Archive | H-2B Visas RSS for this section

Update: the iCERT system is currently unavailable due to Federal Government Shutdown. It Appears that No LCA’s or Prevailing Wages Can be filed.

By Ashwin Sharma, Esq.

Update: our law office tried to file an ETA 9035/LCA a few moments ago and received the following message:

+++++++

The iCERT system is currently unavailable

This Web application is currently unavailable due to the suspension of Federal government services. It will be available again when the Federal government resumes operations.

++++++++

USCIS – New Countries Eligible for H-2A and H-2Bs

VIA USCIS.gov


WASHINGTON— U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) announced today that the Department of Homeland Security (DHS), in consultation with the Department of State, has identified 53 countries whose nationals are eligible to participate in the H-2A and H-2B programs for the coming year.

The H-2A program allows U.S. employers to bring foreign nationals to the United States to fill temporary agricultural jobs; the H-2B program allows U.S. employers to bring foreign nationals to the United States for temporary nonagricultural jobs. USCIS, with limited exception, approves petitions only for nationals of countries designated by the Secretary of Homeland Security as eligible to participate in the H-2A and H-2B programs. A new list of eligible countries publishes in a Federal Register notice on January 18, 2011 , and the designations are valid for one year from the date of publication.

Effective Jan. 18, 2011, nationals from the following countries are eligible to participate in the H-2A and H-2B programs:  Argentina, Australia, Barbados, Belize, Brazil, Bulgaria, Canada, Chile, Costa Rica, Croatia, Dominican Republic, Ecuador, El Salvador, Estonia, Ethiopia, Fiji, Guatemala, Honduras, Hungary, Ireland, Israel, Jamaica, Japan, Kiribati, Latvia, Lithuania, Macedonia, Mexico, Moldova, Nauru, The Netherlands, Nicaragua, New Zealand, Norway, Papua New Guinea, Peru, Philippines, Poland, Romania, Samoa, Serbia, Slovakia, Slovenia, Solomon Islands, South Africa, South Korea, Tonga, Turkey, Tuvalu, Ukraine, United Kingdom, Uruguay, and Vanuatu.  Of these countries, the following were designated for the first time this year:  Barbados, Estonia, Fiji, Hungary, Kiribati, Latvia, Macedonia, Nauru, Papua New Guinea, Samoa, Slovenia, Solomon Islands, Tonga, Tuvalu, and Vanuatu.

After considering a number of relevant factors under the governing regulations, the Department of Homeland Security and the Department of State have determined that Indonesia currently does not warrant a renewed designation as a participating country in the H-2A and H-2B programs for 2011.

This new list does not affect the status of individuals who currently hold valid H-2A or H-2B visas or status. A national from a country that is not on the list may be the beneficiary of an approved H-2A and H-2B petition if the Secretary of Homeland Security determines, in her sole and unreviewable discretion, that it is in the U.S. interest for the alien to be a beneficiary of the petition. 

 

 



Last updated:01/14/2011

High Drama Over Highly Skilled Workers

Via Businessweek
09/13/2007

“After failing over the summer to pass legislation that would overhaul
the rules for all kinds of immigrants, Congress is gearing up to take
on the narrower task of reforming immigration laws for highly skilled
workers. The effort is less politically charged than comprehensive
reform since it sets aside the contentious issue of what to do with the
estimated 12 million illegal immigrants
(BusinessWeek.com, 8/22/07) already in the U.S., and it appears likely
that some legislation will be passed. But there is opposition, and the
nature and degree of reform for the highly skilled remains unclear.”

Continue reading

Microsoft skips the US, opens development center in Canada as a result of US immigration limitations

Microsoft is skipping the US and opening a development center in Vancouver, Canada as a result of increasingly illogical and outdated US immigration laws. 

An excerpt from the Infoweek article:

“If Microsoft, or IBM or any other tech giant for that matter, can’t bring workers onto its home turf, it will simply put them in some other more immigration-friendly country. A broadband connection is usually all that’s needed to facilitate communication. Or, in the case of Microsoft’s Vancouver center, an eight-lane highway.


The question Congress now needs to consider is this: Do visa limits do more harm than good to the U.S. economy?…Wouldn’t it be better for Washington state if the workers that Microsoft plans to place in Canada because of “immigration issues” were employed locally, paying state taxes and spending in local shops?


It appears that the biggest beneficiary of the Senate’s failure to pass an immigration bill may be Canada. Is that really what Congress intended?”

Direct Filing Addresses for Form I-129, Petition for Nonimmigrant Worker – Effective April 2, 2007

Direct Filing Addresses for Form I-129, Petition for Nonimmigrant Worker



Form I-129 Petition for Nonimmigrant Worker

Effective April 2, 2007

This
chart provides the direct filing addresses for Form I-129, which become
effective on April 2, 2007.  Please note the filing addresses below and
the filing exceptions for certain classifications.

If

And

Mail Form I-129 to

You are the petitioning employer

The beneficiary will work temporarily in:

 

Alaska,
Arizona, California, Colorado, Guam, Hawaii, Idaho, Illinois, Indiana,
Iowa, Kansas, Michigan, Minnesota, Missouri, Montana, Nebraska, Nevada,
North Dakota, Ohio, Oregon, South Dakota, Utah, Washington, Wisconsin
or Wyoming.

For Regular processing

 

H-1B Cap Cases:

 

USCIS

California Service Center

ATTN: H-1B Cap

P.O. Box 10129

Laguna Niguel, CA 92607-1012

 

U.S. Masters Cap Cases:

 

USCIS

California Service Center

ATTN: H-1B U.S. Masters Cap

P.O. Box 10129

Laguna Niguel, CA  92607-1012

 

H-1B Extensions:

 

USCIS

California Service Center

ATTN: H-1B Extensions

P.O. Box 10129

Laguna Niguel, CA  92607-1012

 

All other I-129 Cases:

 

USCIS

California Service Center

ATTN: I-129

P.O. Box 10129

Laguna Niguel, CA 92607-1012

 

Courier Address for All I-129s:

 

USCIS

California Service Center

24000 Avila Road

2nd Floor, Room 2312

Laguna Niguel, CA  92677

(Please note the type of I-129 in the attention line)

 

For Premium Processing

 

Form I-907/I-129 Regular Mailing Address:

 

Premium Processing Service

USCIS

California Service Center

P.O. Box 10825

Laguna Niguel, CA 92607

(Please note the type of I-129 in the attention line)

 

 

Form I-907/I-129 Courier Mail Address:

 

Premium Processing Service

USCIS

California Service Center

24000 Avila Road

2nd Floor, Room 2312

Laguna Niguel, CA  92677

(Please note the type of I-129 in the attention line)

 

 

 

Form I-907/I-129 E-Mail Address:

CSC-Premium.Processing@dhs.gov

 

 

The beneficiary will work temporarily in:

 

Alabama, Arkansas, Connecticut, Delaware, the District of Columbia,Florida, Georgia, Kentucky, Louisiana, Maine, Maryland, Massachusetts,Mississippi, New Hampshire,New Jersey, New Mexico, New York,North Carolina, Oklahoma, Pennsylvania, Puerto Rico, Rhode Island, South Carolina, Tennessee, Texas, Vermont, Virginia, U.S. Virgin Islands, or West Virginia.

For Regular processing

 

H-1B Cap Cases:

 

USCIS

Vermont Service Center

ATTN: H-1B Cap

1A Lemnah Drive

St. Albans. VT 05479-0001

 

H-1B U.S. Masters Cap Cases:

 

USCIS

Vermont Service Center

ATTN: H-1B U.S. Masters Cap

1A Lemnah Drive

St. Albans. VT 05479-0001

 

All other I-129 Cases:

 

USCIS

Vermont Service Center

ATTN: I-129

75 Lower Weldon Street

St. Albans, VT 05479-0001

 

For Premium Processing

Form I-907/I-129 Mailing Address and Courier Address:

 

H-1B Cap Cases:

 

Premium Processing Service

USCIS

Vermont Service Center

ATTN: H-1B Cap

30 Houghton Street

St. Albans. VT 05478-2399

 

H-1B U.S. Master Cap Cases:

 

Premium Processing Service

USCIS

Vermont Service Center

ATTN: U.S. Masters Cap

30 Houghton Street

St. Albans. VT 05478-2399

 

All other I-129 Cases:

 

Premium Processing Service

USCIS

Vermont Service Center

ATTN: I-129

30 Houghton Street

St. Albans. VT 05478-2399

 

 

 

Form I-907/I129 E-mail address:

 

VSC-Premium.Processing @dhs.gov

 

 

Exceptions

·         Form I-129 Filed for Temporary Employment or Training in More Than One Location: 
When the temporary employment or training will be in different
locations, the state where your company or organization is located will
determine to which Service Center you should send your Form I-129
package.  For example, if the beneficiary will work in Arizona and
Texas, and your company is located in New York, file Form I-129 with
the Vermont Service Center.

 

·         H-1C Classification for Nurses: Mail the I-129 package to the Vermont Service Center, regardless of where the temporary H-1C nurse will be employed.

 

·         R Classification for Temporary Religious Workers:  Mail the I-129 package to the California Service Center, regardless of where the temporary religious worker will be employed.

 

·         Major League Sports: 
Mail the I-129 package to the Vermont Service Center, regardless of
place of temporary employment.  This covers major league athletes,
minor league sports and any affiliates associated with the major
leagues in baseball, hockey, soccer, basketball, and football.  Support
personnel includes coaches, trainers, broadcasters, referees, linesmen,
umpires, and interpreters.

 

·         Change of Status or Extension of Stay Under Certain Free Trade Agreements: 
Mail Form I-129 to the Vermont Service Center, regardless of the place
of temporary employment, if Form I-129 is filed to request a change of
status or extension of stay under one of the Free Trade Agreements
listed below.  

 

o        Change of Status to TN or TN Extension under Trade NAFTA for Nationals of Canada or Mexico.

 

o        Change of Status to H-1B1 or Extension of H-1B1 Stay for Nationals of Singapore and Chile.

 

o        Change of Status to E-3 or Extension of E-3 Stay for Nationals of Australia.  

 

§         Initial Classification Under Certain Free Trade Agreements: DO NOT use Form I-129 to apply for initial classification under one of the Free Trade Agreements listed below.  

 

o      Initial TN Classification for Nationals of Mexico (outside the United States): 
To obtain more information on the application process for initial TN
classification, please visit the U.S. Department of State’s TN Visa
website. [add link here]   

 

o        Initial TN Classification for Nationals of Canada (outside the United States: 8 CFR 214.6 [add link] for information on applying for initial TN admission at a U.S. port of entry. Please see

 

o        Initial H-1B1 Classification Under the Singapore/Chile Free Trade Agreement: 
To obtain more information on applying for initial H-1B1
classification, please visit the U.S. Department of State’s website.  [add link here].

 

o        Initial E-3 Classification Under the Australian Free Trade Agreement:  To obtain more information on applying for initial E-3 classification, please visit the U.S. Department of State’s website.  [add link here].

 

DOL Publishes H-2A Adverse Effect Wage Rate for 2007

[Federal Register: February 21, 2007 (Volume 72, Number 34)]
[Notices]
[Page 7909-7911]
From the Federal Register Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov]
[DOCID:fr21fe07-71]

—————————————


DEPARTMENT OF LABOR


Employment and Training Administration


Labor Certification Process for the Temporary Employment of Aliens in Agriculture and Logging in the United States: 2007 Adverse Effect Wage Rates, Allowable Charges for Agricultural and Logging Workers’ Meals, and Maximum Travel Subsistence Reimbursement


AGENCY: Employment and Training Administration, Department of Labor.


ACTION: Notice of Adverse Effect Wage Rates (AEWRs), allowable charges for meals, and maximum travel subsistence reimbursement for 2007.


—————————————


SUMMARY: The Employment and Training Administration (ETA) of the U.S. Department of Labor (Department or DOL) is issuing this Notice to announce the 2007 AEWRs for employers seeking to employ temporary or seasonal nonimmigrant foreign workers to perform agricultural labor or services (H-2A workers) or logging (H-2 logging workers); the allowable charges for 2007 that employers seeking H-2A workers and H-2 logging workers may levy upon their workers when three meals a day are provided by the employer; and the maximum travel subsistence reimbursement which a worker with receipts may claim in 2007.


AEWRs are the minimum wage rates the Department has determined must be offered and paid by employers of H-2A workers or H-2 logging workers to U.S. and foreign workers. AEWRs are established in order to prevent the employment of these foreign workers from adversely affecting wages of similarly employed U.S. workers. The Department also announces the minimum and maximum charge of travel subsistence expenses a worker may claim in 2007.


EFFECTIVE DATE: February 21, 2007.


FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: William L. Carlson, Administrator, Office of Foreign Labor Certification, U.S. Department of Labor, Room C-4312, 200 Constitution Avenue, NW., Washington, DC 20210. Telephone: 202-693-3010 (this is not a toll-free number).


SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services may not approve an employer’s petition for admission of H-2A workers or H-2 logging workers in the United States unless the petitioner has received from DOL an H-2A or H-2 labor certification, as appropriate. Approved labor certifications attest: (1) There are not sufficient U.S. workers who are able, willing, and qualified and who will be available at the time and place needed to perform the labor or services involved in the petition; and (2) the employment of the foreign worker in such labor or services will not adversely affect the wages and working conditions of workers in the U.S. similarly employed. 8 U.S.C. 1101(a)(15)(H)(ii)(a),1184(c), and 1188.


DOL’s regulations for the H-2A and H-2 program require employers to offer and pay their U.S., H-2A, and H-2 workers no less than the appropriate hourly AEWR in effect at the time the work is performed. 20 CFR 655.102(b)(9)


[[Page 7910]]


and 655.202(b)(9). See also 20 CFR 655.107, 20 CFR 655.207, and the preamble of the Final Rule, 54 FR 28037-28047 (July 5, 1989), which explains in great depth the purpose and history of AEWRs, DOL’s policy in setting AEWRs, and the AEWR computation methodology at 20 CFR 655.107(a). See also 52 FR 20496, 20502-20505 (June 1, 1987).


A. Adverse Effect Wage Rates for 2007


AEWRs are the minimum wage rates which must be offered and paid to U.S. and foreign workers by employers of H-2A workers or H-2 logging workers. Employers of H-2A workers must pay the highest of (i) the AEWR in effect at the time the work is performed, (ii) the applicable prevailing wage, or (iii) the statutory minimum wage, as specified in the regulations. 20 CFR 655.102(b)(9). As U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) regional surveys are not available for logging occupations, employers of H-2 logging workers must pay at least the prevailing wage in the area of intended employment, which is deemed to be the AEWR. 20 CFR 655.202(b)(9) and 20 CFR 655.207(a).


Except as otherwise provided in 20 CFR part 655, subpart B, the region-wide AEWR for all agricultural employment (except those occupations deemed inappropriate under the special circumstance provisions of 20 CFR 655.93) for which temporary H-2A certification is being sought, is equal to the annual weighted average hourly wage rate for field and livestock workers (combined) for the region as published annually by the USDA. 20 CFR 655.107(a). USDA does not provide data on Alaska.


20 CFR 655.107(a) requires the Assistant Secretary, Employment and Training Administration, to publish USDA field and livestock worker (combined) wage data as AEWRs in a Federal Register Notice. Accordingly, the 2007 AEWRs for agricultural work performed by U.S. and H-2A workers on or after the effective date of this Notice are set forth in the table below:


Table.–2007 Adverse Effect Wage Rates


(SEE PDF VERSION FOR TABLE)


For all logging employment, the AEWR shall be the prevailing wage rate in the area of intended employment, and the employer is required to pay at least that rate. 20 CFR 655.207(a).


B. Allowable Meal Charges


Among the minimum benefits and working conditions which DOL requires employers to offer their U.S., H-2A, and H-2 logging workers are three meals a day or free and convenient cooking and kitchen facilities. 20 CFR 655.102(b)(4) and 655.202(b)(4). Where the employer provides meals, the job offer must state the charge, if any, to the worker for meals.


DOL has published at 20 CFR 655.102(b)(4) and 655.111(a) the methodology for determining the maximum amounts that H-2A agricultural employers may charge their U.S. and foreign workers for meals. The same methodology is applied at 20 CFR 655.202(b)(4) and 655.211(a) to H-2 logging employers. These rules provide for annual adjustments of the previous year’s allowable charges based upon Consumer Price Index (CPI) data.


Each year, the maximum charges allowed by 20 CFR 655.102(b)(4) and 655.202(b)(4) are adjusted by the same percentage as the twelve-month percent change in the CPI for all Urban Consumers for Food (CPI-U for Food). ETA may permit an employer to charge workers no more than the higher maximum amount set forth in 20 CFR 655.111(a) and 655.211(a), as applicable, for providing them with three meals a day, if justified and sufficiently documented. Each year, the higher maximum amounts permitted by 20 CFR 655.111(a) and 655.211(a) are changed by the same percentage as the twelve-month percent change in the CPI-U for Food. The program’s regulations require DOL to make the annual adjustments and to publish a Notice in the Federal Register each calendar year, announcing annual adjustments in allowable charges that may be made by agricultural and logging employers for providing three meals daily to their U.S. and foreign workers. The 2006 rates were published in the Federal Register at 71 FR 13633 (March 16, 2006).


DOL has determined the percentage change between December of 2005, and December of 2006, for the CPI-U for Food was 2.4 percent. Accordingly, the maximum allowable charges under 20 CFR 655.102(b)(4), 655.202(b)(4), 655.111, and 655.211 were adjusted using this percentage change, and the new permissible charges for 2007 are as follows: (1) Charges under 20 CFR 655.102(b)(4) and 655.202(b)(4) shall be no more than $9.52 per day, unless ETA has approved a higher charge pursuant to 20 CFR 655.111 or 655.211 and (2) charges under 20 CFR 655.111 and 655.211 shall be no more than $11.80 per day, if the employer justifies the charge and submits to ETA the documentation required to support the higher charge.


C. Maximum Travel Subsistence Expense


The regulations at 20 CFR 655.102(b)(5) establish that the minimum daily travel subsistence expense, for which a worker is entitled to reimbursement, is equivalent to the employer’s daily charge for three meals or, if the employer makes no charge, the amount permitted under 20 CFR 655.102(b)(4). The regulation is silent about the maximum amount to which a qualifying worker is entitled.


The Department established the maximum meals component of the standard Continental United States (CONUS) per diem rate established by the General Services Administration


[[Page 7911]]


(GSA) and published at 41 CFR Pt. 301, Appendix A. The CONUS meal component is now $39.00 per day. Workers who qualify for travel reimbursement are entitled to reimbursement up to the CONUS meal rate for related subsistence when they provide receipts. In determining the appropriate amount of subsistence reimbursement, the employer may use the GSA system under which a traveler qualifies for meal expense reimbursement per quarter of a day. Thus, a worker whose travel occurred during two quarters of a day is entitled, with receipts, to a maximum reimbursement of $19.50. If a worker has no receipts, the employer is not obligated to reimburse above the minimum stated at 20 CFR 655.102(b)(4) as specified above.

Signed in Washington, DC this 13th day of February, 2007.
Emily Stover DeRocco,
Assistant Secretary, Employment and Training Administration.
[FR Doc. E7-2859 Filed 2-20-07; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4510-30-P

EEOC RESOLVES SLAVERY AND HUMAN TRAFFICKING SUIT AGAINST TRANS BAY STEEL FOR AN ESTIMATED $1 MILLION

Via The U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission

LOS ANGELES – The U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) today announced a major litigation settlement with Trans Bay Steel, Inc. for an estimated $1 million in total monetary relief and compensation for 48 welders of Thai descent who were discriminated against and exploited due to their national origin.


EEOC charged that the class of Thai nationals, contracted under H2B visas by Trans Bay and a third party agency, were held against their will, had their passports confiscated, had their movements restricted, and were forced to work without pay. Additionally, some workers were confined to cramped apartments without any electricity, water, or gas.


At least 17 of the workers were told if they tried to leave the location where they were being forcibly held, the police and immigration officials would be called to arrest them. EEOC also contends that all the workers were made to pay exorbitant “fees” to the recruiting company which kept them in involuntary servitude. Ultimately, some of the workers escaped the slave-like conditions.


Trans Bay received a large sub-contract to provide services to retrofit the Bay Bridge and became the sponsoring employer for the workers. Trans Bay contracted with Kota Manpower Co., and Hi Cap Enterprises, Inc., to bring the skilled welders from Thailand to meet the needs of the project. While Kota and Hi-Cap brought over approximately 48 welders from Thailand, only nine of them went to work for Trans Bay. The remaining welders were brought to Los Angeles and Long Beach and forced to work without pay at Thai Restaurants owned by Kota Manpower and Hi-Cap, and forced to work other menial jobs without pay.


“The issues of human trafficking and slavery are an enforcement priority for the Commission,” said Anna Y. Park, Regional Attorney in EEOC’s Los Angeles District Office, which has jurisdiction for the southern half of California. “The EEOC is committed to the protection of all workers, particularly those most vulnerable in our society. The workers in this case sought out the American dream, but instead faced a nightmare.”


EEOC conducted a comprehensive investigation of the charges and, after extensive negotiations, entered into a three-year consent decree with Trans Bay to resolve the case for an estimated $1 million in total monetary relief and compensation. Under the decree, Trans Bay will:



  • Provide monetary relief for each of the claimants;
  • Guarantee work on the Bay Bridge Project;
  • Provide housing for the claimants who agree to work for Trans Bay, including a housing stipend;
  • Pay for tuition and books at a local college for training as a welder;
  • Provide sponsorship, if required, to continue to work in the U.S. and certify claimant welders;
  • Guarantee minimum pay and a base pay once the claimants complete the training period;
  • Pay the claimants relocation costs, including reimbursement for travel;
  • Reimburse the claimants for moving expenses to relocate to Napa, Calif.

EEOC filed the lawsuit under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, as amended in U.S. District Court for the Central District of California (U.S. EEOC v. Trans Bay Steel, Inc., Case Number CV 06-07766 CAS (JTLx)) after first attempting to resolve the matter out of court. Other injunctive measures contained in the consent decree include:



  • Monitoring by the EEOC to ensure compliance;
  • Training of Trans Bay’s employees on anti-discrimination laws;
  • Revising Trans Bay policies and procedures;
  • Developing a viable complaint procedure.

EEOC Los Angeles District Director Olophius E. Perry said, “Through the cooperative efforts between the federal government and non-profit organizations, a just resolution was reached that is a win/win for the workers and for the employer.”


The EEOC worked closely with non-profit organizations such as the Thai Community Development Center, the Coalition to Abolish Slavery and Trafficking, and the Legal Aid Foundation of Los Angeles.


EEOC is the federal agency responsible for enforcing the nation’s anti-discrimination laws in the workplace. Further information about the EEOC is available on its web site at www.eeoc.gov.

California Service Center To Stop Faxing Premium Processing Approval Notices

USCIS PRESS RELEASE

Effective December 1, 2006, the California Service Center (CSC) will no longer fax approval notices for
premium processing cases. Due to a significant increase in receipts and the time expended on faxing copies of
the notices, we are eliminating this step of the process. This change in process will increase efficiency and
allow our customers to receive notices in a more timely manner. The CSC will continue to fax all requests for
evidence relating to premium processing cases.

USCIS Announces Extension of Returning Worker Exemption

VIA USCIS
10/23/2006

Washington, D.C.– U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) announced today that the “returning worker” exemption to the H-2B numerical limitation has been extended by the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2007 (H.R. 5122), section 1074, which was signed by President Bush on Oct. 17, 2006. The one year extension of the “returning worker” provisions will remain in effect until September 30, 2007.

Petitions filed for returning H-2B workers do not count towards the congressionally mandated bi-annual H-2B cap. “Returning workers” are exempt from H-2B cap limitations. In order to qualify, USCIS must have previously counted the “returning worker” against the H-2B numerical cap in one of the three fiscal years preceding the current year (i.e. between October 1, 2003 and September 30, 2006). Any worker not certified as a “returning worker” is subject to the numerical limitations for the relevant fiscal year. Petitions received after the “final receipt date” which contain a combination of “returning workers” and workers subject to the current H-2B cap will be rejected with respect to non-returning workers, and petitioning employers will receive partial approvals for those aliens who qualify as “returning workers” if otherwise approvable.

USCIS will continue to process petitions filed to:

• Extend the stay of a current H-2B worker in the United States;
• Change the terms of employment for current H-2B workers and extend their stay;
• Allow current H-2B workers to change or add employers and extend their stay; or
• Request eligible H-2B “returning workers.”

More information about the H-2B work program is available at http://www.uscis.gov or by calling the National Customer Service Center at 1-800-375-5283.

President Signs Defense Authorization, Enacting H-2B Relief

On October 17, 2006, President Bush signed the National Defense Authorization
Act for Fiscal Year 2007 (H.R. 5122) into law. Section 1074 of the bill includes
a one year extension of the returning worker exemption to the H-2B visa cap and
provides for the extension to take effect beginning October 1, 2006.

Rethinking the Effects of Immigration on Wages

Via AILA
10/03/2006

A crucial question in the current debate over immigration is what
impact immigrants have on the wages of native-born workers. At first
glance, it might seem that the simple economics of supply and demand
provides the answer: immigrants increase the supply of labor; hence
they should decrease the wages of native workers. However, the reality
is more complicated than this.

The latest study published by the Immigration Policy Center
addresses this issue. The study, authored by Giovanni Peri, Associate
Professor of Economics at the University of California, Davis, and a
Faculty Research Fellow at the National Bureau of Economic Research in
Cambridge, Massachusetts, is entitled <!–
D(["mb",""Rethinking the Effects of Immigration on Wages: New Data and Analysis from 1990 2004." In the study, Professor Peri argues that the widespread notion that immigrants decrease native wages is a misconception, complicated by two reasons that too often are overlooked. First, immigrants and natives, with different skills and education levels, do not compete with each other for the same jobs, but actually complement each other performing interdependent jobs, thereby increasing the wages and productivity of natives. Second, evidence shows that new workers added to the labor force stimulate investment by entrepreneurs. When these two factors are included in the analysis of immigration and wages, it becomes clear that immigration has a positive effect on the wages of most native-born workers.
\n \n\n
For a detailed analysis of Professor Peri\'s findings, read the full report here. \n\n

Return to top

\n\n

Take Action

\n\n

Hold Members of Congress Accountable at Town Hall Meetings

\n\nIncumbent Candidates are back in their home districts making the most of the pre-election season. Many are hosting Town Hall meetings. This is a good way for them to get out and talk to their constituents and "take the pulse" of the communities they represent in Congress. It is also a great opportunity for AILA members to educate and inform Senators, Representatives, and other meeting attendees about the need for comprehensive immigration reform, H-1B relief, and other key AILA concerns. Consider attending a Town Hall meeting with your AILA colleagues to show collective support for your shared ideals. Generating a large and well-informed crowd at a public meeting is an extremely effective way to elicit the views of your Member of Congress and to share your perspective. Use AILA\'s ",1]
);
//–>“Rethinking the Effects of Immigration on Wages: New Data and Analysis from 1990 2004.”
In the study, Professor Peri argues that the widespread notion that
immigrants decrease native wages is a misconception, complicated by two
reasons that too often are overlooked. First, immigrants and natives,
with different skills and education levels, do not compete with each
other for the same jobs, but actually complement each other performing
interdependent jobs, thereby increasing the wages and productivity of
natives. Second, evidence shows that new workers added to the labor
force stimulate investment by entrepreneurs. When these two factors are
included in the analysis of immigration and wages, it becomes clear
that immigration has a positive effect on the wages of most native-born
workers.

For a detailed analysis of Professor Peri’s findings, read the full report here.

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 298 other followers