National Day of Action

National Day of Action: Immigration Advocates Head to DC

Resources for Immigrants

Friday April 7 is the National Day of Action for immigration. Immigration lawyers, activists, advocates, and immigrants descend upon Washington DC and Capitol Hill to vocalize their concerns with the immigration system. Last year’s Day of Action occurred on May 19, which was the day that President Obama’s Executive Actions – DAPA and new DACA – were supposed to begin. They have not yet taken effect. A federal judge in Texas struck them down for abrogating the Administrative Procedures Act and the Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit upheld that decision. The Supreme Court is expected to make its decision in June of this year.

The National Day of Action is not limited to one piece of the immigration system. Advocates will be championing other aspects of immigration reform, such as changing the H-1B cap, increasing entrepreneurial opportunities, and giving migrants fleeing persecution access to counsel and a chance to have their cases heard.

The main motivation of the National Day of Action is to exhort members of Congress to understand facts about immigration, how it benefits the United States, and demonstrate that immigration reform is desired by the country at large. A booklet distributed by the American Immigration Lawyers Association highlights important facts about immigration in the United States.

Immigrants have created businesses and generated business income in their states. California, Texas, Florida, and Ohio are four states in which a combined 1.3 million immigrants started businesses and generated over 58 million dollars in business income. Immigrant-owned small businesses employ 4.7 million people. Legalization of undocumented immigrants would have a significant impact on the tax revenue, to which undocumented migrants contribute to (state and local taxes) already.

The National Day of Action urges reform in all aspects of immigration: humanitarian, family, and business. Immigration reform has been oft-discussed but not enacted. AILA is touting the election year as an impetus to change.

Employee Portability

Section 204(j) Portability

Section 204(j) provides that an approved Form I-140 petition for certain classifications remains valid for adjustment of status when an applicant switches jobs or employers if:

  • The adjustment of status application has been filed and remains unadjudicated for 180 days or more, based on an employment-based immigrant visa petition AND
  • The new job is in the “same or a similar occupational classification” as the job for which the petition was filed.

 

A new policy memorandum has been issued to assist immigration officers in determining what qualifies as a same or a similar occupational classification and which evidence should be used in making that determination. They are instructed to examine the job duties of the former and new job and skills, experience, education, training, licenses, and certifications required. Wages can also be important. The policy memorandum also repeats that a preponderance of the evidence standard is to be utilized.

Immigration officers are supposed to treat evidence favorably if the applicant establishes that the previous and new job are within the same broad occupation code in determining whether the two positions are similar. The memo gives the example of Computer Programmers, Software Developers Applications, Software Developers Systems Software, and Web Developers being found within the same broad occupational group of Software Developers and Programmers. It also gives warning: just establishing that the two jobs are described within the same broad occupation may not be enough for the two jobs to be in similar classifications for a preponderance of the evidence.

Of note, the memo dedicates analysis to career progression. It continues the analysis under the totality of the circumstances and preponderance of the evidence guidance. The analysis may be more straightforward when the promotion is to a more senior position that does not involve managerial or supervisory duties. The analysis becomes complicated when that transition is to a position that involves a managerial or supervisory role.

For that second scenario, the memo instructs that if the applicant establishes in the new job that she will be “primarily responsible for managing the same or similar functions of their original jobs or the work of individuals whose jobs are in the same or similar occupational classification(s) as the applicants’ original positions, the immigration officer can treat that evidence in the applicant’s favor for determining similar occupational classifications. The example used is a cook advancing to a food service manager. A food service manager supervises restaurant cooks and other individuals in similar positions.

There may also be situations where a normal career progression does not involve managing persons in jobs that in the same or similar occupational classification as the applicant’s original position. The example used is a cook that becomes a food service manager, while retaining many of the original job duties. That position may be devoid of supervisory duties, but the applicant would be able to demonstrate similar occupational classifications based on functions.

The memorandum is lengthy and detailed, delving into many scenarios that immigration officers encounter as they adjudicated portability petitions. Portability is an important provision of the AC21 law enacted in 2000. The express purpose of that law was to increase job flexibility for foreign workers who are stuck in delays and backlogs in the employment-based immigrant visa process.

Retaining College Graduates

The Best and Worst Cities at Retaining College Graduates

 

This is a statistically-based article that methodically and neatly describes the large metros in the United States and their ability to retain college graduates. The flight of college graduates is a concern for many metropolitan cities. A high retention rate of college graduates can be viewed as a reliable indicator of economic viability.

The article misses a critical point: immigration.

At US colleges and universities, large and small, the number of foreign students is high. Foreign students from all over the world, flock to American universities for education and the opportunities that education opens. Well over a million F-1 visa students are in the United States. However, their post-graduate options are limited. Someone who attends undergraduate and graduate school in the same city may have embedded himself into the community. That graduate, however, may not have the ability to stay in the United States. Only 85,000 cap subject H-1B visas are available. The O-1 visa bears a high standard for eligibility. J visa ability is limited. L visas have foreign restrictions that would make them unviable for US college graduates. Not every country allows for E visas (notoriously India) and even then, that is an extraordinary expense and may not comport with what the graduate is pursuing. Immigration visas are generally shut off for recent graduates.

There are millions of foreign graduates and not a commensurate number of visas or options to retain their talents and skills. Graduate retention rates would be higher for many cities if foreign national recent graduates had the ability to stay in the United States and work for employers that want to hire them. For example, 233,000 H-1B cap-subject visas were filed last year for the 85,000 visa spots.

The article did not consider this angle as a reason to why some retention rates are more depressed, but this is certainly a factor. Cities are losing the opportunity to retain their college graduates and the lack of nonimmigrant visa options is a major reason why.

USCIS Processing Times

USCIS Processing Times Updated

Check this link for USCIS processing times of applications as of December 31, 2015

Check your receipt letters. The first three letters dictate where your application is. LIN = Nebraska. SRC = Texas. NBC = National Benefits Center. WAC = California. EAC = Vermont.

Of Note

O and P visas at Vermont are taking 2 months instead of 2 weeks. They are taking 2 weeks at California.

Asylum work authorization applications are taking 4 months at Vermont

Most work authorization applications are taking 3 months at Vermont

H-1B extensions and changes of status are taking over 6 months Vermont and California

I-140s at Nebraska are taking 4 months or more.

H-1B Extension Delays

H-1B Extension Delays in Processing Times

H1b 2016

A recent problem in USCIS adjudications is lengthy processing times for H-1B extension applications. These are applications filed without premium processing. The delays are problematic: they force employers to fork over the $1,225.00 for premium processing, and they can cause significant hardships for affected employees. USCIS Service Center Operations has acknowledged that the lengthy processing times are a problem and USCIS is working on reducing those times.

American Immigration Lawyers Association is working with USCIS to reduce the processing time. The main issues are employees in danger of losing employment authorization or were otherwise forced to request an upgrade to premium processing as a result of the backlog; and (2) clients with a pending H-1B extension petition, where the H-1B beneficiary is within one month of the expiration of the automatic 240-day employment authorization extension.

It is important to consult with the attorney filing your H-1B application whether premium processing is necessary. Both service centers are close to 6 months in processing time. That means an application submitted today would not be adjudicated until the end of July or beginning of August. Premium processing forces a decision within 15 days.