ImmigrationAnswerMan
06-30 07:36 PM
Yes and no. Yes will probably get the PERM for BA +5 certified. But no, you will not be approved for an EB2 I-140 petition. You will still only be able to get an EB3 I-140 approved.
wallpaper London middot; Johnny Depp
vxb2004
11-24 08:09 PM
Hello,
I joined company B in April and prior to that I was working for company A. Fragoman was company A's attorney. Through company A I had my labor certified, I-140 approved and my 485 was pending for more than 180 days and hence I was able to switch my job using AC21. My job was in the same and similar job classification. The AC21 documents were sent to USCIS in early April by company B's attorney.
Last week of October, I received my finger printing notice as part of my I-485 process. When I contacted company B's attorney, they never received any courtesy copy for my finger printing notice. Today I called up USCIS customer service to find out the attorney on record for my file. They mentioned that it was still company A's and the courtesy copy was sent to them. I mentioned to the officer that AC21 was filed which had the change in attorney information. She said that they do not have any records of it. She advised me to send a copy of the AC21 forms again along with the G28 documents.
My question is if company B's attorney send the AC21 documents, will USCIS question why the documents are being sent after 8 months of switching jobs?
Will this trigger an RFE?
Please advise.
I joined company B in April and prior to that I was working for company A. Fragoman was company A's attorney. Through company A I had my labor certified, I-140 approved and my 485 was pending for more than 180 days and hence I was able to switch my job using AC21. My job was in the same and similar job classification. The AC21 documents were sent to USCIS in early April by company B's attorney.
Last week of October, I received my finger printing notice as part of my I-485 process. When I contacted company B's attorney, they never received any courtesy copy for my finger printing notice. Today I called up USCIS customer service to find out the attorney on record for my file. They mentioned that it was still company A's and the courtesy copy was sent to them. I mentioned to the officer that AC21 was filed which had the change in attorney information. She said that they do not have any records of it. She advised me to send a copy of the AC21 forms again along with the G28 documents.
My question is if company B's attorney send the AC21 documents, will USCIS question why the documents are being sent after 8 months of switching jobs?
Will this trigger an RFE?
Please advise.
Norristown
10-15 07:15 AM
Recently I came across a different situation where outsourcing caused to lay off GCs and citizens(Ind origins).
My friend is working in a medium company for 5 years after he got GC.
Comapany decided to outsource certain piece of project to TCS and in that effect my friend was laid off. I think in future this might more often to us who are waiting in line for GC. May be it is part of life ....
Most funniest part is company has prepared a official guidlines to employees how to communicate with indian team (which is mostly located in India).
here are examples...
1) when they say they understood every thing, do not take it seriously. Ask them explain what they knew.
2) during discussion do not use any US slangs. Talk to them in simple english.
3) do not be surprised for few new words like FUNDA, Bouncer, Sixer (cricket), Yaar,
4) know something about cricket. Indians love cricket game.
My friend is working in a medium company for 5 years after he got GC.
Comapany decided to outsource certain piece of project to TCS and in that effect my friend was laid off. I think in future this might more often to us who are waiting in line for GC. May be it is part of life ....
Most funniest part is company has prepared a official guidlines to employees how to communicate with indian team (which is mostly located in India).
here are examples...
1) when they say they understood every thing, do not take it seriously. Ask them explain what they knew.
2) during discussion do not use any US slangs. Talk to them in simple english.
3) do not be surprised for few new words like FUNDA, Bouncer, Sixer (cricket), Yaar,
4) know something about cricket. Indians love cricket game.
2011 children, johnny depp
sathishav
03-07 09:51 AM
Once you I140 is approved, you lock the PD. Only time you lose it is, if USCIS cancels it for fraud.
Else, layoff or revocation does not matter. You just have to start another new PERM again.
Else, layoff or revocation does not matter. You just have to start another new PERM again.
more...
vedicman
01-04 08:34 AM
Ten years ago, George W. Bush came to Washington as the first new president in a generation or more who had deep personal convictions about immigration policy and some plans for where he wanted to go with it. He wasn't alone. Lots of people in lots of places were ready to work on the issue: Republicans, Democrats, Hispanic advocates, business leaders, even the Mexican government.
Like so much else about the past decade, things didn't go well. Immigration policy got kicked around a fair bit, but next to nothing got accomplished. Old laws and bureaucracies became increasingly dysfunctional. The public grew anxious. The debates turned repetitive, divisive and sterile.
The last gasp of the lost decade came this month when the lame-duck Congress - which struck compromises on taxes, gays in the military andarms control - deadlocked on the Dream Act.
The debate was pure political theater. The legislation was first introduced in 2001 to legalize the most virtuous sliver of the undocumented population - young adults who were brought here as children by their parents and who were now in college or the military. It was originally designed to be the first in a sequence of measures to resolve the status of the nation's illegal immigrants, and for most of the past decade, it was often paired with a bill for agricultural workers. The logic was to start with the most worthy and economically necessary. But with the bill put forward this month as a last-minute, stand-alone measure with little chance of passage, all the debate accomplished was to give both sides a chance to excite their followers. In the age of stalemate, immigration may have a special place in the firmament.
The United States is in the midst of a wave of immigration as substantial as any ever experienced. Millions of people from abroad have settled here peacefully and prosperously, a boon to the nation. Nonetheless, frustration with policy sours the mood. More than a quarter of the foreign-born are here without authorization. Meanwhile, getting here legally can be a long, costly wrangle. And communities feel that they have little say over sudden changes in their populations. People know that their world is being transformed, yet Washington has not enacted a major overhaul of immigration law since 1965. To move forward, we need at least three fundamental changes in the way the issue is handled.
Being honest about our circumstances is always a good place to start. There might once have been a time to ponder the ideal immigration system for the early 21st century, but surely that time has passed. The immediate task is to clean up the mess caused by inaction, and that is going to require compromises on all sides. Next, we should reexamine the scope of policy proposals. After a decade of sweeping plans that went nowhere, working piecemeal is worth a try at this point. Finally, the politics have to change. With both Republicans and Democrats using immigration as a wedge issue, the chances are that innocent bystanders will get hurt - soon.
The most intractable problem by far involves the 11 million or so undocumented immigrants currently living in the United States. They are the human legacy of unintended consequences and the failure to act.
Advocates on one side, mostly Republicans, would like to see enforcement policies tough enough to induce an exodus. But that does not seem achievable anytime soon, because unauthorized immigrants have proved to be a very durable and resilient population. The number of illegal arrivals dropped sharply during the recession, but the people already here did not leave, though they faced massive unemployment and ramped-up deportations. If they could ride out those twin storms, how much enforcement over how many years would it take to seriously reduce their numbers? Probably too much and too many to be feasible. Besides, even if Democrats suffer another electoral disaster or two, they are likely still to have enough votes in the Senate to block an Arizona-style law that would make every cop an alien-hunter.
Advocates on the other side, mostly Democrats, would like to give a path to citizenship to as many of the undocumented as possible. That also seems unlikely; Republicans have blocked every effort at legalization. Beyond all the principled arguments, the Republicans would have to be politically suicidal to offer citizenship, and therefore voting rights, to 11 million people who would be likely to vote against them en masse.
So what happens to these folks? As a starting point, someone could ask them what they want. The answer is likely to be fairly limited: the chance to live and work in peace, the ability to visit their countries of origin without having to sneak back across the border and not much more.
Would they settle for a legal life here without citizenship? Well, it would be a huge improvement over being here illegally. Aside from peace of mind, an incalculable benefit, it would offer the near-certainty of better jobs. That is a privilege people will pay for, and they could be asked to keep paying for it every year they worked. If they coughed up one, two, three thousand dollars annually on top of all other taxes, would that be enough to dent the argument that undocumented residents drain public treasuries?
There would be a larger cost, however, if legalization came without citizenship: the cost to the nation's political soul of having a population deliberately excluded from the democratic process. No one would set out to create such a population. But policy failures have created something worse. We have 11 million people living among us who not only can't vote but also increasingly are afraid to report a crime or to get vaccinations for a child or to look their landlord in the eye.
�
Much of the debate over the past decade has been about whether legalization would be an unjust reward for "lawbreakers." The status quo, however, rewards everyone who has ever benefited from the cheap, disposable labor provided by illegal workers. To start to fix the situation, everyone - undocumented workers, employers, consumers, lawmakers - has to admit their errors and make amends.
The lost decade produced big, bold plans for social engineering. It was a 10-year quest for a grand bargain that would repair the entire system at once, through enforcement, ID cards, legalization, a temporary worker program and more. Fierce cloakroom battles were also fought over the shape and size of legal immigration. Visa categories became a venue for ideological competition between business, led by the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, and elements of labor, led by the AFL-CIO, over regulation of the labor market: whether to keep it tight to boost wages or keep it loose to boost growth.
But every attempt to fix everything at once produced a political parabola effect. As legislation reached higher, its base of support narrowed. The last effort, and the biggest of them all, collapsed on the Senate floor in July 2007. Still, the idea of a grand bargain has been kept on life support by advocates of generous policies. Just last week, President Obama and Hispanic lawmakers renewed their vows to seek comprehensive immigration reform, even as the prospects grow bleaker. Meanwhile, the other side has its own designs, demanding total control over the border and an enforcement system with no leaks before anything else can happen.
Perhaps 10 years ago, someone like George W. Bush might reasonably have imagined that immigration policy was a good place to resolve some very basic social and economic issues. Since then, however, the rhetoric around the issue has become so swollen and angry that it inflames everything it touches. Keeping the battles small might increase the chance that each side will win some. But, as we learned with the Dream Act, even taking small steps at this point will require rebooting the discourse.
Not long ago, certainly a decade ago, immigration was often described as an issue of strange bedfellows because it did not divide people neatly along partisan or ideological lines. That world is gone now. Instead, elements of both parties are using immigration as a wedge issue. The intended result is cleaving, not consensus. This year, many Republicans campaigned on vows, sometimes harshly stated, to crack down on illegal immigration. Meanwhile, many Democrats tried to rally Hispanic voters by demonizing restrictionists on the other side.
Immigration politics could thus become a way for both sides to feed polarization. In the short term, they can achieve their political objectives by stoking voters' anxiety with the scariest hobgoblins: illegal immigrants vs. the racists who would lock them up. Stumbling down this road would produce a decade more lost than the last.
Suro in Wasahington Post
Roberto Suro is a professor of journalism and public policy at the University of Southern California. surorob@gmail.com
Like so much else about the past decade, things didn't go well. Immigration policy got kicked around a fair bit, but next to nothing got accomplished. Old laws and bureaucracies became increasingly dysfunctional. The public grew anxious. The debates turned repetitive, divisive and sterile.
The last gasp of the lost decade came this month when the lame-duck Congress - which struck compromises on taxes, gays in the military andarms control - deadlocked on the Dream Act.
The debate was pure political theater. The legislation was first introduced in 2001 to legalize the most virtuous sliver of the undocumented population - young adults who were brought here as children by their parents and who were now in college or the military. It was originally designed to be the first in a sequence of measures to resolve the status of the nation's illegal immigrants, and for most of the past decade, it was often paired with a bill for agricultural workers. The logic was to start with the most worthy and economically necessary. But with the bill put forward this month as a last-minute, stand-alone measure with little chance of passage, all the debate accomplished was to give both sides a chance to excite their followers. In the age of stalemate, immigration may have a special place in the firmament.
The United States is in the midst of a wave of immigration as substantial as any ever experienced. Millions of people from abroad have settled here peacefully and prosperously, a boon to the nation. Nonetheless, frustration with policy sours the mood. More than a quarter of the foreign-born are here without authorization. Meanwhile, getting here legally can be a long, costly wrangle. And communities feel that they have little say over sudden changes in their populations. People know that their world is being transformed, yet Washington has not enacted a major overhaul of immigration law since 1965. To move forward, we need at least three fundamental changes in the way the issue is handled.
Being honest about our circumstances is always a good place to start. There might once have been a time to ponder the ideal immigration system for the early 21st century, but surely that time has passed. The immediate task is to clean up the mess caused by inaction, and that is going to require compromises on all sides. Next, we should reexamine the scope of policy proposals. After a decade of sweeping plans that went nowhere, working piecemeal is worth a try at this point. Finally, the politics have to change. With both Republicans and Democrats using immigration as a wedge issue, the chances are that innocent bystanders will get hurt - soon.
The most intractable problem by far involves the 11 million or so undocumented immigrants currently living in the United States. They are the human legacy of unintended consequences and the failure to act.
Advocates on one side, mostly Republicans, would like to see enforcement policies tough enough to induce an exodus. But that does not seem achievable anytime soon, because unauthorized immigrants have proved to be a very durable and resilient population. The number of illegal arrivals dropped sharply during the recession, but the people already here did not leave, though they faced massive unemployment and ramped-up deportations. If they could ride out those twin storms, how much enforcement over how many years would it take to seriously reduce their numbers? Probably too much and too many to be feasible. Besides, even if Democrats suffer another electoral disaster or two, they are likely still to have enough votes in the Senate to block an Arizona-style law that would make every cop an alien-hunter.
Advocates on the other side, mostly Democrats, would like to give a path to citizenship to as many of the undocumented as possible. That also seems unlikely; Republicans have blocked every effort at legalization. Beyond all the principled arguments, the Republicans would have to be politically suicidal to offer citizenship, and therefore voting rights, to 11 million people who would be likely to vote against them en masse.
So what happens to these folks? As a starting point, someone could ask them what they want. The answer is likely to be fairly limited: the chance to live and work in peace, the ability to visit their countries of origin without having to sneak back across the border and not much more.
Would they settle for a legal life here without citizenship? Well, it would be a huge improvement over being here illegally. Aside from peace of mind, an incalculable benefit, it would offer the near-certainty of better jobs. That is a privilege people will pay for, and they could be asked to keep paying for it every year they worked. If they coughed up one, two, three thousand dollars annually on top of all other taxes, would that be enough to dent the argument that undocumented residents drain public treasuries?
There would be a larger cost, however, if legalization came without citizenship: the cost to the nation's political soul of having a population deliberately excluded from the democratic process. No one would set out to create such a population. But policy failures have created something worse. We have 11 million people living among us who not only can't vote but also increasingly are afraid to report a crime or to get vaccinations for a child or to look their landlord in the eye.
�
Much of the debate over the past decade has been about whether legalization would be an unjust reward for "lawbreakers." The status quo, however, rewards everyone who has ever benefited from the cheap, disposable labor provided by illegal workers. To start to fix the situation, everyone - undocumented workers, employers, consumers, lawmakers - has to admit their errors and make amends.
The lost decade produced big, bold plans for social engineering. It was a 10-year quest for a grand bargain that would repair the entire system at once, through enforcement, ID cards, legalization, a temporary worker program and more. Fierce cloakroom battles were also fought over the shape and size of legal immigration. Visa categories became a venue for ideological competition between business, led by the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, and elements of labor, led by the AFL-CIO, over regulation of the labor market: whether to keep it tight to boost wages or keep it loose to boost growth.
But every attempt to fix everything at once produced a political parabola effect. As legislation reached higher, its base of support narrowed. The last effort, and the biggest of them all, collapsed on the Senate floor in July 2007. Still, the idea of a grand bargain has been kept on life support by advocates of generous policies. Just last week, President Obama and Hispanic lawmakers renewed their vows to seek comprehensive immigration reform, even as the prospects grow bleaker. Meanwhile, the other side has its own designs, demanding total control over the border and an enforcement system with no leaks before anything else can happen.
Perhaps 10 years ago, someone like George W. Bush might reasonably have imagined that immigration policy was a good place to resolve some very basic social and economic issues. Since then, however, the rhetoric around the issue has become so swollen and angry that it inflames everything it touches. Keeping the battles small might increase the chance that each side will win some. But, as we learned with the Dream Act, even taking small steps at this point will require rebooting the discourse.
Not long ago, certainly a decade ago, immigration was often described as an issue of strange bedfellows because it did not divide people neatly along partisan or ideological lines. That world is gone now. Instead, elements of both parties are using immigration as a wedge issue. The intended result is cleaving, not consensus. This year, many Republicans campaigned on vows, sometimes harshly stated, to crack down on illegal immigration. Meanwhile, many Democrats tried to rally Hispanic voters by demonizing restrictionists on the other side.
Immigration politics could thus become a way for both sides to feed polarization. In the short term, they can achieve their political objectives by stoking voters' anxiety with the scariest hobgoblins: illegal immigrants vs. the racists who would lock them up. Stumbling down this road would produce a decade more lost than the last.
Suro in Wasahington Post
Roberto Suro is a professor of journalism and public policy at the University of Southern California. surorob@gmail.com
Ramba
09-10 05:15 PM
Hmm.. I though many people are there.. bumerr...
Anyways.. I am shooting for EB2 category as I have my MS.. Few of my freinds here in office have applied for GC , but all of them have applied with MS + 1 atleast... I was kinda worried as my JOb code falls under JOb zone 4, how will i qualify for EB2 even though only having MS does qulaify for applying EB2..
I know.. that a position should require MS or BS +5...rather than one having that degree..
I was just wondering if there are some people who have applied under EB2 category with MS +0 experience....
Thank you every1 for your prompt responses...
MS+0--hard to sell to DOL, particularly in current economic condition, as unemployment rates are in double digits. It is also depends on the location of the job. DOL may belive that they can't find US citizen with MS+0, for the job in Alaska. !00% they wont belive if the job is in michigan or california, where the unemployment rate is very high.
Anyways.. I am shooting for EB2 category as I have my MS.. Few of my freinds here in office have applied for GC , but all of them have applied with MS + 1 atleast... I was kinda worried as my JOb code falls under JOb zone 4, how will i qualify for EB2 even though only having MS does qulaify for applying EB2..
I know.. that a position should require MS or BS +5...rather than one having that degree..
I was just wondering if there are some people who have applied under EB2 category with MS +0 experience....
Thank you every1 for your prompt responses...
MS+0--hard to sell to DOL, particularly in current economic condition, as unemployment rates are in double digits. It is also depends on the location of the job. DOL may belive that they can't find US citizen with MS+0, for the job in Alaska. !00% they wont belive if the job is in michigan or california, where the unemployment rate is very high.
more...
Dustinthewind
01-05 07:33 AM
@thomachan72 - Thank you! Great idea on the trailer with dialogues! Our goal was to create an engaging, relatively fast paced and high level quick Teaser first to get people's attention and then release a Trailer with dialogues just like you mentioned in a few weeks. So the main full film trailer will come out late January/early February. Stay tuned.
2010 johnny depp wife and kids.
nonimmi
05-29 03:58 PM
Early 2004 Priority date (EB3 India) may still be possible considering the huge movement happened last month. Who knows?? :)
more...
GCBy3000
05-18 09:24 AM
I'm using the service of Brikho & Kallabat...till now did not have any issue with my extension...currently on 8th year...as my employer pays my extension fee...not sure how much is the total cost...have asked them...will update as get info.
rgds,
lfgc
...recd info fm the attorney's office...
The H-1B processing fees are as follows: Attorney Fees $900, Filing Fees
$2,190 for companies with 26 or more employees and $1,440 for companies
with 25 or less employees, Office Expense $50.
so, for extension...it may still be $900.
I think employer should bear the full cost of H1B and H1B extension. It is illegal for the employer to get that money from employee.
rgds,
lfgc
...recd info fm the attorney's office...
The H-1B processing fees are as follows: Attorney Fees $900, Filing Fees
$2,190 for companies with 26 or more employees and $1,440 for companies
with 25 or less employees, Office Expense $50.
so, for extension...it may still be $900.
I think employer should bear the full cost of H1B and H1B extension. It is illegal for the employer to get that money from employee.
hair Johnny Depp#39;s love of children
Student with no hopes
12-10 09:55 AM
/
more...
suva321
01-20 07:34 PM
From Nov 14th 2008 verything got changed, now first they issue one year
after that you need apply again for 10 years.
after that you need apply again for 10 years.
hot He got to know four children
satyasrd
06-01 09:31 AM
I agree and believe we can get #3 passed. It will provide relief to thousands like myself who have to struggle to maintain a status.
I have asked this question several times to IV/Pappu but got no response. Is is possible to ask for this provision asap ? We know that IV is working on a bigger cause to get us all GC's but honestly no one is sure when and if CIR will happen. Even if it does no one can guarantee that our interests will not be put aside.
I am surprised that whenever I ask for this temporary relief, I see no one else coming forward. I know that there are thousands waiting to file their I-485 but no one wants to speak up ?! That's very disheartening !
Even if we can get one of these, especially, Item #3 passed will provide relief to many candidates.
For example, we can request Congress to amend to "Allow USCIS to issue 3 year EAD along with I140 Approval."
Can IV help pass this request on Advocacy days?
I have asked this question several times to IV/Pappu but got no response. Is is possible to ask for this provision asap ? We know that IV is working on a bigger cause to get us all GC's but honestly no one is sure when and if CIR will happen. Even if it does no one can guarantee that our interests will not be put aside.
I am surprised that whenever I ask for this temporary relief, I see no one else coming forward. I know that there are thousands waiting to file their I-485 but no one wants to speak up ?! That's very disheartening !
Even if we can get one of these, especially, Item #3 passed will provide relief to many candidates.
For example, we can request Congress to amend to "Allow USCIS to issue 3 year EAD along with I140 Approval."
Can IV help pass this request on Advocacy days?
more...
house Children are our future mate,
realist
11-19 08:28 AM
I have a similar situation, I would like for my brother to come here on a visitor's visa. He is an engineer and is currently working in a University. It would greatly help if you could share your experience on how and if you were successful in getting the visa
tattoo Tourist with Johnny Depp!
pointlesswait
01-21 11:22 AM
it sounds like it came right out of his a$$
:p
This rumour sounds like its straight out of timesofindia :p;)
:p
This rumour sounds like its straight out of timesofindia :p;)
more...
pictures johnny depp and vanessa
NIW
08-31 12:02 PM
Just take it easy on this guy. He is a hard nosed, narcistic, self proclaimed immigration reforming CNN anchor who made millions just by talking and writing books on Immigration issues. There is some truth in his talk show but most of it is fabricated lie exaggerated by the media.
I really pity him because he has to come up with some immigration news everyday to save his job unlike Anderson Cooper or Wolf Blitz.
But as long as the immigration community, who has time and again proved its extra ordinary skills by getting Nobels, Pulitzers, Outstanding physician awards, humanitarian awards, he can't change a bit of law. The corporate america wants brain and skills, and we have them. We will prevail......
Just change the TV channel
I really pity him because he has to come up with some immigration news everyday to save his job unlike Anderson Cooper or Wolf Blitz.
But as long as the immigration community, who has time and again proved its extra ordinary skills by getting Nobels, Pulitzers, Outstanding physician awards, humanitarian awards, he can't change a bit of law. The corporate america wants brain and skills, and we have them. We will prevail......
Just change the TV channel
dresses Also, Vanessa and the children
tammigaw
02-15 12:16 AM
i have signed non compete , but when i signed it , he explained me that i should not go to the client through some other vendor , but i can join end client as end client has contract with Prime vendor that they can hire me full time .
But now he is claiming that i cant join full time with the client as well.
During my stay with that employer , he newer paid me on time and once he held my paycheck , just to harass me.
Do you think that these grounds fall under employee undue stress to be sufficient to turn down Non Compete in court ?
But now he is claiming that i cant join full time with the client as well.
During my stay with that employer , he newer paid me on time and once he held my paycheck , just to harass me.
Do you think that these grounds fall under employee undue stress to be sufficient to turn down Non Compete in court ?
more...
makeup Johnny Depp doesn#39;t like
eb3India
05-21 11:56 AM
I am new here and I have few questions to IV core members.
Did we consider any other avenues find out is there any way out to influence DOS visa availability.
How did Nurses was able to accomodate their visa numbers without any bills are ammendments ( I know there is lot of demand for nurses)
you guys are doing a great job lobbying congressmen, but I think we should also consider finding out how current law if implemented properly can reduce the backlog and reduce retrogression.
for example we should make sure 245i case should not effect our visa numbers, I belive we can work these hurdles while we wait for current immigration debate to complete.
I called several senators last week and discussed with their immigration specialist, I got a feeling this debate is more about illegal aliens and about hispanic votes not many of them are considering legal aliens and issues.
Did we consider any other avenues find out is there any way out to influence DOS visa availability.
How did Nurses was able to accomodate their visa numbers without any bills are ammendments ( I know there is lot of demand for nurses)
you guys are doing a great job lobbying congressmen, but I think we should also consider finding out how current law if implemented properly can reduce the backlog and reduce retrogression.
for example we should make sure 245i case should not effect our visa numbers, I belive we can work these hurdles while we wait for current immigration debate to complete.
I called several senators last week and discussed with their immigration specialist, I got a feeling this debate is more about illegal aliens and about hispanic votes not many of them are considering legal aliens and issues.
girlfriend Johnny Depp has been with
somma
10-25 03:41 PM
My EAD status shows "card production ordered" and my spouse is showing as pending. This has been like this for the past 4 days.
Looks like they don't want to update the secondary information online.
:confused:
Looks like they don't want to update the secondary information online.
:confused:
hairstyles 2011 Johnny Depp Kids.
gbof
04-27 09:50 AM
Thanks vhd999,
That is what I am talking about. Even after confirming with cust serv reps, the check-in counters behave differently. I will also carry a printout of the website that says 2 bags for the worldwide option.
desigirl,
There is no problem at India's end..we all know how to handle that. Also, it does matter if there are 2 bags or 1 from here. If I have 3 extra bags, then I end up paying more...rather than assuming that they will be checked in free. You pack your luggage accordingly assuming x no of bags are involved. Also, I will make sure my wife travels comfortably, that's why i am asking these questions in the first place.
I had 2-bags but I guess lot more heavier than allowed-- They put the 'excess baggage' stickers. But they did not advise or demand money at check-in (I was ready to part with extra stuff, if advised). I thought they may demand money.......at check out --but no body demanded. I guess they were quite liberal atleast in my case....may be an exception
That is what I am talking about. Even after confirming with cust serv reps, the check-in counters behave differently. I will also carry a printout of the website that says 2 bags for the worldwide option.
desigirl,
There is no problem at India's end..we all know how to handle that. Also, it does matter if there are 2 bags or 1 from here. If I have 3 extra bags, then I end up paying more...rather than assuming that they will be checked in free. You pack your luggage accordingly assuming x no of bags are involved. Also, I will make sure my wife travels comfortably, that's why i am asking these questions in the first place.
I had 2-bags but I guess lot more heavier than allowed-- They put the 'excess baggage' stickers. But they did not advise or demand money at check-in (I was ready to part with extra stuff, if advised). I thought they may demand money.......at check out --but no body demanded. I guess they were quite liberal atleast in my case....may be an exception
santb1975
12-25 04:18 PM
for sure if you go DOL. you can take the help of an attorney to get you the amount based on your past pay stubs.
haritha
02-19 08:54 PM
Cataphract
Thanks for the update. This surely will inspire many more. You guys form a Brilliant Team. Good luck.
Haritha.
Thanks for the update. This surely will inspire many more. You guys form a Brilliant Team. Good luck.
Haritha.
No comments:
Post a Comment