Sponsorowanie Przez Prace

[gucior]

Jestem sponsorowana przez prace. W tym miesiacu zatwierdzono petycje I140.Moje pytanie czy nadal musze pracowac u sponsora do otrzymania zielonej karty, czy wtej chwili moge zwolnic sie z pracy bez konsekwencji przerwania sponsorowania. I czy moj sponsor moze jeszcze przerwac sponsorstwo? Dziekuje bardzo za wasze opinie a szczegolnie zalezy mi na wypowiedzi Kariny.

[marcinct]

Hej z tego co mi wiadomo to zalezy jakie masz stosunki ze sponsorem , sa tacy co wogole nie pracuja u sponsora a sponsor im wszystko podpisuje , niemniej jednak I 140 czyli zatwierdzenie sponsora juz masz, czyli teraz skladanie formy i485 (wniosek o zielona karte ) no i na tym wniosku sponsor musi sie podpisac , a jesli pozniej przyjdzie wezwanie na rozmowe musisz miec ze soba list polecajacy od sponsora i wlasnie tam czesto pada pytanko czy pracujesz u sponsora , jakie masz czeki itp - oczywiscie to nie regola (kumpel byl na rozmowie i mial tylko jedno pytanie- how are you ) ale w obecnych czasach raczej na rozmowie urzedasy sa bardziej wymagajacy - czesto oprocz listu ze sponsor podtrzymuje to ze cie zatrudni chca jego rozliczenie , lub jakes zaswiadczenie o jego biznesie (kilku znajomych tak mialo )

[karina]

Hej z tego co mi wiadomo to zalezy jakie masz stosunki ze sponsorem , sa tacy co wogole nie pracuja u sponsora a sponsor im wszystko podpisuje , niemniej jednak I 140 czyli zatwierdzenie sponsora juz masz, czyli teraz skladanie formy i485 (wniosek o zielona karte ) no i na tym wniosku sponsor musi sie podpisac ,

chyba sobie zartujesz, ze sie sponsor podpisuje na I-485.

[marcinct]

No moze u Ciebie nie musi albo sie przepisy zmienily , bo jak ja bylkem sponsorowany to po i140 adwokat dal mi papiery do podpisania przez sponsora jak i mnie Po podpisaniu wszystko wraz z badaniami , oplatami , wysylal do imigration- oczywiscie bylo to dawno wiec moze sie cos zmienilo

Moze to nie byly podpisy akurat na formie i485 ale wraz z nia poszly papiery na ktorych musial sie podpisac sponsor , juz niepamietam dokladnie co to byly za papiery ale wiem ze musial mi to sponsor podpisac

[karina]

Jestem sponsorowana przez prace. W tym miesiacu zatwierdzono petycje I140.Moje pytanie czy nadal musze pracowac u sponsora do otrzymania zielonej karty, czy wtej chwili moge zwolnic sie z pracy bez konsekwencji przerwania sponsorowania. I czy moj sponsor moze jeszcze przerwac sponsorstwo? Dziekuje bardzo za wasze opinie a szczegolnie zalezy mi na wypowiedzi Kariny.

Tu bedziesz mial napisane nie tylko o tym o czym pytasz, ale tez o pozniejszym opuszczeniu pracodawcy kiedy dostaniesz green card.

Prawnie nie musisz wcale pracowac u sponsora do uzyskania green card (a i w momencie uzyskania green card nie musi pracowac u sponsora), bo prawo mowi wyraznie, ze ktos moze pracowac jesli otrzyma green card - po to sie kogos sponsoruje. A ze urzednik nie wierzy czesto w bona fide intencje pracodawcy - to pyta o czeki itd. itp.

Wyobrazmy sobie, ze ktos ma wize F-1 i nie bierze pozwolenia na prace to co - wtedy nie dostanie green card? Dostanie. Bo prawo mowi wyraznie, ze pracodawca podpisal dokumenty, ze chce kogos zatrudnic po uzyskaniu przez te osobe pobytu stalego. I teraz znowu - nie ma prawa nakazujace aby pracownik pracowal u pracodawcy, ale jest prawo, ktore mowi, ze mozna cofnac green card jesli oferta pracy nie byla bona fide (i to moze sie stac np. podczas interview na obywatelstwo).

Podobnie jesli ktos jest sponsorowany na green card, a mieszka poza USA. Ta osoba tez nie da rady dostac pozwolenia na prace. Ta osoba wleci do USA z wiza imigracyjna i powinna zaczac prace u sponsora (a czy zaczyna to juz inna bajka).

Inna sprawa jesli ktos chce zmienic pracodawce-sponsora - taka mozliwosc jest ale na okreslonych zasadach, ktorych autor postu nie spelnia niestety na dzien dzisiejszy (musi I-140 byc zatwierdzona przez okreslony czas itd.) Jest wtedy mozliwosc zmiany pracodawcy bez zaczynania zadnych procesow od nowa (czasem wymagany jest list od nowego pracodawcy aby przyniesc na interview, ze dana osoba bedzie zatrudniona w Firmie B na takim samym stanowisku jak w poprzedniej Firmie A, ktora wystawila dokumenty do sponsorowania). Jesli Ty teraz odejdziesz - prawnie nie przysluguje Ci zmiana pracodawcy co moze sie wiazac z tym, ze oficer moze zazadac nowa oferte (a raczej potwierdzenie oferty) pracy podczas interview o zielona karte a Ty tego mial nie bedziesz.

Nie ma prawa precyzujacego, ze ktos musi pracowac u pracodawcy przez okreslony czas po otrzymaniu green card. Jednak jesli urzednik nie wierzy, ze petycja o sponsorowanie byla prawdziwa wtedy zaczyna sie szukanie adwokatow itd. Jezeli ktos pracowal wczesniej u tegoz pracodawcy - wtedy jest sprawa latwiejsza, bo da sie wiele rzeczy udowodnic.

Poniewaz jest wiele takich spraw gdzie wymaga sie udowodnienia, ze oferta pracy byla bona fide, zaleca sie przez prawnikow, zeby pracowac u pracodawcy przez okolo 3 miesiace p uzyskaniu green card. Jest to zaecenie, nie wymog prawny.

Tutaj masz odpowiedz prof. Wernicka na ten temat:

Q. My employer sponsored me for my green card. Am I stuck working for the employer who sponsored me?

I recently became a permanent resident through employer sponsorship. I had been working for the company for many years in H-1B temporary professional worker status. Can I leave this company for a better opportunity? Can I work in a different field?

N., White Plains

A. You are free to quit your job and keep your permanent residence. You can work in a different field or not work at all. The rule is based on the concept that no one in the U.S. can be forced to work against his or her will.

If you leave the sponsoring employer shortly after getting permanent residence, the U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services might someday ask you to prove that yours was a real job offer, not just a plot to get you a green card. That might happen if you apply for citizenship.

Because you have been working for your employer for many years, you shouldn't have a problem. Still, it's best to keep records of your present employment in case the USCIS ever questions you about it.

Sponsored workers often ask me how long they must stay with the employer. The law doesn't require any particular amount of time. However, to avoid hassles, I generally recommend that a sponsored employee work with the sponsoring employer at least three months after getting permanent residence.

Tu jest wypowiedz adw. Khanna:

How soon can I leave the employer after I get my GC

Posted by Rajiv S. Khanna

Q. How soon can I leave my petitioning employer once I get my green card approval?

A. There is no brief answer to this question. Let me explain. The basic premise (or theory) behind permanent residence through offer of employment is that an employee is accepting a job on a "permanent" bases. What does "permanent" mean? Does it mean for ever. Obviously not. That would be unreasonable. But "permanent" also does not mean that you pack your bags the moment you receive your green card. So what is the answer? No one really knows. Each case has to be determined upon its own merits. Normally, I would say working for one year or more with the same employer after getting your GC is PROBABLY enough indication of permanency. Less than 4-5 months is perhaps evidence to the contrary

But REMEMBER, this is just my own guess. Technically speaking, the moment you decide that you will leave after a certain period of time, "permanent" intent is gone. Catch-22 eh? Well that is the way it is.

There may be considerable relaxation in this interpretation because in the year 2001 Congress enacted a law that permits employees to leave an employer even while their I-485 is pending. We do not have the regulations or any detailed guidance on these issues.

Niektorzy posuwaja sie nawet sugerowania pracy przez 1 roku czasu:

Question is how long one should work for the same company, through which they are getting the Green Card?

My Opinion:

Do not change job at least for 1 year. The law does not specify the duration for which you should work for the company through which you got the GC.

The official rule is that you must not have any preconceived intention to leave the job when you get your Green Card.

a tutaj caly artykul na temat powyzszy i nie tylko:

THE PORTABILITY PARADOX

by

Cyrus D. Mehta

It is well settled that a non-citizen must have the requisite intent to work for his or her employer at the time of entry or adjustment of status under the second or third employment preferences. A non-citizen who does not have such a bona fide intent is potentially inadmissible under Section 212(a)(5) of the Immigration and Nationality Act (INA) or may be deportable after entry.1

1. INA Section 212(a)(5) is a ground of inadmissibility against a noncitizen who seeks to either the US to perform skilled or unskilled labor without labor certification. Even if the employer obtained labor certification, it can be declared invalid if the noncitizen did not intend to work for the employer upon obtaining permanent resident status.

Non-citizens who never reported to the certified job after entering the US as a permanent resident have been found deportable. For instance, in Spyropoulos v. INS, 590 F.2d 1 (1st Cir. 1978), a Greek national with Canadian citizenship, was offered a job as a cabinet maker in Washington DC. and the prospective employer obtained labor certification, but was unable to obtain confirmation of the job offer prior to entering the US. Upon arrival in the US, the respondent worked instead in Massachusetts as a woodworker and shortly thereafter with yet another employer as a machinist. The court upheld the lower Board of Immigration Appeals (BIA) reasoning that the respondent should have known that there were problems regarding the offer of employment before he entered the US and further held that he was excludable under Section 212(a)(5) as he never had an intent to take up the certified job.

On the other hand, there are also a long line of decisions holding that as long as the noncitizen took up the job or reported for work, and then left later due to a change in intention (as a result of finding a more attractive job elsewhere), this individual could not be found excludable or deportable. In Matter of Cardoso, 13 I.&N. Dec. 228 (BIA 1969), the respondent, a Portuguese citizen, was sponsored to work for a Rhode Island employer as a braider tender. Upon reporting to the employer with his wife for work, the foreman indicated that there was a possibility that both would be laid off if they both worked for the employer. Based on the foreman's well intentioned advice, who also stated that he would keep the braider tender job offer open, the respondent worked elsewhere first as a shoe lace tipper and then as a bobbin machine operator. The BIA held that it could not impugn the validity of such an admission where a person reported for work and did not take up the job under the circumstances described above or if the person worked for some time with the certified employer but quit because he did not like the work or found a better job elsewhere.2

Yet, INA Section 204(j), enacted by Congress in 2000 through the American Competiveness in the 21st Century Act, permits a labor certification or an employment-based petition to remain valid when the adjustment of status application has been pending for 180 days or longer even if the noncitizen changes jobs provided it is in the "same or similar occupational classification" as the job described in the labor certification. AC21 turned the prior law topsy turvey in a positive way by allowing a noncitizen under special circumstances to change his or her intent even prior to obtaining permanent residence. 3

Section 204(j), thus, trumps the rule that a noncitizen must have a bona fide intent to work for the employer who sponsored him or her. Section 204(j) is known as "portability" as it allows a noncitizen who has been waiting for an excessively long time for permanent resident status to change jobs within the same employer or even change employers provided it is in the same or similar occupation. According to guidance provided by the USCIS on portability,4 such an applicant can also port to self-employment provided the new activity involves "same or similar" employment and the new job is legitimate. The examiner may focus, though, on whether at the time of filing the I-140 petition or the concurrent I-140 and I-485 whether the petition reflected the truly intended employment prior to portability.

Moreover, according to the same USCIS guidance, the applicant must have a valid offer of employment in order to port under Section 204(j) at the time of the adjudication of the application, but need not be working at this point. On the other hand, the noncitizen cannot be looking for employment during the adjudication of the application.

Thus, if an applicant legitimately ports under a pending adjustment of status application, his or her intent to work for the sponsoring employer is no longer relevant. If on the other hand, the non-citizen did not exercise portability under Section 204(j), and the adjustment application is approved, it does not appear that he or she can exercise portability upon the acquisition of permanent residence. At this point, upon the approval of the adjustment application, the noncitizen must demonstrate that he or she had the intent to work for the employer. Not working for the employer, or reporting to work for that employer, if there was no porting prior to the adjudication of the application is no longer appears to be an option. Section 204(j) portability thus seems to put those in a favorable situation prior to the successful adjudication of the adjustment application. If such persons did not have an offer of same or similar employment prior to the approval of the adjustment application, they must demonstrate they had an intent to work for the sponsoring employer. Portability's paradox, thus, favors the person who was able to demonstrate a job offer in a same or similar job before adjudication of the application but not after. Furthermore, Section 204(j) only benefits an adjustment of status applicant. If the individual is overseas waiting for a visa appointment at the US consulate instead of adjusting status in the US, he or she cannot avail of this benefit.

An adjustment application is mostly approved by an anonymous examiner at a distant USCIS Service Center in either Nebraska or Texas prior to the applicant knowing about it. Suppose the examiner approved the application at 10 am in the morning on February 13, 2009. It takes a few days for the applicant to receive the good news in the mail (although electronic notification is quicker). If the non-citizen had a bona fide offer in the same or similar job at 9 am on February 13, 2009, which he or she intended to take up, it can be argued that he or she had legitimately ported under Section 204(j). This individual still had a pending adjustment of status application. If on the other hand, this person received the offer of new employment in a same or similar job at 10.05 am, five minutes after the application was approved, he or she technically could not have taken advantage of Section 204(j) portability and would still need to demonstrate an intent to work for the sponsoring employer. At 10.05 am on February 13, this person was no longer an adjustment application and Section 204(j) technically only applies to pending adjustment applicants.

It is hoped that the USCIS will not penalize a non-citizen in such a predicament. And if the government still goes ahead by charging her with deportability, she should challenge the charges and not give up until the matter is heard in a federal court of appeals. The best argument is that Congress did not intend to put this person who unfortunately changed her intention 5 minutes after the adjustment application was approved, but unbeknownst to her, in a worse off position as a person who was able to change his intention just prior to the adjudication of the application. Congress by enacting AC21 intended to ameliorate the plight of applicants who were waiting endlessly for their green card and it would be inequitable, perhaps bordering on involuntary servitude, for such a person to maintain an intent to work for the sponsoring employer for years on end. There are other provisions in AC21 that provide similar relief, such as extending the H-1B status beyond the six year limit, and thus it can be argued that the entire purpose of AC21 was to provide relief to professional and skilled non-citizens who are legally here but stuck in the pipeline for the green card. While the above example of porting occurring 5 minutes after the grant of permanent residency starkly demonstrates the absurdity of the disparity, the same benefit should broadly apply to persons who got the green card after an endless wait but changed their intention after receiving it. In any event, the moral of the story is that eligible adjustment applicants who intend to port should do so sooner than later.

Finally, it should be noted that the USCIS has yet to implement a procedure for purposes of notification when an adjustment applicant has ported, although the standard practice is to send a letter, along with evidence of the job offer, to the USCIS Service Center where the application is filed detailing the applicant's eligibility under Section 204(j). Hence, where the porting occurred prior to the grant of permanent residency, it is still advisable to immediately send notification specifically stating the precise time and day of the job offer in the same or similar occupation to insulate against any challenge down the road, particularly when the permanent resident files an application for naturalization some years later. "

[karina]

No moze u Ciebie nie musi albo sie przepisy zmienily ,

u mnie nie musi byc ani przepisy sie nie zmienily, nigdy nie bylo wymogu podpisywania sie pracodawcy na I-485

bo jak ja bylkem sponsorowany to po i140 adwokat dal mi papiery do podpisania przez sponsora jak i mnie Po podpisaniu wszystko wraz z badaniami , oplatami , wysylal do imigration- oczywiscie bylo to dawno wiec moze sie cos zmienilo

Moze to nie byly podpisy akurat na formie i485 ale wraz z nia poszly papiery na ktorych musial sie podpisac sponsor , juz niepamietam dokladnie co to byly za papiery ale wiem ze musial mi to sponsor podpisac

Jedna rada: jesli nie wiesz dokladnie - to nie wprowadzaj kogos w blad. Napisales wyzej: czyli teraz skladanie formy i485 (wniosek o zielona karte ) no i na tym wniosku sponsor musi sie podpisac

[marcinct]

Hej

Karina oczywiscie napisalem z wlasnego doswiadczenia i zaraz potem sie poprawilem bo pamietam napewno ze sponsor mi podpisywal jakies formy ,fakt mozliwe ze to nie byla i485 ale napewno byly razem wysylane czyli jednak po zatwierdzeniu i140 potrzebny jest sponsor i o to mi chodzilo

[gucior]

Dziekuje bardzo za udzielenie mi odpowiedzi na moje pytania.Jestem sponsorowana od 6 lat jako nauczyciel w przedszkolu.W viza biuletyn czekam na wrzesien 2003.Do trzeciego etapu czyli wszystkie badania mialam w czerwcu 2007 roku.Pozwolenie na prace mam od grudnia 2007 roku.(2008 przedluzalam na 2 lata) W 2009 w marcu zatwierdzono petycje I-140.Adwokat powiedzial mi ze teraz pracowac u sponsora nie musze.Poddal mi mysl ze moge zalozyc na siebie korporacje miec pod soba 3 dzieci i w ten sposob do otrzymania gc utrzymam sie w swoim zawodzie.A ja nie wiem czy tak mozna czy teraz gdybym odeszla z pracy sponsor moze przerwac sponsorowanie? Jaki dlugi czas po zatwierdzeniu petyji I-140 musze tam jeszcze pracowac? Acha adwokat mowil jeszcze ze interviu nie bede miec,ze sonsor ma b. dobre podatki itp. Z gory dziekuje za pomoc.