Why USA should issue the dependant visa holders work-authorization ?
sin...@yahoo.com
All these years the United States of America denied work-permits to
dependant visa holders with one simple explanation "You are in USA
because Your Spouse is allowed to work here". But numerous surveys by
different social organizations has thrown light on the darker sides of
the life of dependant visa holders.
The dependant visa holder has to forgo his/her career growth in-order
to stay with the spouse. This causes a big gap in the career and
finding a suitable job in the home country becomes difficult when the
pricipal visa holder has to leave USA and return to the home country.
If the dependant visa holder's field of study or work is, one in which
getting a sponsorship from an employer is difficult, getting a
work-visa is almost impossible. He/she even loses his/her hard earned
skills in the respective fields due to the large gap in career. Even
though volunteering is possible, most of the volunteer jobs might not
utilize the persons skills.
Studying in the USA is good option but, being a single income family,
it will affect the financial satatus of the family if other members of
the family (children) are studying.
90 percent of dependant visa holders are women. Women being, more
susceptible to domestic violence by the partner, becomes even more
prone to violence due to her complete dependance on the Spouse. They
become prisoners in USA due to the spousal abuse and immigration
policies that give their husbands complete control over their lives.
The immigrant Women get protection under VAWA but non-immigrants are
not covered. Even if a law to let the non-immigrant battered women to
obtain work permit is introduced, It might not protect women whose
cases dismissed as non-critical. The abuser can furthur exert his
control over the victim and convince her that he has changed so that
the victim might not press charges against him. Thus the abuser gets
encouraged to continue violence.
Divorce is not an option because most non-immigrants come from third
world countries where a divorced women has to bear the social stigma of
divorce and will not be protected in her own home country.
Because of the long queues for Labor certification applicationa and
retrogression of visa numbers, getting an EAD and Green Card takes
longer.
Most European countries issue work permits to the spouses. Also the
time taken for permanent residency is lesser. In USA L2 and E2 visa
holders can have work permit, but the other categories are ignored.
Fear of flooding the labor market is not a valid reason to deny the
dependant visa holders work permit. Allowing the L2 and E2 category to
work didn't create any marked increase in the unemployment rate among
US Citizens.
calling all the dependant visa holders to send in their comments.......
Joe Santana
Furthermore, given unreasonably long wait to obtain employment-based GC with
over 4 years just to clear LC, one could argue that not allowing H4 any kind
of work is a form of abuse.
Joe
<sin...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:1118101112....@g43g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
Ritze
"Joe Santana" <joesa...@email.si> wrote in message
news:11a9p8o...@corp.supernews.com...
>I couldn't agree more with the presented arguments.
>
> Furthermore, given unreasonably long wait to obtain employment-based GC
> with over 4 years just to clear LC, one could argue that not allowing H4
> any kind of work is a form of abuse.
>
> Joe
>
Give somebody an inch and he'd want a foot!
:)
crg14624
The rules are open to the public. Noone has had a gun put to their
head and been forced to take an H1B in the US. Oh, how oppressive the
US government is being to poor H4 women. Saudi Arabia doesn't even
let women drive cars. E2, L2, and J2 can all work. H4 can't work
because H's are capped! They limit how many jobs can be taken and in
what fields.
--
Posted via http://britishexpats.com
LDJ
"crg14624" <member20421@british_expats.com> wrote in message
news:34$307215$2466397$11181...@britishexpats.com...
>
>> All these years the United States of America denied work-permits to
>> calling all the dependant visa holders to send in their
>> comments.......
>
> The rules are open to the public. Noone has had a gun put to their
^^^^^
Good spelling boy, maybe you should go back to elementary school instead of
discussing such complicated issues. This is waaaay over you head boy.
steeler
The other message was right, "Give them an inch and they want a foot".
Considering that permanent residents (who live and work in the US
permanently) cannot even bring their spouses & children with them to the
US while they wait for their GC, H4s are really lucky since they are not
subjected to the trauma of having the family unit broken apart (which
could take 10 years for some folks) while they await for the immigration
process to finish. Now to give them visas to work would be stretching it
a bit for these folks besides no one held a gun to their heads to take
the H1B visa in the first place.
Gerd Rausch
>> calling all the dependant visa holders to send in their
>> comments.......
> The rules are open to the public. Noone has had a gun put to their
> head and been forced to take an H1B in the US. Oh, how oppressive the
> US government is being to poor H4 women. Saudi Arabia doesn't even
> let women drive cars.
It all depends on how low you want to put the bar.
If Saudi Arabia is the standard you want to compete with,
then certainly the U.S. looks pretty good.
Cheers,
Gerd
Ritze
"Gerd Rausch" <ge...@sam.meshed.net> wrote in message
news:m3d5qy5...@sam.meshed.net...
And which country do you think should be the best standard for non-immigrant
workers?
gerd...@gmail.com
The rules in various countries are too distinct, inconsistent and
depend too much on your personal situation to allow for a generalized
statement.
One example where dependent visa holders are permitted to work is the
EU. Spouses of EU citizens, who live and work in any of the EU member
countries, will get a work permit regardless of their nationality.
Even in the U.S. the spouse can get work-permission, but it is
dependent on the visa category (e.g. L1/L2).
Cheers,
Gerd
sin...@yahoo.com
If countries like Saudi Arabia denies any form of freedom to their
women folk, it is because they are still in their infancy in
understanding and accepting basic human rights. United States of
America is still considered a land of opportunity and growth. And
America has always benefitted through immigration.
If anyone is a US Citizen now, it is because his forefathers migrated
to USA and contributed to build a great nation.
So why so much hatred towards contractors ? A contractor, like any
other US citizen pays the taxes and contributes the Social Security. A
US citizen's contribution to the Social Security benefits him later.
when he retires he recieves benefits from social security, whereas a
contrator who leaves the USA never recieves the benefit.
The immigration System of USA is faulty.
It failed to prevent illegal immigrants - who never pay taxes.
It failed to prevent terrorists from entering and attacking USA.
Now look at the evergrowing Backlogs of family-based immigrants, Labor
Certification Applications and retrogression of Employment based
immigration.
If US considers contractors as those who take away the jobs, what about
outsourcing and offshoring ? If USA just stopped bringing in
contractors, will the jobs stay here ? No, the job will follow the
brain. Instead of creating a new non-immigrant visa category for
illegal aliens why not give more rights to those who are in us. Being
able to work is a basic human right. why deprive a dependant visa
holder that right based on visa category ?
Gerd Rausch
> The other message was right, "Give them an inch and they want a foot".
> Considering that permanent residents (who live and work in the US
> permanently) cannot even bring their spouses & children with them to the
> US while they wait for their GC, H4s are really lucky since they are not
> subjected to the trauma of having the family unit broken apart (which
> could take 10 years for some folks) while they await for the immigration
> process to finish. Now to give them visas to work would be stretching it
> a bit for these folks besides no one held a gun to their heads to take
> the H1B visa in the first place.
Now explain to me again how denying H4 holders a work permit is going
to help re-unite families that were split up due to DHS-policies?
And the "gun to your head" argument is really silly:
Do you want to live in a society where anything short of a "gun to
your head" is morally acceptable?
And where will this end?
"Did anyone point a gun to your head when you married that
foreigner/alien?"
"Did anyone point a gun to the girl's head before going through the
genital mutilation procedure?"
It all boils down to what you decide basic human rights should include.
Regards,
Gerd
crg14624
Coming to the US is not a "right". They have the "right" to work in
their home country. Being allowed to come to the US is a privilege.
Being able to lawfully work is another privilege. The couple needs to
decide if the trade-off is worth it. If it's not worth it, then they
shouldn't come at all. If one of the members of the couple is overruled
and doesn't like it, then it's their fault for marrying the person.
crg14624
I really don't understand how families are split up by DHS. If someone
got permission to move to the US before entering, then the entire family
would ride along and get their green cards at the same time.
It seems that people who enter illegally, and then manage to aquire
status via asylum or a fake marriage are the ones who can't bring their
real spouse and kids over.
The people who enter legally in a work/student status, eventually get
their green card and then fall for someone in another country are the
ones who get screwed.
The people who move to the US illegally without their spouse, get legal,
and then whine because they aren't allowed to then import their entire
family can stuff it. They split their own family.
Noone is forced to stay in the US, therefore, DHS doesn't split
families.
wabbit
First of all, I think the "gun to your head" was meant to be a metaphor
so don't take it literally. Moreover, we are in a civilized society so
we don't have to talk about "genital mutilation"
Secondly, I believe that people need to count their blessings. If the
author of the thread believes that H4 dependents specifically women are
disadvantaged, think about how many people cannot even be reunited with
their families because they had their greencards before they got
married? Really now, people need to realize they cannot have
everything.
Wabbit
PS For victims of domestic violence, go to your local state police or
some nonprofit orgs who help disadvantaged women. I honestly don't
think immigration reform for H1B dependents will solve domestic
violence. Hope this helps.
steeler
> I really don't understand how families are split up by DHS. If
> someone got permission to move to the US before entering, then the
> entire family would ride along and get their green cards at the
> same time.
>
> It seems that people who enter illegally, and then manage to aquire
> status via asylum or a fake marriage are the ones who can't bring
> their real spouse and kids over.
>
> The people who enter legally in a work/student status, eventually get
> their green card and then fall for someone in another country are the
> ones who get screwed.
>
> The people who move to the US illegally without their spouse, get
> legal, and then whine because they aren't allowed to then import their
> entire family can stuff it. They split their own family.
>
> Noone is forced to stay in the US, therefore, DHS doesn't split
> families.
Agree with your situations but if you look at your situation where you
said that "The people who enter legally in a work/student status,
eventually get their green card and then fall for someone in another
country are the ones who get screwed", there are around 700,000 -
800,000 cases that fall under this. This is the reason why there are
backlogs in embassies all over the world. A lot of the people in the
line are immediate family members of GC holders. The reason for this is
that immediate families are classified as Category 2 applications and
with a limited number of Alien visa numbers, not everyone can be
accomodated. Hence, people are forced to stay behind even if their
spouse is a legal resident. It's not the DHS that splits families but
the way the immigration law is written. Would it not be fair that for
immediate family members of permanent residents be allowed to stay in
the US as long as the GC holder can prove he has the income to support
his family? In fact, if an H1-B holder converts to a GC, he is able to
convert his family with him immediately (just like a US citizen), now is
that fair to the folks who already have GCs?
Now, if H4s are complaining they cannot work. I say just be happy that
they can come with their spouses to the US because this is privilege
that families of GC holders cannot have. If you look to other countries,
yes the EU may be more lax but other countries like the Middle East or
Asia will not allow even immediate family members to accompany them
while they work in the foreign country unless they are expats.
PS
The "gun to your head" was meant to be a figure of speech, a metaphor.
It really means that no one is forced to be an H1-B visa holder in the
first place.
I think one guy was confused. It does not mean that if you give H4s a
work permit it will re-unite families. They should just be happy they
can be with their spouse under their H1B status because some GC holder
do not even have this privilege.
crg14624
I've actually seen cases where an LPR gave up their I-551 with an I-407,
and then entered as an L1 with their spouse and kid the same day.
I wouldn't mind if the spouse of a GC holder was allowed to come over as
long as the GC holder entered in a work status, and was squeeky clean
and free of any violations. Of course the spouse would have to be clean
too. Allowing people who broke the rules to get here to then import
their family merely encourages more people to break the rules. Being
apart from their family should serve as a deterrant for those who would
seek entry unlawfully.
It's about time that they start encouraging all of the people who do
things properly.
You have a good point that it's not DHS that makes the rules. It's the
US Congress.
Padu
> head and been forced to take an H1B in the US. Oh, how oppressive the
> US government is being to poor H4 women. Saudi Arabia doesn't even
> let women drive cars. E2, L2, and J2 can all work. H4 can't work
> because H's are capped! They limit how many jobs can be taken and in
> what fields.
Saudi Arabia doesn't preach (read invade other countries with the purpose
of) democracy. Ops, I let my naive self speak again...
Padu
> Considering that permanent residents (who live and work in the US
> permanently) cannot even bring their spouses & children with them to the
> US while they wait for their GC, H4s are really lucky since they are not
> subjected to the trauma of having the family unit broken apart (which
> could take 10 years for some folks) while they await for the immigration
> process to finish. Now to give them visas to work would be stretching it
> a bit for these folks besides no one held a gun to their heads to take
> the H1B visa in the first place.
Now you are being too naive. Do you really think that someone with a decent
constructed family would break it and be separated from their loved ones for
such a long stretch of time? C'mon, we are talking about H1b'ers, not
illegal immigrants that cross the Mexican border with dreams of getting out
of misery.
Nobody except a few legionaries would accept to come here and Silicon Valley
would surely be in a country other than the US.
Ritze
"Padu" <pa...@merlotti.com> wrote in message
news:G-idnROqHtm...@iswest.net...
>>> Nobody except a few legionaries would accept to come here and Silicon
>>> Valley
> would surely be in a country other than the US.
>
>
Sounds more like an opinion rather than a fact.
The point you should consider is that the laws of the US has been
established by duly elected US citizen representatives of this country even
before any of these complainers were granted the privilege of living and
working in the US. These complainers know what they were getting into based
on the laws and policies of the US. If they didn't, then nobody else should
be blamed but them for their lack of foresight and planning. If they really
want to change the laws then they should do it in accordance with the
system, that is, become US citizens and legal voters of their respective
representative lawmakers in Congress! That is how you change the system.
Many things may seem unfair to you now but so are things you find acceptable
are also considered unfair to many of the bona fide citizens of this
country.
The United States of America, FOREMOST of all, is for AMERICAN CITIZENS.
Other legal residents of the US are more like GUEST to this country and they
should be expected to act like so. If you are not a US citizen and you were
granted the privilege of living in the US you should be glad and be
genuinely grateful for that. Complaining and trashing the very system and
nation which provided you the opportunity to be where you are now is
tantamount to being rude, an ingrate and an unacceptable guest!
Again, wait for your chance to be a US citizen and participate in the
process of nation building if you really want to make a change the proper
way.
I can't just go to your country and badmouth or whine about your system, can
I? You have more rights and privileges here compared to an American in your
country. Who is really being unfair???
Then you know how we citizens of this country feel about some of your rude
behaviors!
gerd...@gmail.com
> I really don't understand how families are split up by DHS. If
> someone got permission to move to the US before entering, then the
> entire family would ride along and get their green cards at the same
> time.
Are you saying the DHS never denies any AOS/Visa application?
Or are you saying that DHS has a 0% failure rate in determining which
application in legitimate, applying any sensible standard?
In the later case, families still might end up being split up but for
arguably legitimate reasons.
If so, why bother accepting appeals? All of them must be coming from
disgruntled people, who can't accept the fact that they're criminals.
> It seems that people who enter illegally, and then manage to aquire
> status via asylum or a fake marriage are the ones who can't bring
> their real spouse and kids over.
> The people who enter legally in a work/student status, eventually
> get their green card and then fall for someone in another country
> are the ones who get screwed.
Correct, but they're not the only ones who end up being screwed.
> Noone is forced to stay in the US, therefore, DHS doesn't split
> families.
Did it ever occur to you there might be mixed couples with different
nationalities?
What if DHS says "no" to the alien, and the home country of the alien
says no to whom they regard to be the alien?
Where does the couple move? They end up having to split up!
I personally know of one such case; in this case the U.S. wasn't
involved. It was a dutch / taiwanese couple.
This scenario is certainly also possible with the USA.
Best Regards,
Gerd
crg14624
I'd wager that DHS approves 100 times more fraudlent applications than
it denies bona fide applicants.
snowbunny
> I'd wager that DHS approves 100 times more fraudlent applications than
> it denies bona fide applicants.
Why is it *assumed* that it's the husband who's the H1-B recipient?
I've seen plenty of cases where it was the wife.
The point about women who aren't working losing their career status is
valid, but it happens all the time when they stay home to have
children. I know -- I went back to work immediately after having my
first, but HAD to stay home after my second (long story). Yeah, it
sucks, and yeah, some of it is discriminatory. Address that problem --
no one is willing to retrain workers who have been out of work for any
length of time; no one is willing to retrain older workers. Address
the discrimination first.
I'd rather let people in on H-visas to work here rather than outsourcing
the work to another country; at least some of the money would stay here
and would go into Medicare and Social Security.
Again, though, all of this is controlled by the US Congress and those
who influence them. Even if you're not a USC, don't let that stop you
writing and calling members of Congress.
Alun L. Palmer
$11182...@britishexpats.com:
The rule against non-immigrant dependants working is oppressive and is
clearly based on outdated ideas of families supported by one male head of
household. Your 'like it or lump it' attitude is appalling. It would be
perfectly possible to allow them to work while cutting the number of visas
so that not one single extra worker would be added to the US labour market,
and that would still be a major improvement over the status quo.
As long as the current rules persist two things will continue to happen-
(1) people will apply for green cards who are eligible for a visa and have
no intention of staying in the US, just so their dependents can work; and
(2) dependents will continue to become illegal workers, not illegal aliens,
but people who work for cash under the table on an H4 visa.
If dependents of those with H1 visas could work legally, many would not
bother to apply for green cards and they could pay taxes and avoid being
exploited. The typical scenario right now is the husband gets an H1, they
come to the US, and the wife works illegally while they apply for for
adjustment to get green cards they only need so the wife can work legally.
Alun L. Palmer
$11182...@britishexpats.com:
That's just it, they don't encourage legality. It's basic decency to say
that if you let someone in (visa or GC, whatever), you should let in their
spouse and kids and let them all work (subject to child labour laws, of
course!). I have no problem with reducing the numbers of principal
immigrants to keep the number of workers the same. The current system
fosters separation and illegal working. If it was necessary to reduce
quotas to acheive this, the objective would be well worth it.
Alun L. Palmer
news:EaOpe.2883$jS1....@newssvr17.news.prodigy.com:
Actually, you could go to my country and whine about it and badmouth it
etc. People might not like it, but you would have that right. We do here
too. You may have heard of it. In the US it's called the first amendment.
Boiler
The H is a non immigrant visa, designed to allow non USC's to work in
the US for a short period, with as others have said a numerical cap.
The problem is that it has dual intent and is perceived by many/most/all
as a method to immigrate. Also it seems, I may be wrong, that most look
on the maximum allowed time as the normal time. A bit like if all VWP's
stayed for 90 days.
It makes perfect sense to me that someone coming for a short period be
allowed to bring their immediate family, if any, but not work. If the
spouse, male or female has sufficient skills to interest US employers
then they can get their own work visa.
The obvious solution would be to remove the dual intent aspect. Those
wanting to stay should apply for an Immigrant visa, this would free up
visa's for those with no long term desire.
Alun L. Palmer
$11189...@britishexpats.com:
And that has what to do with the first amendment?
I'll let that pass. It's understandable that you get miffed if we criticise
your country and your immigration laws. The fact is, though, your
immigration system doesn't make much sense, either for you or for us.
Not all of us come from third world dictatorships, you know. Many of us are
used to having a right of free speech in our own countries, and are used to
living in a dual income soceity, so not much difference there. Visas that
block spouses from working are a throwback to the Victorian era. You are
free to maintain a 'take it or leave it' stance if you like, but a system
that doesn't fit with the realities of modern soceity produces distortions
in people's behaviour, whether you like it or not.
In my case, I got a green card because a visa wouldn't allow my wife to
work. What I think you maybe don't get here is that I had no immigrant
intent, i.e. I only intended to stay a year or two. You are probably so
used to thinking of all of us clamouring to get into your wonderful country
that such an idea probably wouldn't occur to you. This may lead you to
think that I got an H visa so that I could get a GC and remain, but that's
not the case. In fact, the truth is I stayed because I had a GC, and I only
got it so my wife could work. The cause and effect here are backwards, and
it is that way because spouses of GC holders get a GC but spouses of H visa
holders don't.
If I couldn't get a GC and the H4 still didn't allow work, I probably would
have stayed home. Maybe that's what you want, so come out and say it!
AOSfamilybasedF-4
>that if you let someone in (visa or GC, whatever), you should let in their
>spouse and kids and let them all work (subject to child labour laws, of
>course!). I have no problem with reducing the numbers of principal
>immigrants to keep the number of workers the same.
Because you said *visa*, not just GC, your suggestion means ... give
the spouse on H4 a work permit and reduce the quota of H1 in order to
keep total number the same. In another word, give an H4 with lesser
education than a person who is qualified for H1. Don't you think that
H1 quota is the way it is for a reason. You start changing all that
and there will be a new can of worms.
My suggestion H4 is to find a teaching job since there is no cap for
teaching and teachers are in shortage.
AOSfamilybasedF-4
>status via asylum
I thought that those who are granted asylum can have the spouse and
children followed; Isn't it the case that the spouse and children can
go to US Embassy and inform of the spouse (in US)'s asylum status and
get visit visa to enter US?
Sorry for topic change.
Boiler
Not quite true, but the dates for H Visa's are not very helpful when it
comes to teaching and many school districts are not set up for the cost
and hassle of Visa's.
crg14624
The relationship of spouse and child must have existed at the time the
principal alien's asylum application was approved and must continue to
exist at the time of filing for accompanying or following-to-join
benefits and at the time of the spouse or child's subsequent admission
to the United States.
Often asylum is applied for following denial of other applications. For
instance, someone may try the sham marriage to a USC route. This could
interfere with follow-to-join benefits of the real spouse.
AOSfamilybasedF-4
crg14624 wrote:
<snip>
>
> The relationship of spouse and child must have existed at the time the
> principal alien's asylum application was approved and must continue to
> exist at the time of filing for accompanying or following-to-join
> benefits and at the time of the spouse or child's subsequent admission
> to the United States.
Yes, I was talking about that kind of situation. A married guy with
children came to US alone, filed for asylum, and approve. Then his
spouse and children get *visit visa* in home country (to leave home
country safely) and enter US by informing the US Embassy of his granted
asylum, right?