gc28262
03-27 12:27 PM
Matters related to Driver license are largely decided by States but with "Secure ID Initiative" passed in the Congress, some of the powers have shifted to the Federal Govt. Many aspects of Secure ID initiative are still work in progress but some of the states have taken pro-active steps.
Driver license is not merely used for letting the person drive BUT ALSO serves as a photo ID.
Your immigrant status is linked to how long you can stay in this country. Your stay in this country is prescribed by the laws established by USCIS, Department of Homeland Security and other agencies. Driver's license is the single most important photo identification is this land. It shows who you are, where you reside and if you are legally in this country.
You use your photo ID to board a plane, when applying for a loan, to deal with various govt. agencies etc.
As for your question as to why driver's license is used for ID: That same question has been debated by lawmakers and thus came the idea of "Real ID". Go lookup info regarding Real ID and you will be pretty happy with using Driver's license as the ID.
Why is any of the above causing your grief ? Why references to slavery ? As long as the system is transparent and documented on their websites (like DMVs), I fail to understand your angst.
qasleuth,
I understand that is the way rules are being framed in this country. For me, right to drive is a human rights issue. Unlike other countries, where public transport system is well established, in USA you can hardly move without a drivers license and a car.
Using drivers license as an Id, for me that is non-sense. Drivers license should be used for what it is meant for, driving.
US may make n number of laws. As a self respecting individual who just happens to be on a non-immigrant visa, I cannot digest the reasoning behind these laws and cannot agree to so many hurdles being put up for a basic need like a DL.
If they want an ID, let them separate it from drivers license.
I can't agree to every single law being setup by some ignorant lawmaker.
Some examples.
NC DMV had a law stating that you have to have SSN to get DL. ITIN was not acceptable. How would our non-working spouses on H4 drive when they are legally present in this country ? Is it fair ?
TX DMV has another rule that says unless you have at least one year remaining on the visa you won't be issued a license. What if somene moves to TX during last 6 months of one's visa and can't get a license while their extendion for H1 is pending with USCIS ? One should not drive in the last six months of his visa. Does it make sense ?
I have come across many such restrictions/situations which does not make sense. So my angst.
Driver license is not merely used for letting the person drive BUT ALSO serves as a photo ID.
Your immigrant status is linked to how long you can stay in this country. Your stay in this country is prescribed by the laws established by USCIS, Department of Homeland Security and other agencies. Driver's license is the single most important photo identification is this land. It shows who you are, where you reside and if you are legally in this country.
You use your photo ID to board a plane, when applying for a loan, to deal with various govt. agencies etc.
As for your question as to why driver's license is used for ID: That same question has been debated by lawmakers and thus came the idea of "Real ID". Go lookup info regarding Real ID and you will be pretty happy with using Driver's license as the ID.
Why is any of the above causing your grief ? Why references to slavery ? As long as the system is transparent and documented on their websites (like DMVs), I fail to understand your angst.
qasleuth,
I understand that is the way rules are being framed in this country. For me, right to drive is a human rights issue. Unlike other countries, where public transport system is well established, in USA you can hardly move without a drivers license and a car.
Using drivers license as an Id, for me that is non-sense. Drivers license should be used for what it is meant for, driving.
US may make n number of laws. As a self respecting individual who just happens to be on a non-immigrant visa, I cannot digest the reasoning behind these laws and cannot agree to so many hurdles being put up for a basic need like a DL.
If they want an ID, let them separate it from drivers license.
I can't agree to every single law being setup by some ignorant lawmaker.
Some examples.
NC DMV had a law stating that you have to have SSN to get DL. ITIN was not acceptable. How would our non-working spouses on H4 drive when they are legally present in this country ? Is it fair ?
TX DMV has another rule that says unless you have at least one year remaining on the visa you won't be issued a license. What if somene moves to TX during last 6 months of one's visa and can't get a license while their extendion for H1 is pending with USCIS ? One should not drive in the last six months of his visa. Does it make sense ?
I have come across many such restrictions/situations which does not make sense. So my angst.
wallpaper kb24mvp com hardwood bg iphone
nrk
10-27 05:08 PM
Please let me know what are the things to carry for info pass appointment.
Thanks in advance
Thanks in advance
delhirocks
07-14 10:51 AM
I read that most would-be immigrants are differentiating themselves as an 'illigal' or a 'legal' immigrant. People are forgetting that legal or illegal both are immigrant and want to have a better life for themselves or for their family compare to what their own country have to offer to them. Where is the difference - look deep into your heart - difference is one has some additional pieces of papers while other does not. Stop differentiating! Start uniting and fight for the justice.
I have not done my research on the "Dream act" and thus would refrain from speaking on it (I am all for sparing the kids from hardship though)...but I take strong exception to your comment above. I pride myself to be a legal immigrant...and frankly any person who flaunts the law of the land, disgusts me.
I have spent thousands of dollars and hours to maintain my legal documents that you so casually refer to as "pieces of paper". I have sacrificed my career to a certain extent for those "pieces of paper". I have put my married life on peril for those "pieces of paper". But I am proud of it, 'coz those pieces of paper differentiate me from a Criminal.
The only reason I joined IV was that this is for LEGAL immigrants and for folks who have followed the law, however discriminating it might seem.
Again this comment is not on the merits of the dream act, but on the comments you made. Remember Immigrating to US is not your/my right.
I have not done my research on the "Dream act" and thus would refrain from speaking on it (I am all for sparing the kids from hardship though)...but I take strong exception to your comment above. I pride myself to be a legal immigrant...and frankly any person who flaunts the law of the land, disgusts me.
I have spent thousands of dollars and hours to maintain my legal documents that you so casually refer to as "pieces of paper". I have sacrificed my career to a certain extent for those "pieces of paper". I have put my married life on peril for those "pieces of paper". But I am proud of it, 'coz those pieces of paper differentiate me from a Criminal.
The only reason I joined IV was that this is for LEGAL immigrants and for folks who have followed the law, however discriminating it might seem.
Again this comment is not on the merits of the dream act, but on the comments you made. Remember Immigrating to US is not your/my right.
2011 Kobe Bryant (24) flies to
chmur
05-10 12:53 AM
"GC and Citizenship should not prevent anyone from pursuing their career and personal dreams - if not US - there are other countries where your skills would be welcome. Personally - i have given priority to career and family life ahead of visa issues and rest has automatically fallen into place"
I know this is easier said than done but I think for most part I have moved on .I have not got my GC yet (PD Nov 2003 EB3 -India) but allow me to chime in .
Actually I had little interest in pursuing GC to begin with(Mistake). Could have started earlier than I actually did and was lucky to breeze thru Labour and 140 stages(< 6 months) and did not follow I-485 progress till June -1 st 2007
Then suddenly in next 4-5 months browsed every info /problems/issues with GC. Made 3 info pass appointments(Name Check cleared), initiated 2 separate inquiries one thru OMBUDSMAN. must have called USCIS about 10 times and checked the online status atleast 3 times a day . Pedantic. Mostly because my application was pre-approved and lot applications around my PD's were approved and I thought I was really close . Alas, that was not to be . I was pretty dissapointed for a few months.
However in the last 6 months I have moved on mentally, I browse IV and consider other options like switching to Eb2 but gone are those pedantic days followed by huge disappointments.
Planning a career move with AC21/EAD option.
I know this is easier said than done but I think for most part I have moved on .I have not got my GC yet (PD Nov 2003 EB3 -India) but allow me to chime in .
Actually I had little interest in pursuing GC to begin with(Mistake). Could have started earlier than I actually did and was lucky to breeze thru Labour and 140 stages(< 6 months) and did not follow I-485 progress till June -1 st 2007
Then suddenly in next 4-5 months browsed every info /problems/issues with GC. Made 3 info pass appointments(Name Check cleared), initiated 2 separate inquiries one thru OMBUDSMAN. must have called USCIS about 10 times and checked the online status atleast 3 times a day . Pedantic. Mostly because my application was pre-approved and lot applications around my PD's were approved and I thought I was really close . Alas, that was not to be . I was pretty dissapointed for a few months.
However in the last 6 months I have moved on mentally, I browse IV and consider other options like switching to Eb2 but gone are those pedantic days followed by huge disappointments.
Planning a career move with AC21/EAD option.
more...
Macaca
09-03 08:38 AM
over the next over the next 75 years, new legal immigrants entering the United States will provide a net benefit of $611 billion in present value to America�s Social Security system, according to official Social Security Administration data.
Over 50 years, new legal immigrants entering the United States will provide a net benefit of $506 billion in present value to America�s Social Security system.
The 2004 Trustees Report, utilizing the intermediate projections, assumes an annual level of 800,000 legal immigrants and 200,000 emigrants (people who leave the U.S. legal immigrant population) for a net level of 600,000 per year. The Trustees Report also assumes a net level of 300,000 annually for �other immigration� (illegal immigration).
The average age for those settling here as part of this �other immigration� each year is 21 years for men and 22 years for women, which is younger than for legal immigrants. The SSA�s Chief Actuary Office analysis discussed here assumed no change in illegal immigration, though it notes that it is possible that illegal immigration could increase in response to legal immigration cutbacks, which could �partly offset� the negative effect of legal immigration reductions.
Federal Reserve Bank Chairman Alan Greenspan has pointed out the important role that immigration can play in addressing Social Security. In February 2003 testimony before the Senate Special Committee on Aging, Greenspan stated, �The aging of the population in the United States will have significant effects on our fiscal situation. In particular it makes our Social Security and Medicare programs unsustainable in the longrun, short of a major increase in immigration rates, a dramatic acceleration in productivity growth well beyond historical experience, a significant increase in the age of eligibility for benefits, or the use of general revenues to fund benefits.�
More recently, Chairman Greenspan noted the advantageous position of the United States versus the more rapidly aging populations of Europe and Japan. While between 2000 and 2030 the number of working age adults will decline in Italy (-19%), Japan (-15.8%), and Germany (-15.1%), the working age adult population will increase by 18.9% in the United States over that period due primarily to immigration. In concluding his August 27, 2004 speech at a symposium sponsored by the Federal Reserve Bank of Kansas, Greenspan said, �Aside from the comparatively lesser depth of required adjustment, our open labor markets should respond more easily to the changing needs and abilities of our population; our capital markets should allow for the creation and rapid adoption of new labor-saving technologies, and our open society should be receptive to immigrants. These supports should help us adjust to the inexorabilities of an aging population. Nonetheless, tough policy choices lie ahead.�
Over 50 years, new legal immigrants entering the United States will provide a net benefit of $506 billion in present value to America�s Social Security system.
The 2004 Trustees Report, utilizing the intermediate projections, assumes an annual level of 800,000 legal immigrants and 200,000 emigrants (people who leave the U.S. legal immigrant population) for a net level of 600,000 per year. The Trustees Report also assumes a net level of 300,000 annually for �other immigration� (illegal immigration).
The average age for those settling here as part of this �other immigration� each year is 21 years for men and 22 years for women, which is younger than for legal immigrants. The SSA�s Chief Actuary Office analysis discussed here assumed no change in illegal immigration, though it notes that it is possible that illegal immigration could increase in response to legal immigration cutbacks, which could �partly offset� the negative effect of legal immigration reductions.
Federal Reserve Bank Chairman Alan Greenspan has pointed out the important role that immigration can play in addressing Social Security. In February 2003 testimony before the Senate Special Committee on Aging, Greenspan stated, �The aging of the population in the United States will have significant effects on our fiscal situation. In particular it makes our Social Security and Medicare programs unsustainable in the longrun, short of a major increase in immigration rates, a dramatic acceleration in productivity growth well beyond historical experience, a significant increase in the age of eligibility for benefits, or the use of general revenues to fund benefits.�
More recently, Chairman Greenspan noted the advantageous position of the United States versus the more rapidly aging populations of Europe and Japan. While between 2000 and 2030 the number of working age adults will decline in Italy (-19%), Japan (-15.8%), and Germany (-15.1%), the working age adult population will increase by 18.9% in the United States over that period due primarily to immigration. In concluding his August 27, 2004 speech at a symposium sponsored by the Federal Reserve Bank of Kansas, Greenspan said, �Aside from the comparatively lesser depth of required adjustment, our open labor markets should respond more easily to the changing needs and abilities of our population; our capital markets should allow for the creation and rapid adoption of new labor-saving technologies, and our open society should be receptive to immigrants. These supports should help us adjust to the inexorabilities of an aging population. Nonetheless, tough policy choices lie ahead.�
kedar_007
02-07 08:18 AM
Hello All-
I am going to India via Franfurt next week.
I have AP with visa expired.
I saw the following document on German Consulate - New Delhi. http://www.new-delhi.diplo.de/contentblob/1827030/Daten/857105/DD_Airport_Transit_A.pdf
It says:
- a valid residence permit or visa for the USA, Japan, and Canada
- An Airport Transit Visa is not required for holders of valid visa issued by
Bulgaria, Romania, Cyprus, Ireland, United Kingdom, Canada, Japan or
the USA irrespective of the travel destination.
I have a Canadian Visitor Visa. Do you think I will need Airport Transit Visa or I am reading it wrong?
Thanks for any help!
I am going to India via Franfurt next week.
I have AP with visa expired.
I saw the following document on German Consulate - New Delhi. http://www.new-delhi.diplo.de/contentblob/1827030/Daten/857105/DD_Airport_Transit_A.pdf
It says:
- a valid residence permit or visa for the USA, Japan, and Canada
- An Airport Transit Visa is not required for holders of valid visa issued by
Bulgaria, Romania, Cyprus, Ireland, United Kingdom, Canada, Japan or
the USA irrespective of the travel destination.
I have a Canadian Visitor Visa. Do you think I will need Airport Transit Visa or I am reading it wrong?
Thanks for any help!
more...
tonyHK12
11-03 09:23 AM
Piece meal is our best/only option for the next 2 years. We have to keep track of the legal bills being introduced and campaign for them. I don't think CIR will make it in lameduck too. Republicans would like to enforce border security and employer, internal monitoring, before any king of path to legal status for illegals.
lets stop this rhetoric on repubs, what about bobby jindal, marco rubio & nick haley and plz don't give explanations to distort the reality, many in the republicans sincerely support legal immigration, tell me few good things dems did to legal immigrants, aint regan the one who gave amnesty to illegals in 80s, aint bush the one who tried more than once to pass CIR, who opposed h1b fee increase recently?
Yes I agree, we should be neutral on party as an organization. Also the enhanced H1b, monitoring RFE, etc was introduced due to body shops misusing visas and not paying on bench. Think of it as an extended background check due to the misuse.
I feel republicans would sincerely welcome qualified immigrants. Some of their views on protecting the border have been distorted out of propotion due to politics.
What we need to do is enhance our reputation with both Republicans and Democrats and get them to help us.
lets stop this rhetoric on repubs, what about bobby jindal, marco rubio & nick haley and plz don't give explanations to distort the reality, many in the republicans sincerely support legal immigration, tell me few good things dems did to legal immigrants, aint regan the one who gave amnesty to illegals in 80s, aint bush the one who tried more than once to pass CIR, who opposed h1b fee increase recently?
Yes I agree, we should be neutral on party as an organization. Also the enhanced H1b, monitoring RFE, etc was introduced due to body shops misusing visas and not paying on bench. Think of it as an extended background check due to the misuse.
I feel republicans would sincerely welcome qualified immigrants. Some of their views on protecting the border have been distorted out of propotion due to politics.
What we need to do is enhance our reputation with both Republicans and Democrats and get them to help us.
2010 Kobe+ryant+24+mvp Photo was uploaded by saka videos online our site
immigrant2007
07-16 11:08 AM
Over 60% of the US and 90% of Arizona supports the law they passed.
The same 60% or more people in the US support the cause of solving the immigration system.
Obama and his Attorney General are doing the wrong thing by interfering with state politics.
As for the Arizona law, immigration issues fall under the federal jurisdiction - so it is the State that is interfering with the fed agency.
How can these high ranking officials tell state law enforcement NOT TO enforce laws?
The Fed is going after the law itself - and arguing on its unconstitutionality. Enforcing a law that is unconstitutional is not right
The Supreme court will favor AZ even before the case starts. Slam Dunk.
Lets wait and see!!
1) Please update your profile.
2) It's sad that we are getting GCs at the expense of people of came here illegally. Our efforts are held hostage by both parties (It's simple), One party wants to win votes of one group and the other wants to wins votes as well of a different group. It's not about "DOING THE RIGHT THING". If it was about "DOING THE RIGHT THING" there would never had been a backlog. Backlog elimination center was created just to put some cases on hold and clear cases of 245i applicants (USCIS will never allow us access to that data)
3) DOING THE RIGHT THING....why unequal penalties of the parties who break the immigration Law. All punishment is directed towards the employee. EMployer only gets fine. Make punishment stricter for employers, (hit them where it hurts most, jail them and shut down their business)there will never be any illegal immigrant getting jobs. there whould be equal punishment for both.
4) Why this doble standard when it comes to immigration. why don't people oppose when jobs are transferred in name of outsroucing or shifting production to cheapr countries? Anti Immigants are biggest Hypocrites ever and Pro immigrants are not representins immigrants properly. No one focuses on the injsutice done to legal aliens.
5) I am EB3, I followed Law, I am in backlog because Govt did not process the cases in 2001 , 2002, 2003 in time and created a backlog and I resisted the temptation to break laws and buy Labor substitution AND I openly say that I oppsoe illegal immigration and amesty to illegeal immigrants (and I do feel sorry for them. god bless them they deserve a better life).
I am one of those who need Immigration reform immediately. Justice delayed is jsutice denied (rest is all face saving).
The same 60% or more people in the US support the cause of solving the immigration system.
Obama and his Attorney General are doing the wrong thing by interfering with state politics.
As for the Arizona law, immigration issues fall under the federal jurisdiction - so it is the State that is interfering with the fed agency.
How can these high ranking officials tell state law enforcement NOT TO enforce laws?
The Fed is going after the law itself - and arguing on its unconstitutionality. Enforcing a law that is unconstitutional is not right
The Supreme court will favor AZ even before the case starts. Slam Dunk.
Lets wait and see!!
1) Please update your profile.
2) It's sad that we are getting GCs at the expense of people of came here illegally. Our efforts are held hostage by both parties (It's simple), One party wants to win votes of one group and the other wants to wins votes as well of a different group. It's not about "DOING THE RIGHT THING". If it was about "DOING THE RIGHT THING" there would never had been a backlog. Backlog elimination center was created just to put some cases on hold and clear cases of 245i applicants (USCIS will never allow us access to that data)
3) DOING THE RIGHT THING....why unequal penalties of the parties who break the immigration Law. All punishment is directed towards the employee. EMployer only gets fine. Make punishment stricter for employers, (hit them where it hurts most, jail them and shut down their business)there will never be any illegal immigrant getting jobs. there whould be equal punishment for both.
4) Why this doble standard when it comes to immigration. why don't people oppose when jobs are transferred in name of outsroucing or shifting production to cheapr countries? Anti Immigants are biggest Hypocrites ever and Pro immigrants are not representins immigrants properly. No one focuses on the injsutice done to legal aliens.
5) I am EB3, I followed Law, I am in backlog because Govt did not process the cases in 2001 , 2002, 2003 in time and created a backlog and I resisted the temptation to break laws and buy Labor substitution AND I openly say that I oppsoe illegal immigration and amesty to illegeal immigrants (and I do feel sorry for them. god bless them they deserve a better life).
I am one of those who need Immigration reform immediately. Justice delayed is jsutice denied (rest is all face saving).
more...
dreamgc_real
04-22 10:12 AM
To all the antis posting here........read this.........
http://www.leei.us/main/media/AACOP_STATEMENT_ON_SENATE_BILL_1070.pdf
Obviously Sherriff Joe Arpaio didn't get this memo............
http://www.leei.us/main/media/AACOP_STATEMENT_ON_SENATE_BILL_1070.pdf
Obviously Sherriff Joe Arpaio didn't get this memo............
hair kobe bryant wallpaper mvp.
bkarnik
04-12 11:27 AM
The only leeway USCIS has w.r.t EADs are the duration of the EADs and not the timing of the issue of the EAD. The fact that the EAD can be given only after the I485 is filed is governed by the INA.
Further the grant of EADs in all the eligible categories is more or less the same. Even if the timing of the grant of the EAD were in USCIS hands, it is hard to request an alternative interpretation of the regulation in some cases (eg after I-140) while retaining the same interpretation for other categories (eg EAD after completion of Education). This just opens up a lot of loopholes.
ON top of all this we have to take into consideration the huge inherent inertia of the USCIS to change. As already pointed out the only recourse available would be to change the law of the land, on which path we are already traversing.
Werc:
Thanks for your post. However, as per my original post, could you indicate the section where in the INA does it mention when employment authorization can be given? In fact, the first line in the in the paper in the link included by Bee in his post, clearly mentions that "...nowhere in the statutes or regulations, is there a reference to a work permit" (i.e. an EAD as clarified later in the document).
As you mention later in your post, yes it is hard to get something from USCIS, but should we shy away from something just because it is hard? Also, as the same document (posted by BEE) mentions, the reasons for issuing an EAD are varied.
But let us take the specific case you mentioned, a student can work up to 12 months after his graduation. This time frame is provided for multiple reasons, the main one being to give the student to find employment in his related field of education and for the employer to evaluate him and process his adjustment of status. Without the EAD, the student would have to find employment and adjust his status within 2 months or be out of status. BUT the EAD also provides the student the choice of changing employers without losing his status.
Now, coming to the issue of EAD after I-140 or after I-485...By submitting the I-140 the employer is not only asking the USCIS to approve the need (as certified by the DOL) of a alien as a permanent worker, the employer is also providing the USCIS with particulars of the alien who will be hired. Therefore, by approving the I-140, the USCIS is not only approving the need of the employer, it is also approving the alien for the job. This is also supported by the fact that the USCIS allows concurrent filing of I-140 and I-485 if the priority date is current for that particular country/category. Hence, an EAD after I-140 not only allows the employer to hire an alien already in the company, it also allows the alien who might be working for an employer other than the one which applied for the I-140 to switch jobs, without worrying about being out-of-status, if he is very close to finishing his 6years on an H1B. For an alien who is outside the country when his I-140 is approved (very rare case, but possible), he can enter the US on an H1B sponsored by the petitioning employer and then apply for an EAD for himself and his dependents while waiting for the visa number to be available and file his I-485. BUT the EAD also gives the alien the chance to find another willing employer within 6 months for similar job descriptions and within the same geographic area without being out of status and preserve the priority date rather than worry about losing his status if something unfortunate happens to the petitioning employer (ENRON, MCI, etc.)
Whether, this will be successful or not is another question. But unless you try you can never be sure. Before 1969, a man on the moon was an impossibility but it happened :) Changing the law is the NEED of the day and we should be pursuing it to the full extent of our capabilities for LONG term relief. But, asking the agencies who interpret the existing laws and apply them to reconsider will not and should not in any way hamper our efforts in this. Rather this is something that is a SHORT term relief that in no way goes against the word of the law or against the intent of Congress when it passed the law.
Well, since this has been an long post, I will call it my 4 cents.:D Thoughts, comments and brickbats are, as usual, welcome.
Further the grant of EADs in all the eligible categories is more or less the same. Even if the timing of the grant of the EAD were in USCIS hands, it is hard to request an alternative interpretation of the regulation in some cases (eg after I-140) while retaining the same interpretation for other categories (eg EAD after completion of Education). This just opens up a lot of loopholes.
ON top of all this we have to take into consideration the huge inherent inertia of the USCIS to change. As already pointed out the only recourse available would be to change the law of the land, on which path we are already traversing.
Werc:
Thanks for your post. However, as per my original post, could you indicate the section where in the INA does it mention when employment authorization can be given? In fact, the first line in the in the paper in the link included by Bee in his post, clearly mentions that "...nowhere in the statutes or regulations, is there a reference to a work permit" (i.e. an EAD as clarified later in the document).
As you mention later in your post, yes it is hard to get something from USCIS, but should we shy away from something just because it is hard? Also, as the same document (posted by BEE) mentions, the reasons for issuing an EAD are varied.
But let us take the specific case you mentioned, a student can work up to 12 months after his graduation. This time frame is provided for multiple reasons, the main one being to give the student to find employment in his related field of education and for the employer to evaluate him and process his adjustment of status. Without the EAD, the student would have to find employment and adjust his status within 2 months or be out of status. BUT the EAD also provides the student the choice of changing employers without losing his status.
Now, coming to the issue of EAD after I-140 or after I-485...By submitting the I-140 the employer is not only asking the USCIS to approve the need (as certified by the DOL) of a alien as a permanent worker, the employer is also providing the USCIS with particulars of the alien who will be hired. Therefore, by approving the I-140, the USCIS is not only approving the need of the employer, it is also approving the alien for the job. This is also supported by the fact that the USCIS allows concurrent filing of I-140 and I-485 if the priority date is current for that particular country/category. Hence, an EAD after I-140 not only allows the employer to hire an alien already in the company, it also allows the alien who might be working for an employer other than the one which applied for the I-140 to switch jobs, without worrying about being out-of-status, if he is very close to finishing his 6years on an H1B. For an alien who is outside the country when his I-140 is approved (very rare case, but possible), he can enter the US on an H1B sponsored by the petitioning employer and then apply for an EAD for himself and his dependents while waiting for the visa number to be available and file his I-485. BUT the EAD also gives the alien the chance to find another willing employer within 6 months for similar job descriptions and within the same geographic area without being out of status and preserve the priority date rather than worry about losing his status if something unfortunate happens to the petitioning employer (ENRON, MCI, etc.)
Whether, this will be successful or not is another question. But unless you try you can never be sure. Before 1969, a man on the moon was an impossibility but it happened :) Changing the law is the NEED of the day and we should be pursuing it to the full extent of our capabilities for LONG term relief. But, asking the agencies who interpret the existing laws and apply them to reconsider will not and should not in any way hamper our efforts in this. Rather this is something that is a SHORT term relief that in no way goes against the word of the law or against the intent of Congress when it passed the law.
Well, since this has been an long post, I will call it my 4 cents.:D Thoughts, comments and brickbats are, as usual, welcome.
more...
bidhanc
12-22 03:14 PM
Sorry to say, but sending mails of unresolved issues to NY Consulate is a waste of time.
I have sent them mails every week for 2 month (yes, I did that religiously) thinking that I would clog up their system, but I guess they had the last laugh! :-)
But hey everybody, pls do go ahead and follow the process!
Thanks
EMBASSY
--------------
Embassy of India - Washington DC (official website) United States of America Passport Services FAQ (http://www.indianembassy.org/index.php?option=com_faqs&task=detail&id=2#22)
Passport Services - Assistance/Complaints
Assistant Consular Officer
Phone: (202) 939-9861
Attach� (Consular)
Phone: (202) 939-9832
Consulate General, NY
---------------------------
Consulate General of India, New York, U.S.A. - indiacgny.org - www.indiacgny.org (http://www.indiacgny.org/php/showHighLightDet.php?h_id=165&key=)
Any unresolved problems with the Consulate? Please click HERE
For unresolved matters relating to Passports, Attestations, Renunciation/Surrender Certificate, PIO, Visa etc. please send email at: cg@indiacgny.org giving details of applicant�s full name(including middle name), passport number, date of application, application ref. number, brief background of the case, etc.
For unresolved matters relating to OCI, please send an email at: dcg@indiacgny.org giving details of applicant�s full name(including middle name), passport number, date of application, application ref. number, brief background of the case, etc.
I have sent them mails every week for 2 month (yes, I did that religiously) thinking that I would clog up their system, but I guess they had the last laugh! :-)
But hey everybody, pls do go ahead and follow the process!
Thanks
EMBASSY
--------------
Embassy of India - Washington DC (official website) United States of America Passport Services FAQ (http://www.indianembassy.org/index.php?option=com_faqs&task=detail&id=2#22)
Passport Services - Assistance/Complaints
Assistant Consular Officer
Phone: (202) 939-9861
Attach� (Consular)
Phone: (202) 939-9832
Consulate General, NY
---------------------------
Consulate General of India, New York, U.S.A. - indiacgny.org - www.indiacgny.org (http://www.indiacgny.org/php/showHighLightDet.php?h_id=165&key=)
Any unresolved problems with the Consulate? Please click HERE
For unresolved matters relating to Passports, Attestations, Renunciation/Surrender Certificate, PIO, Visa etc. please send email at: cg@indiacgny.org giving details of applicant�s full name(including middle name), passport number, date of application, application ref. number, brief background of the case, etc.
For unresolved matters relating to OCI, please send an email at: dcg@indiacgny.org giving details of applicant�s full name(including middle name), passport number, date of application, application ref. number, brief background of the case, etc.
hot Kobe Bryant..the black Mamba,
gc_check
08-01 10:25 AM
Folks,
Just now i called up USCIS (1-800-375-5283 Option 1,2,2,6,2,2,1) since my App was mailed more than 4 weeks.
The lady who picked up was nice enough to explain me the revised ETA for receipting from 4 weeks to 60 Calendar days. She also said that they generally receipts in 2 weeks (not even 4 weeks) but because of this rush that ETA is set to 60 days. She appreciated all of our anxiety and re-assured me that i dont have to call after 60 days because the receipt will be definitely with me ( if everything is filed correctly as per rules )
One thing i found funny - she explained me that this Rush is just for avoiding the 'Fee Increase' - She has no idea about the Retrogression and stuffs like that :)
Good luck guys - chat with you after another 29 days !!
The comment about the "Fee Increase" might be partially true. There is surely a surge in number of application for Naturalization, to avoid the few increase... Atleast I know a couple of friends who applied for citizenship....
Just now i called up USCIS (1-800-375-5283 Option 1,2,2,6,2,2,1) since my App was mailed more than 4 weeks.
The lady who picked up was nice enough to explain me the revised ETA for receipting from 4 weeks to 60 Calendar days. She also said that they generally receipts in 2 weeks (not even 4 weeks) but because of this rush that ETA is set to 60 days. She appreciated all of our anxiety and re-assured me that i dont have to call after 60 days because the receipt will be definitely with me ( if everything is filed correctly as per rules )
One thing i found funny - she explained me that this Rush is just for avoiding the 'Fee Increase' - She has no idea about the Retrogression and stuffs like that :)
Good luck guys - chat with you after another 29 days !!
The comment about the "Fee Increase" might be partially true. There is surely a surge in number of application for Naturalization, to avoid the few increase... Atleast I know a couple of friends who applied for citizenship....
more...
house Tonight, Kobe Bryant, will
payur
06-27 08:44 AM
you should probably correct ur sentence "... and obviously every one is as anxious as others to get their papers (fedexed) filed on time, fedexing it will not alone guarantee your filing.
You are having fun. Don't you?
You are having fun. Don't you?
tattoo kobe bryant wallpaper mvp.
raysaikat
07-19 06:20 PM
Now my hunch is that risk no. 1 is a low risk. Either the dates won't retrogress again, or even if they do, they will move forward in October again. So we can live with that.
Risk no. 2 is a bigger risk. But can USCIS take a decision on my I-485 petition so quickly. I don't think so. But if it does, then we lovers will be torn apart.
And lastly, has anybody ever heard of "Follow to join" procedure? What exactly is it and can we utilize it to our benefit?
If your GC is approved before your wife can enter US and apply for I-485, then she can do "following to join" through consular processing. The apparent wisdom seems to be that the application has to be done quite quickly, but I had read in one website that there is no time limit to apply (it is possible that the law changed in that regard; you need to seek a competent lawyer's advice and check the current rules). I also read that visa numbers are not required for following to join; i.e., she can get GC even if PD retrogrades. Again, that could be a outdated law, or perhaps that wording was for the "following to join" procedure for the spouses of US citizens. In any case, if you act quickly and properly, there is not much to worry about not being able to get your wife into US after your GC.
Risk no. 2 is a bigger risk. But can USCIS take a decision on my I-485 petition so quickly. I don't think so. But if it does, then we lovers will be torn apart.
And lastly, has anybody ever heard of "Follow to join" procedure? What exactly is it and can we utilize it to our benefit?
If your GC is approved before your wife can enter US and apply for I-485, then she can do "following to join" through consular processing. The apparent wisdom seems to be that the application has to be done quite quickly, but I had read in one website that there is no time limit to apply (it is possible that the law changed in that regard; you need to seek a competent lawyer's advice and check the current rules). I also read that visa numbers are not required for following to join; i.e., she can get GC even if PD retrogrades. Again, that could be a outdated law, or perhaps that wording was for the "following to join" procedure for the spouses of US citizens. In any case, if you act quickly and properly, there is not much to worry about not being able to get your wife into US after your GC.
more...
pictures kobe bryant wallpaper mvp.
yabadaba
08-10 09:56 AM
I understand what everybody says, but some people are honest and you have to believe. Can somebody who is knowledgeable on the subject, post a reply please?
well you guys are the kings of jumping ahead of the line using labor substitution...how can any of us be knowledgable on the subject...contact unitednations or ppl like him who "help" the skirters of the law.
svan77: if a person posts on a forum he or she will get the opinions of members whether he/she likes it or not. all of us have our beef with labor substitors and ppl with 3 yr degrees or aptec/niit diplomas who just believe in jumping ahead of the line and have no qualms about it.
well you guys are the kings of jumping ahead of the line using labor substitution...how can any of us be knowledgable on the subject...contact unitednations or ppl like him who "help" the skirters of the law.
svan77: if a person posts on a forum he or she will get the opinions of members whether he/she likes it or not. all of us have our beef with labor substitors and ppl with 3 yr degrees or aptec/niit diplomas who just believe in jumping ahead of the line and have no qualms about it.
dresses kobe bryant 24 mvp. Kobe+ryant+24+shoes; Kobe+ryant+24+shoes. westonharvey
DSJ
07-17 10:12 AM
Man I-485 Texas procesing dates went back to August 07 2006
more...
makeup Lakers MVP #24 Kobe Bryant All
desidude
06-19 01:48 PM
Akhil,
Can you pls send me a copy too? thanks in advance!
Check your PM. This is what i sent.
Can you pls send me a copy too? thanks in advance!
Check your PM. This is what i sent.
girlfriend Kobe Bryant was named Finals
hiralal
05-29 11:29 PM
+1 one from me, why can't we pass this to all US friends as a forward?
done
done
hairstyles Lakers Guard #24 Kobe Bryant
ronhira
07-21 09:01 AM
doggy, (what a name) u just signed-up and this is your first post..... r u an agent of anti-immigrant website doing their media campaign :cool:
Check Anti Antis: Conference call: To teach Antis how to post!!! (http://anti-antis.blogspot.com/2009/07/conference-call-to-teach-antis-how-to.html)
Conference Call on Effective Posting - tomorrow, July 21st at 7:15pm
How to Post for Maximum Impact
Conference Call tomorrow night, 7:15pm Central
Labor Day marks the beginning of national discussions on the corporate visa programs that allow companies to legally bypass the US workforce. Most tech workers see this bypass and confront this bypass when they are looking for jobs. But most recent college grads will never see or confront this issue because they will never be considered for jobs their degrees qualify them to do.
This is the power of employment discrimination. This issue will be part of a national conversation on comprehensive immigration reform if we tell the truth about our own circumstances.
Businessweek will be posting their article on H-1b exploitation on Wednesday. Join me to discuss why the "culture of bypass" is the necessary precondition to create the "culture of exploitation."
Scheduled Conference Date: Tuesday, July 21, 2009
Scheduled Start Time: 07:15 PM Central Daylight Time
Scheduled End Time: 07:55 PM Central Daylight Time
Type of Conference: Standard
Dial-in Number: 1-219-509-8111
Participant Access Code: 798504
Reservation:
NO, just dial in at 7:15pm Central
Text of Email Sent Last Week:
This culture of exploitation among IT labor contractors could not occur without the legal protections to bypass the US workforce. This is why the corporations are fighting hard to defend this protection and defeat the Durbin bill (S. 887).
Readers may not make the connection between this corporate malfeasance and the bypass of qualifed citizens and green card holders - but your posts can. Make sure your posts mention the Durbin bill (S.887).
Here's some talking points on corporate protections affored by visa programs:
* The H-1b corporate visa program is responsible for these crimes because it protects corporations from ever considering local talent and opening the door to this culture of exploitation. Passing the Durbin bill will end this culutre of exploitation.
* Protectionist measures in the current corporate visa programs are poisoning the IT industry - no corporation should be protected from the consequences of discriminatory hiring practices.
* American labor laws and EEO have had a powerful impact on American society. These visa programs protect corporations from employing a workforce that knows their rights and can exercise them. That's why corporations don't want the Durbin bill (S. 887) to pass.
* Far from protecting the US workforce, the Durbin bill (S.887) will give us a chance to compete for job openings in our own country, thus preventing these corporate crimes.
* It's the responsibilty of the federal government to ensure that we have the freedom to compete- and we will get this freedom to compete when S.887 passes.
* If these companies were required to seek local talent first, these shakedowns would virtually disappear.
* The discriminatory practice of recruiting abroad for US job openings now breeds a form of exploitation unimaginable to 21st century Americans. These cheats could never swindle Americans this way.
Our posts promoting the Durbin bill will be watched -- and measured -- by Congressional supporters of the Durbin bill and all of the players who will be at the table when this issue comes up in the fall.
Your posts supporting the bill and defending American labor and talent will let all the players know that American IT professionals are standing up for what they want and shaping the circumstances of our lives.
Donna Conroy
Director
Bright Future Jobs (http://www.brightfuturejobs.com)
dmconroy@sbcglobal.net
Check Anti Antis: Conference call: To teach Antis how to post!!! (http://anti-antis.blogspot.com/2009/07/conference-call-to-teach-antis-how-to.html)
Conference Call on Effective Posting - tomorrow, July 21st at 7:15pm
How to Post for Maximum Impact
Conference Call tomorrow night, 7:15pm Central
Labor Day marks the beginning of national discussions on the corporate visa programs that allow companies to legally bypass the US workforce. Most tech workers see this bypass and confront this bypass when they are looking for jobs. But most recent college grads will never see or confront this issue because they will never be considered for jobs their degrees qualify them to do.
This is the power of employment discrimination. This issue will be part of a national conversation on comprehensive immigration reform if we tell the truth about our own circumstances.
Businessweek will be posting their article on H-1b exploitation on Wednesday. Join me to discuss why the "culture of bypass" is the necessary precondition to create the "culture of exploitation."
Scheduled Conference Date: Tuesday, July 21, 2009
Scheduled Start Time: 07:15 PM Central Daylight Time
Scheduled End Time: 07:55 PM Central Daylight Time
Type of Conference: Standard
Dial-in Number: 1-219-509-8111
Participant Access Code: 798504
Reservation:
NO, just dial in at 7:15pm Central
Text of Email Sent Last Week:
This culture of exploitation among IT labor contractors could not occur without the legal protections to bypass the US workforce. This is why the corporations are fighting hard to defend this protection and defeat the Durbin bill (S. 887).
Readers may not make the connection between this corporate malfeasance and the bypass of qualifed citizens and green card holders - but your posts can. Make sure your posts mention the Durbin bill (S.887).
Here's some talking points on corporate protections affored by visa programs:
* The H-1b corporate visa program is responsible for these crimes because it protects corporations from ever considering local talent and opening the door to this culture of exploitation. Passing the Durbin bill will end this culutre of exploitation.
* Protectionist measures in the current corporate visa programs are poisoning the IT industry - no corporation should be protected from the consequences of discriminatory hiring practices.
* American labor laws and EEO have had a powerful impact on American society. These visa programs protect corporations from employing a workforce that knows their rights and can exercise them. That's why corporations don't want the Durbin bill (S. 887) to pass.
* Far from protecting the US workforce, the Durbin bill (S.887) will give us a chance to compete for job openings in our own country, thus preventing these corporate crimes.
* It's the responsibilty of the federal government to ensure that we have the freedom to compete- and we will get this freedom to compete when S.887 passes.
* If these companies were required to seek local talent first, these shakedowns would virtually disappear.
* The discriminatory practice of recruiting abroad for US job openings now breeds a form of exploitation unimaginable to 21st century Americans. These cheats could never swindle Americans this way.
Our posts promoting the Durbin bill will be watched -- and measured -- by Congressional supporters of the Durbin bill and all of the players who will be at the table when this issue comes up in the fall.
Your posts supporting the bill and defending American labor and talent will let all the players know that American IT professionals are standing up for what they want and shaping the circumstances of our lives.
Donna Conroy
Director
Bright Future Jobs (http://www.brightfuturejobs.com)
dmconroy@sbcglobal.net
marwan234
10-03 10:12 PM
Why CSC WHYYYYY??? :(
You gave me EAD, you gave me AP, you gave me receipts......why did you put me back at the mercy of NSC again? WHYYY? you knew they suck!!!
No FP yet for me or my wife. Been calling CIS.....feels like talking to a wall.
I guess we CSC transferees are DOOMED!!!
There shall be light at the end of the tunnel....or it could just be an incoming train :-)
You gave me EAD, you gave me AP, you gave me receipts......why did you put me back at the mercy of NSC again? WHYYY? you knew they suck!!!
No FP yet for me or my wife. Been calling CIS.....feels like talking to a wall.
I guess we CSC transferees are DOOMED!!!
There shall be light at the end of the tunnel....or it could just be an incoming train :-)
logiclife
01-09 12:15 PM
Is a divorced spouse entitled to COBRA coverage from their former spouses� group health plan?
Under COBRA, participants, covered spouses and dependent children may continue their plan coverage for a limited time when they would otherwise lose coverage due to a particular event, such as divorce (or legal separation). A covered employee�s spouse who would lose coverage due to a divorce may elect continuation coverage under the plan for a maximum of 36 months. A qualified beneficiary must notify the plan administrator of a qualifying event within 60 days after divorce or legal separation. After being notified of a divorce, the plan administrator must give notice, generally within 14 days, to the qualified beneficiary of the right to elect COBRA continuation coverage.
Divorced spouses may call their plan administrator or the EBSA Toll-Free number, 1.866.444.EBSA (3272) if they have questions about COBRA continuation coverage or their rights under ERISA.
If I waive COBRA coverage during the election period, can I still get coverage at a later date?
If a qualified beneficiary waives COBRA coverage during the election period, he or she may revoke the waiver of coverage before the end of the election period. A beneficiary may then elect COBRA coverage. Then, the plan need only provide continuation coverage beginning on the date the waiver is revoked.
Under COBRA, what benefits must be covered?
Qualified beneficiaries must be offered coverage identical to that available to similarly situated beneficiaries who are not receiving COBRA coverage under the plan (generally, the same coverage that the qualified beneficiary had immediately before qualifying for continuation coverage). A change in the benefits under the plan for the active employees will also apply to qualified beneficiaries. Qualified beneficiaries must be allowed to make the same choices given to non-COBRA beneficiaries under the plan, such as during periods of open enrollment by the plan.
When does COBRA coverage begin?
COBRA coverage begins on the date that health care coverage would otherwise have been lost by reason of a qualifying event.
How long does COBRA coverage last?
COBRA establishes required periods of coverage for continuation health benefits. A plan, however, may provide longer periods of coverage beyond those required by COBRA. COBRA beneficiaries generally are eligible for group coverage during a maximum of 18 months for qualifying events due to employment termination or reduction of hours of work. Certain qualifying events, or a second qualifying event during the initial period of coverage, may permit a beneficiary to receive a maximum of 36 months of coverage.
Coverage begins on the date that coverage would otherwise have been lost by reason of a qualifying event and will end at the end of the maximum period. It may end earlier if:
Premiums are not paid on a timely basis
The employer ceases to maintain any group health plan
After the COBRA election, coverage is obtained with another employer group health plan that does not contain any exclusion or limitation with respect to any pre-existing condition of such beneficiary. However, if other group health coverage is obtained prior to the COBRA election, COBRA coverage may not be discontinued, even if the other coverage continues after the COBRA election.
After the COBRA election, a beneficiary becomes entitled to Medicare benefits. However, if Medicare is obtained prior to COBRA election, COBRA coverage may not be discontinued, even if the other coverage continues after the COBRA election.
Although COBRA specifies certain periods of time that continued health coverage must be offered to qualified beneficiaries, COBRA does not prohibit plans from offering continuation health coverage that goes beyond the COBRA periods.
Some plans allow participants and beneficiaries to convert group health coverage to an individual policy. If this option is generally available from the plan, a qualified beneficiary who pays for COBRA coverage must be given the option of converting to an individual policy at the end of the COBRA continuation coverage period. The option must be given to enroll in a conversion health plan within 180 days before COBRA coverage ends. The premium for a conversion policy may be more expensive than the premium of a group plan, and the conversion policy may provide a lower level of coverage. The conversion option, however, is not available if the beneficiary ends COBRA coverage before reaching the end of the maximum period of COBRA coverage.
Who pays for COBRA coverage?
Beneficiaries may be required to pay for COBRA coverage. The premium cannot exceed 102 percent of the cost to the plan for similarly situated individuals who have not incurred a qualifying event, including both the portion paid by employees and any portion paid by the employer before the qualifying event, plus 2 percent for administrative costs.
For qualified beneficiaries receiving the 11 month disability extension of coverage, the premium for those additional months may be increased to 150 percent of the plan's total cost of coverage.
COBRA premiums may be increased if the costs to the plan increase but generally must be fixed in advance of each 12-month premium cycle. The plan must allow you to pay premiums on a monthly basis if you ask to do so, and the plan may allow you to make payments at other intervals (weekly or quarterly).
The initial premium payment must be made within 45 days after the date of the COBRA election by the qualified beneficiary. Payment generally must cover the period of coverage from the date of COBRA election retroactive to the date of the loss of coverage due to the qualifying event. Premiums for successive periods of coverage are due on the date stated in the plan with a minimum 30-day grace period for payments. Payment is considered to be made on the date it is sent to the plan.
If premiums are not paid by the first day of the period of coverage, the plan has the option to cancel coverage until payment is received and then reinstate coverage retroactively to the beginning of the period of coverage.
If the amount of the payment made to the plan is made in error but is not significantly less than the amount due, the plan is required to notify you of the deficiency and grant a reasonable period (for this purpose, 30 days is considered reasonable) to pay the difference. The plan is not obligated to send monthly premium notices.
COBRA beneficiaries remain subject to the rules of the plan and therefore must satisfy all costs related to co-payments and deductibles, and are subject to catastrophic and other benefit limits.
If I elect COBRA, how much do I pay?
When you were an active employee, your employer may have paid all or part of your group health premiums. Under COBRA, as a former employee no longer receiving benefits, you will usually pay the entire premium amount, that is, the portion of the premium that you paid as an active employee and the amount of the contribution made by your employer. In addition, there may be a 2 percent administrative fee.
While COBRA rates may seem high, you will be paying group premium rates, which are usually lower than individual rates.
Since it is likely that there will be a lapse of a month or more between the date of layoff and the time you make the COBRA election decision, you may have to pay health premiums retroactively-from the time of separation from the company. The first premium, for instance, will cover the entire time since your last day of employment with your former employer.
You should also be aware that it is your responsibility to pay for COBRA coverage even if you do not receive a monthly statement.
Although they are not required to do so, some employers may subsidize COBRA coverage.
Can I receive COBRA benefits while on FMLA leave?
The Family and Medical Leave Act, effective August 5, 1993, requires an employer to maintain coverage under any group health plan for an employee on FMLA leave under the same conditions coverage would have been provided if the employee had continued working. Coverage provided under the FMLA is not COBRA coverage, and FMLA leave is not a qualifying event under COBRA. A COBRA qualifying event may occur, however, when an employer's obligation to maintain health benefits under FMLA ceases, such as when an employee notifies an employer of his or her intent not to return to work.
Further information on FMLA is available from the nearest office of the Wage and Hour Division, listed in most telephone directories under U.S. Government, U.S. Department of Labor, Employment Standards Administration.
Under COBRA, participants, covered spouses and dependent children may continue their plan coverage for a limited time when they would otherwise lose coverage due to a particular event, such as divorce (or legal separation). A covered employee�s spouse who would lose coverage due to a divorce may elect continuation coverage under the plan for a maximum of 36 months. A qualified beneficiary must notify the plan administrator of a qualifying event within 60 days after divorce or legal separation. After being notified of a divorce, the plan administrator must give notice, generally within 14 days, to the qualified beneficiary of the right to elect COBRA continuation coverage.
Divorced spouses may call their plan administrator or the EBSA Toll-Free number, 1.866.444.EBSA (3272) if they have questions about COBRA continuation coverage or their rights under ERISA.
If I waive COBRA coverage during the election period, can I still get coverage at a later date?
If a qualified beneficiary waives COBRA coverage during the election period, he or she may revoke the waiver of coverage before the end of the election period. A beneficiary may then elect COBRA coverage. Then, the plan need only provide continuation coverage beginning on the date the waiver is revoked.
Under COBRA, what benefits must be covered?
Qualified beneficiaries must be offered coverage identical to that available to similarly situated beneficiaries who are not receiving COBRA coverage under the plan (generally, the same coverage that the qualified beneficiary had immediately before qualifying for continuation coverage). A change in the benefits under the plan for the active employees will also apply to qualified beneficiaries. Qualified beneficiaries must be allowed to make the same choices given to non-COBRA beneficiaries under the plan, such as during periods of open enrollment by the plan.
When does COBRA coverage begin?
COBRA coverage begins on the date that health care coverage would otherwise have been lost by reason of a qualifying event.
How long does COBRA coverage last?
COBRA establishes required periods of coverage for continuation health benefits. A plan, however, may provide longer periods of coverage beyond those required by COBRA. COBRA beneficiaries generally are eligible for group coverage during a maximum of 18 months for qualifying events due to employment termination or reduction of hours of work. Certain qualifying events, or a second qualifying event during the initial period of coverage, may permit a beneficiary to receive a maximum of 36 months of coverage.
Coverage begins on the date that coverage would otherwise have been lost by reason of a qualifying event and will end at the end of the maximum period. It may end earlier if:
Premiums are not paid on a timely basis
The employer ceases to maintain any group health plan
After the COBRA election, coverage is obtained with another employer group health plan that does not contain any exclusion or limitation with respect to any pre-existing condition of such beneficiary. However, if other group health coverage is obtained prior to the COBRA election, COBRA coverage may not be discontinued, even if the other coverage continues after the COBRA election.
After the COBRA election, a beneficiary becomes entitled to Medicare benefits. However, if Medicare is obtained prior to COBRA election, COBRA coverage may not be discontinued, even if the other coverage continues after the COBRA election.
Although COBRA specifies certain periods of time that continued health coverage must be offered to qualified beneficiaries, COBRA does not prohibit plans from offering continuation health coverage that goes beyond the COBRA periods.
Some plans allow participants and beneficiaries to convert group health coverage to an individual policy. If this option is generally available from the plan, a qualified beneficiary who pays for COBRA coverage must be given the option of converting to an individual policy at the end of the COBRA continuation coverage period. The option must be given to enroll in a conversion health plan within 180 days before COBRA coverage ends. The premium for a conversion policy may be more expensive than the premium of a group plan, and the conversion policy may provide a lower level of coverage. The conversion option, however, is not available if the beneficiary ends COBRA coverage before reaching the end of the maximum period of COBRA coverage.
Who pays for COBRA coverage?
Beneficiaries may be required to pay for COBRA coverage. The premium cannot exceed 102 percent of the cost to the plan for similarly situated individuals who have not incurred a qualifying event, including both the portion paid by employees and any portion paid by the employer before the qualifying event, plus 2 percent for administrative costs.
For qualified beneficiaries receiving the 11 month disability extension of coverage, the premium for those additional months may be increased to 150 percent of the plan's total cost of coverage.
COBRA premiums may be increased if the costs to the plan increase but generally must be fixed in advance of each 12-month premium cycle. The plan must allow you to pay premiums on a monthly basis if you ask to do so, and the plan may allow you to make payments at other intervals (weekly or quarterly).
The initial premium payment must be made within 45 days after the date of the COBRA election by the qualified beneficiary. Payment generally must cover the period of coverage from the date of COBRA election retroactive to the date of the loss of coverage due to the qualifying event. Premiums for successive periods of coverage are due on the date stated in the plan with a minimum 30-day grace period for payments. Payment is considered to be made on the date it is sent to the plan.
If premiums are not paid by the first day of the period of coverage, the plan has the option to cancel coverage until payment is received and then reinstate coverage retroactively to the beginning of the period of coverage.
If the amount of the payment made to the plan is made in error but is not significantly less than the amount due, the plan is required to notify you of the deficiency and grant a reasonable period (for this purpose, 30 days is considered reasonable) to pay the difference. The plan is not obligated to send monthly premium notices.
COBRA beneficiaries remain subject to the rules of the plan and therefore must satisfy all costs related to co-payments and deductibles, and are subject to catastrophic and other benefit limits.
If I elect COBRA, how much do I pay?
When you were an active employee, your employer may have paid all or part of your group health premiums. Under COBRA, as a former employee no longer receiving benefits, you will usually pay the entire premium amount, that is, the portion of the premium that you paid as an active employee and the amount of the contribution made by your employer. In addition, there may be a 2 percent administrative fee.
While COBRA rates may seem high, you will be paying group premium rates, which are usually lower than individual rates.
Since it is likely that there will be a lapse of a month or more between the date of layoff and the time you make the COBRA election decision, you may have to pay health premiums retroactively-from the time of separation from the company. The first premium, for instance, will cover the entire time since your last day of employment with your former employer.
You should also be aware that it is your responsibility to pay for COBRA coverage even if you do not receive a monthly statement.
Although they are not required to do so, some employers may subsidize COBRA coverage.
Can I receive COBRA benefits while on FMLA leave?
The Family and Medical Leave Act, effective August 5, 1993, requires an employer to maintain coverage under any group health plan for an employee on FMLA leave under the same conditions coverage would have been provided if the employee had continued working. Coverage provided under the FMLA is not COBRA coverage, and FMLA leave is not a qualifying event under COBRA. A COBRA qualifying event may occur, however, when an employer's obligation to maintain health benefits under FMLA ceases, such as when an employee notifies an employer of his or her intent not to return to work.
Further information on FMLA is available from the nearest office of the Wage and Hour Division, listed in most telephone directories under U.S. Government, U.S. Department of Labor, Employment Standards Administration.