAD -
a. If you plan to work on your business on a part time basis and stay with your sponsored job full time, I don't see a problem with this.
b. If you plan to work on your business full time, you might have an issue with a RFE at the I-485 stage as you would have used AC21 for self employment (Some people say this is okay, but it depends on your risk taking ability)
Thoughts?
What about when u start the company on your spouse name and you work through it...I guess that would also be considered as self employment
1. If you are on H1 - You can technically start a business but since you cannot "work" towards it, in practice it's almost impossible
2. If you are on H1 and have an EAD - You can start a business. But if you use your EAD, you are no longer on H1. (There are contradicting views on using EAD for PT while still maintaining H1. For now, this is a grey area)
3. If you are on EAD -
a. If you plan to work on your business on a part time basis and stay with your sponsored job full time, I don't see a problem with this.
b. If you plan to work on your business full time, you might have an issue with a RFE at the I-485 stage as you would have used AC21 for self employment (Some people say this is okay, but it depends on your risk taking ability)
Thoughts?
What about when u start the company on your spouse name and you work through it...I guess that would also be considered as self employment
more...
makeup wolf tattoos have become a
gg_ny
03-17 09:40 PM
Patton Boggs is a lobbyist hired by IV, Can he help in this situation ? It may be the case he already may be working to get something thru ..
we all write to Bernake that some 10, 000 immigrants will buy homes if we all get a GC. 10, 000 may or may not buy a home, but let us just polish the numbers a little bit. 10,000 * 300,000 (average home price) = 1 million billion dollars . Actually the total figure is 3 billion $$; enough to give a massive jolt to the sagging economy.
mails by albertpinto
please do not stop posting like the above just because some walking_dude has tried 650 times to sound serious and bring sense. your postings are really energizing and hilarious in these difficult times. I work for a firm contracting from the Big Bear and in these difficult times postings like these, particularly albertpinto's, are soothing for their comic sense (sounds as though the writer meant what he/she posted).
we all write to Bernake that some 10, 000 immigrants will buy homes if we all get a GC. 10, 000 may or may not buy a home, but let us just polish the numbers a little bit. 10,000 * 300,000 (average home price) = 1 million billion dollars . Actually the total figure is 3 billion $$; enough to give a massive jolt to the sagging economy.
mails by albertpinto
please do not stop posting like the above just because some walking_dude has tried 650 times to sound serious and bring sense. your postings are really energizing and hilarious in these difficult times. I work for a firm contracting from the Big Bear and in these difficult times postings like these, particularly albertpinto's, are soothing for their comic sense (sounds as though the writer meant what he/she posted).
girlfriend tattoos of wolves with a pixie
waitingnwaiting
05-31 08:26 AM
(c) Grants- Not later than 6 months after the date of enactment of this Act, the Secretary of Labor (referred to in this section as the ‘Secretary’) shall establish a partnership grant program to award grants to eligible entities to carry out comprehensive programs to provide education to nurses and create a pipeline to nursing for incumbent ancillary healthcare workers who wish to advance their careers, and to otherwise carry out the purposes of this section.
(d) Eligible Entities- To be eligible to receive a grant under this section an entity shall--
(1) be--
(A) a healthcare entity that is jointly administered by a healthcare employer and a labor union representing the healthcare employees of the employer and that carries out activities using labor management training funds as provided for under section 302 of the Labor-Management Relations Act, 1947 (18 U.S.C. 186(c)(6));
(B) an entity that operates a training program that is jointly administered by--
(i) one or more healthcare providers or facilities, or a trade association of healthcare providers; and
(ii) one or more organizations which represent the interests of direct care healthcare workers or staff nurses and in which the direct care healthcare workers or staff nurses have direct input as to the leadership of the organization; or
(C) a State training partnership program that consists of non-profit organizations that include equal participation from industry, including public or private employers, and labor organizations including joint labor-management training programs, and which may include representatives from local governments, worker investment agency one-stop career centers, community based organizations, community colleges, and accredited schools of nursing; and
(2) submit to the Secretary an application at such time, in such manner, and containing such information as the Secretary may require.
(e) Additional Requirements for Healthcare Employer Described in Subsection (d)- To be eligible for a grant under this section, a healthcare employer described in subsection (d) shall demonstrate--
(1) an established program within their facility to encourage the retention of existing nurses;
(2) it provides wages and benefits to its nurses that are competitive for its market or that have been collectively bargained with a labor organization; and
(3) support for programs funded under this section through 1 or more of the following:
(A) The provision of paid leave time and continued health coverage to incumbent healthcare workers to allow their participation in nursing career ladder programs, including Certified Nurse Assistants, Licensed Practical Nurses, Licensed Vocational Nurses, and Registered Nurses.
(B) Contributions to a joint labor-management or other jointly administered training fund which administers the program involved.
(C) The provision of paid release time, incentive compensation, or continued health coverage to staff nurses who desire to work full- or part-time in a faculty position.
(D) The provision of paid release time for staff nurses to enable them to obtain a bachelor of science in nursing degree, other advanced nursing degrees, specialty training, or certification program.
(E) The payment of tuition assistance to incumbent healthcare workers.
(f) Other Requirements-
(1) MATCHING REQUIREMENT-
(A) IN GENERAL- The Secretary may not make a grant under this section unless the applicant involved agrees, with respect to the costs to be incurred by the applicant in carrying out the program under the grant, to make available non-Federal contributions (in cash or in kind under subparagraph (B)) toward such costs in an amount equal to not less than $1 for each $1 of Federal funds provided in the grant. Such contributions may be made directly or through donations from public or private entities, or may be provided through the cash equivalent of paid release time provided to incumbent worker students.
(B) DETERMINATION OF AMOUNT OF NON-FEDERAL CONTRIBUTION- Non-Federal contributions required in subparagraph (A) may be in cash or in kind (including paid release time), fairly evaluated, including equipment or services (and excluding indirect or overhead costs).
(C) SUPPLEMENT, NOT SUPPLANT- Funds made available under this section shall supplement, and not supplant, resources dedicated by an entity, or other Federal, State, or localfunds available to carry out activities described in this section.
(2) REQUIRED COLLABORATION- Entities carrying out or overseeing programs carried out with assistance provided under this section shall demonstrate collaboration with accredited schools of nursing which may include community colleges and other academic institutions providing associate, bachelor’s, or advanced nursing degree programs or specialty training or certification programs.
(g) Activities- Amounts awarded to an entity under a grant under this section shall be used for the following:
(d) Eligible Entities- To be eligible to receive a grant under this section an entity shall--
(1) be--
(A) a healthcare entity that is jointly administered by a healthcare employer and a labor union representing the healthcare employees of the employer and that carries out activities using labor management training funds as provided for under section 302 of the Labor-Management Relations Act, 1947 (18 U.S.C. 186(c)(6));
(B) an entity that operates a training program that is jointly administered by--
(i) one or more healthcare providers or facilities, or a trade association of healthcare providers; and
(ii) one or more organizations which represent the interests of direct care healthcare workers or staff nurses and in which the direct care healthcare workers or staff nurses have direct input as to the leadership of the organization; or
(C) a State training partnership program that consists of non-profit organizations that include equal participation from industry, including public or private employers, and labor organizations including joint labor-management training programs, and which may include representatives from local governments, worker investment agency one-stop career centers, community based organizations, community colleges, and accredited schools of nursing; and
(2) submit to the Secretary an application at such time, in such manner, and containing such information as the Secretary may require.
(e) Additional Requirements for Healthcare Employer Described in Subsection (d)- To be eligible for a grant under this section, a healthcare employer described in subsection (d) shall demonstrate--
(1) an established program within their facility to encourage the retention of existing nurses;
(2) it provides wages and benefits to its nurses that are competitive for its market or that have been collectively bargained with a labor organization; and
(3) support for programs funded under this section through 1 or more of the following:
(A) The provision of paid leave time and continued health coverage to incumbent healthcare workers to allow their participation in nursing career ladder programs, including Certified Nurse Assistants, Licensed Practical Nurses, Licensed Vocational Nurses, and Registered Nurses.
(B) Contributions to a joint labor-management or other jointly administered training fund which administers the program involved.
(C) The provision of paid release time, incentive compensation, or continued health coverage to staff nurses who desire to work full- or part-time in a faculty position.
(D) The provision of paid release time for staff nurses to enable them to obtain a bachelor of science in nursing degree, other advanced nursing degrees, specialty training, or certification program.
(E) The payment of tuition assistance to incumbent healthcare workers.
(f) Other Requirements-
(1) MATCHING REQUIREMENT-
(A) IN GENERAL- The Secretary may not make a grant under this section unless the applicant involved agrees, with respect to the costs to be incurred by the applicant in carrying out the program under the grant, to make available non-Federal contributions (in cash or in kind under subparagraph (B)) toward such costs in an amount equal to not less than $1 for each $1 of Federal funds provided in the grant. Such contributions may be made directly or through donations from public or private entities, or may be provided through the cash equivalent of paid release time provided to incumbent worker students.
(B) DETERMINATION OF AMOUNT OF NON-FEDERAL CONTRIBUTION- Non-Federal contributions required in subparagraph (A) may be in cash or in kind (including paid release time), fairly evaluated, including equipment or services (and excluding indirect or overhead costs).
(C) SUPPLEMENT, NOT SUPPLANT- Funds made available under this section shall supplement, and not supplant, resources dedicated by an entity, or other Federal, State, or localfunds available to carry out activities described in this section.
(2) REQUIRED COLLABORATION- Entities carrying out or overseeing programs carried out with assistance provided under this section shall demonstrate collaboration with accredited schools of nursing which may include community colleges and other academic institutions providing associate, bachelor’s, or advanced nursing degree programs or specialty training or certification programs.
(g) Activities- Amounts awarded to an entity under a grant under this section shall be used for the following:
hairstyles Wolf tattoo by *CunningFox on
BharatPremi
05-29 09:01 PM
why ? ask your kids to do same and see what you feel on that night. can your kids do same ? forget about torturing or anything for a moment. Didn't you see Nupur Lala a past winner where she is now ? if she was torture for that competition she would n't be in MIT. its a competition of brain power to me.
The notion that going to MIT would translate to the "brain power"... it is hard to agree upon. What is your definition of "Brain Power" ?...
The notion that going to MIT would translate to the "brain power"... it is hard to agree upon. What is your definition of "Brain Power" ?...
sgupta33
10-05 11:26 AM
Government of Power?
GOP refers to Grand Old Party. It is the term used since 1880 to refer to the Republican party.
GOP refers to Grand Old Party. It is the term used since 1880 to refer to the Republican party.
ASR
05-21 04:22 PM
This is unprecedented - NSC was doing Eb3 140's slowly and now they stopped.
NSC EB2 140 is July 5th 2007 (my friend got approval yesterday by filing in Aug 2007)
Clear your cache and then reopen browser - you should be able to see MAY 15th update.
Thanks,
These processing times are crap. My received date i 140 is July 24 2007 which is not even in this dates, but it got approved on May 5th 2008
can anybody paste here if they see new dates?
PD Jan 24, 2004- EB2
I140 aproved May 5th 2008
RD I140 and 485 concurrent July 24 2007
NSC EB2 140 is July 5th 2007 (my friend got approval yesterday by filing in Aug 2007)
Clear your cache and then reopen browser - you should be able to see MAY 15th update.
Thanks,
These processing times are crap. My received date i 140 is July 24 2007 which is not even in this dates, but it got approved on May 5th 2008
can anybody paste here if they see new dates?
PD Jan 24, 2004- EB2
I140 aproved May 5th 2008
RD I140 and 485 concurrent July 24 2007
No comments:
Post a Comment