imv116
06-06 05:36 PM
Hi S.Hoosier,
Subject to the AC21 restrictions, like what? Could you please elaborate?
Yes, you should be able to use AC21 to change employment (subject to the AC21 restrictions).
Subject to the AC21 restrictions, like what? Could you please elaborate?
Yes, you should be able to use AC21 to change employment (subject to the AC21 restrictions).
wallpaper IKEA 2011 IKEA Wooden Kitchen
alterego
12-12 07:09 PM
How there could be demand for visa numbers for EB2 India between the years 2000 & 2002. The possible sources of such visa number demand would be from BEC or LC substitution. Both require filing a new I-140 recently, which most likely would not have been approved yet. Are visa numbers alloted even before I-140 is approved??
Unless there were some real unlucky ones with PD earlier than 2002 that got through 'namecheck' just recently.
You forget that BECs were clearing up since some time now, and that 140PP was available until late July. Which person in his/her right mind having endured the BEC nightmare would not have done the 140PP, and if they did that and filed concurrently, then if all goes well 485 could easily get wrapped up in 4-6 months. I know of a person from EB2 ROW who got his green card start(PERM) to finish(485 approval) in 8mths flat. Similar examples, if a little slower abound at . To him this can seem an efficient system!
Unless there were some real unlucky ones with PD earlier than 2002 that got through 'namecheck' just recently.
You forget that BECs were clearing up since some time now, and that 140PP was available until late July. Which person in his/her right mind having endured the BEC nightmare would not have done the 140PP, and if they did that and filed concurrently, then if all goes well 485 could easily get wrapped up in 4-6 months. I know of a person from EB2 ROW who got his green card start(PERM) to finish(485 approval) in 8mths flat. Similar examples, if a little slower abound at . To him this can seem an efficient system!
renupond
10-09 04:35 PM
If 1099 is not acceptable with client, what is the the easiest way to go forward, assuming no intent of other employees?
I think LLC is the only option ( if I dont want to go towards C-Cop ). How long does it take to set that up? What setps? What are the expenses involved other than one time registration fee?
I think LLC is the only option ( if I dont want to go towards C-Cop ). How long does it take to set that up? What setps? What are the expenses involved other than one time registration fee?
2011 Amazing Modern Kitchen Design
casinoroyale
03-10 12:23 AM
I don't understand in what cases consulate holds a person's passport. What if the applicant wants to return back home country instead of waiting in Canada?
more...
lord_labaku
07-28 11:48 AM
I had to sacrifice my career a little bit due to GC. I regret that. I dont think GC is worth enough to sacrifice career advancements; especially for people from India & China.
Yes; India has infrastructure challenges....but they are being addressed slowly...the worst part is people in the US are missing out the growth in India. accelerating growth always feels better than advanced developed stable nation.
I have my GC already...I can say for sure that it wasnt worth it.
Yes; India has infrastructure challenges....but they are being addressed slowly...the worst part is people in the US are missing out the growth in India. accelerating growth always feels better than advanced developed stable nation.
I have my GC already...I can say for sure that it wasnt worth it.
h1techSlave
04-22 02:23 PM
Each RFE will result in lawyer fees, medical exams, etc. to the tune of $2000.
Even if they issue 100, 000 RFEs, the resultant increase in GDP = 100K * 2000 = $200 million.
Even if they issue 100, 000 RFEs, the resultant increase in GDP = 100K * 2000 = $200 million.
more...
alkg
09-24 03:43 PM
don't worry be happy
2010 kitchen designs 2011.
Hinglish
01-08 12:25 AM
I rue for the big "premium" company that has hired a "premium" MBA graduate that cracks under pressure. A Satyam waiting to happen I guess ... best of luck
I am sorry for "atrocious" english. I guess I am just very nervous. Lemme reprahse:
I never worked on that H1-B application. I just filled the H1-B and left USA (I was working on OPT before that with another company). My biggest mistake in life was filing the H1-B with a shady consultant out of desperation. Good that I never worked with him before leaving states. obviously I got a 221G, but now a big company has recruited me from India. I am again nervous if they can transfer my H1-B(which I never used).
Now do I make some sense?
I am sorry for "atrocious" english. I guess I am just very nervous. Lemme reprahse:
I never worked on that H1-B application. I just filled the H1-B and left USA (I was working on OPT before that with another company). My biggest mistake in life was filing the H1-B with a shady consultant out of desperation. Good that I never worked with him before leaving states. obviously I got a 221G, but now a big company has recruited me from India. I am again nervous if they can transfer my H1-B(which I never used).
Now do I make some sense?
more...
buehler
06-03 01:09 PM
May be I am not understanding the question right...I think the question was - what are the STEM disciplines? I know the website lists a bunch of occupations that require one of the STEM degrees. So to look at what are the STEM degrees, I chose Browse By STEM Degree and in that Scroll menu are all the majors - starts with Chemistry, Computer Science, Engineering....
The question that was asked was - is Statistics a STEM discipline. That cannot be answered from that page even though it looks so. For e.g if I choose the Mathematics Major, it only lists the occupation that requires a Math Major and not the disciplines under Math. For e.g. one one of the occupation is Natural Sciences Managers which is an occupation and not exactly a discipline.
The question that was asked was - is Statistics a STEM discipline. That cannot be answered from that page even though it looks so. For e.g if I choose the Mathematics Major, it only lists the occupation that requires a Math Major and not the disciplines under Math. For e.g. one one of the occupation is Natural Sciences Managers which is an occupation and not exactly a discipline.
hair kitchen designs 2011
days_go_by
05-25 10:57 PM
and everyone else involved.
more...
redcard
04-02 10:01 AM
Hmm really? I thought that is not possible anymore. Can you give me the details or refer me to a website that has them? Thank you!
Get married to your partner.. its legal in states like CT, MA. Not sure if USCIS will consider it legal.
Get married to your partner.. its legal in states like CT, MA. Not sure if USCIS will consider it legal.
hot ««IKEA 2011 IKEA Brown Kitchen
fide_champ
04-07 09:37 AM
AC21 allows you to change jobs after 180 days of filing before getting your green card. I do not think that you can invoke AC 21 after you have got your GC.
Greencard is usually for future employment. But with the EB immigration, the same employer who you work for applies for your greencard. With this AC21 law, they allow you to change jobs if your 485 is pending for more than 6 months which means that after you get your greencard INS don't expect you to be back working for the employer who applied for your greencard.
Eventhough there is no fixed time period specified, if you work for 6 months they should not have any issues.
Greencard is usually for future employment. But with the EB immigration, the same employer who you work for applies for your greencard. With this AC21 law, they allow you to change jobs if your 485 is pending for more than 6 months which means that after you get your greencard INS don't expect you to be back working for the employer who applied for your greencard.
Eventhough there is no fixed time period specified, if you work for 6 months they should not have any issues.
more...
house In this 2011 kitchen design is
chanduv23
12-24 02:25 PM
Please post your own blog sites here if you have written articles about immigration and have any videos, cartoons, PSA etc....
tattoo 2011 Kitchen Design Ideas from
sundarpn
04-16 06:40 PM
I have still not converted my I-140 to premium with my current employer, though I intend to right away. But, that will take a month (upto 15 bus. days) and then say 2 weeks to try to get the copy of I-140.
Till then I cannot hold the other job offer.
Till then I cannot hold the other job offer.
more...
pictures Modern Kitchen Design 2011
leoindiano
03-17 11:54 AM
there was randon LUD's over weekends....It could be accidental that LUD happened in same week. Your lawyer should be able to do an enquiry into it...
dresses Ikea-2011-Kitchen-Designs.jpg
vrbest
05-07 02:38 PM
I dont think soft LUD provides any logic.. I had soft LUD on my H1B case last week .. this was approved last year for 3 yr extension and I have not applied for anything recently (last one was for AP in Feb 1st week). No other cases had LUD updates...
They are not random. The do have some logic.
At every center cases are filed in order they are received (at least that is what they claim). "Received" does not mean in order of RD you see on your receipt. It is when physically a center accepted your paper case, and decided to enter in the system. PD plays role only for casesfrom retrogressed countries (EB and FB, both). For majority of cases, it has no relevance. PD of cases is nowhere maintained in the system (at least until a case is looked at the first time, which is sometime referred to as "preadjudication"), except on your paper filing. When your file turns out to be next in que for adjudication, in order or receive date (as defined above), the IO has no idea about your PD. Physical file is processed and checked for docs (birth certificates, photos, etc. etc.), AND the PD. At this time you might see a LUD. If nothing further progresses (due to PD not being current) LUD remains a soft LUD, and your case is put aside. If by luck your file was seen when your PD was current, you get lucky and get a GC (and several hard LUDs). PD sequence and received date sequence have no relationship, that's why the whole process seems random.
They are not random. The do have some logic.
At every center cases are filed in order they are received (at least that is what they claim). "Received" does not mean in order of RD you see on your receipt. It is when physically a center accepted your paper case, and decided to enter in the system. PD plays role only for casesfrom retrogressed countries (EB and FB, both). For majority of cases, it has no relevance. PD of cases is nowhere maintained in the system (at least until a case is looked at the first time, which is sometime referred to as "preadjudication"), except on your paper filing. When your file turns out to be next in que for adjudication, in order or receive date (as defined above), the IO has no idea about your PD. Physical file is processed and checked for docs (birth certificates, photos, etc. etc.), AND the PD. At this time you might see a LUD. If nothing further progresses (due to PD not being current) LUD remains a soft LUD, and your case is put aside. If by luck your file was seen when your PD was current, you get lucky and get a GC (and several hard LUDs). PD sequence and received date sequence have no relationship, that's why the whole process seems random.
more...
makeup Jan 04 2011. Filed In: Kitchen
joshraj
10-11 03:28 PM
Thanks Shirish :)
girlfriend kitchen designs.
alkg
08-13 08:41 PM
see the paragraph in bold letters.................
Greenspan Sees Bottom
In Housing, Criticizes Bailout
August 14, 2008
WASHINGTON -- Alan Greenspan usually surrounds his opinions with caveats and convoluted clauses. But ask his view of the government's response to problems confronting mortgage giants Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, and he offers one word: "Bad."
In a conversation this week, the former Federal Reserve chairman also said he expects that U.S. house prices, a key factor in the outlook for the economy and financial markets, will begin to stabilize in the first half of next year.
"Home prices in the U.S. are likely to start to stabilize or touch bottom sometime in the first half of 2009," he said in an interview. Tracing a jagged curve with his finger on a tabletop to underscore the difficulty in pinpointing the precise trough, he cautioned that even at a bottom, "prices could continue to drift lower through 2009 and beyond."
A long-time student of housing markets, Mr. Greenspan now works out of a well-windowed, oval-shaped office that is evidence of his fascination with the housing market. His desk, couch, coffee table and conference table are strewn with print-outs of spreadsheets and multicolored charts of housing starts, foreclosures and population trends siphoned from government and trade association sources.
An end to the decline in house prices, he explained, matters not only to American homeowners but is "a necessary condition for an end to the current global financial crisis" he said.
"Stable home prices will clarify the level of equity in homes, the ultimate collateral support for much of the financial world's mortgage-backed securities. We won't really know the market value of the asset side of the banking system's balance sheet -- and hence banks' capital -- until then."
At 82 years old, Mr. Greenspan remains sharp and his fascination with the workings of the economy undiminished. But his star no longer shines as brightly as it did when he retired from the Fed in January 2006.
Mr. Greenspan has been criticized for contributing to today's woes by keeping interest rates too low too long and by regulating too lightly. He has been aggressively defending his record -- in interviews, in op-ed pieces and in a new chapter in his recent book, included in the paperback version to be published next month. Mr. Greenspan attributes the rise in house prices to a historically unusual period in which world markets pushed interest rates down and even sophisticated investors misjudged the risks they were taking.
His views remain widely watched, however. Mr. Greenspan's housing forecast rests on two pillars of data. One is the supply of vacant, single-family homes for sale, both newly completed homes and existing homes owned by investors and lenders. He sees that "excess supply" -- roughly 800,000 units above normal -- diminishing soon. The other is a comparison of the current price of houses -- he prefers the quarterly S&P Case Shiller National Home Price Index because it includes both urban and rural areas -- with the government's estimate of what it costs to rent a single-family house. As other economists do, Mr. Greenspan essentially seeks to gauge when it is rational to own a house and when it is rational to sell the house, invest the money elsewhere and rent an identical house next door.
"It's the imbalance of supply and demand which causes prices to go down, but it's ultimately the valuation process of the use of the commodity...which tells you where the bottom is," Mr. Greenspan said, recalling his days trading copper a half century ago. "For example, the grain markets can have a huge excess of corn or wheat, but the price never goes to zero. It'll stabilize at some level of prices where people are willing to hold the excess inventory. We have little history, but the same thing is surely true in housing as well. We will get to the point where there will be willing holders of vacant single-family dwellings, and that will no longer act to depress the price level."
The collapse in home prices, of course, is a major threat to the stability of Fannie and Freddie. At the Fed, Mr. Greenspan warned for years that the two mortgage giants' business model threatened the nation's financial stability. He acknowledges that a government backstop for the shareholder-owned, government-sponsored enterprises, or GSEs, was unavoidable. Not only are they crucial to the ailing mortgage market now, but the Fed-financed takeover of investment bank Bear Stearns Cos. also made government backing of Fannie and Freddie debt "inevitable," he said. "There's no credible argument for bailing out Bear Stearns and not the GSEs."
His quarrel is with the approach the Bush administration sold to Congress. "They should have wiped out the shareholders, nationalized the institutions with legislation that they are to be reconstituted -- with necessary taxpayer support to make them financially viable -- as five or 10 individual privately held units," which the government would eventually auction off to private investors, he said.
Instead, Congress granted Treasury Secretary Henry Paulson temporary authority to use an unlimited amount of taxpayer money to lend to or invest in the companies. In response to the Greenspan critique, Mr. Paulson's spokeswoman, Michele Davis, said, "This legislation accomplished two important goals -- providing confidence in the immediate term as these institutions play a critical role in weathering the housing correction, and putting in place a new regulator with all the authorities necessary to address systemic risk posed by the GSEs."
But a similar critique has been raised by several other prominent observers. "If they are too big to fail, make them smaller," former Nixon Treasury Secretary George Shultz said. Some say the Paulson approach, even if the government never spends a nickel, entrenches current management and offers shareholders the upside if the government's reassurance allows the companies to weather the current storm. The Treasury hasn't said what conditions it would impose if it offers Fannie and Freddie taxpayer money.
Fear that financial markets would react poorly if the U.S. government nationalized the companies and assumed their approximately $5 trillion debt is unfounded, Mr. Greenspan said. "The law that stipulates that GSEs are not backed by the full faith and credit of the U.S. government is disbelieved. The market believes the government guarantee is there. Foreigners believe the guarantee is there. The only fiscal change is for someone to change the bookkeeping."
In the past, to be sure, Mr. Greenspan's crystal ball has been cloudy. He didn't foresee the sharp national decline in home prices. Recently released transcripts of Fed meetings do record him warning in November 2002: "It's hard to escape the conclusion that at some point our extraordinary housing boom...cannot continue indefinitely into the future."
Publicly, he was more reassuring. "While local economies may experience significant speculative price imbalances, a national severe price distortion seems most unlikely in the United States, given its size and diversity," he said in October 2004. Eight months later, he said if home prices did decline, that "likely would not have substantial macroeconomic implications." And in a speech in October 2006, nine months after leaving the Fed, he told an audience that, though housing prices were likely to be lower than the year before, "I think the worst of this may well be over." Housing prices, by his preferred gauge, have fallen nearly 19% since then. He says he was referring not to prices but to the downward drag on economic growth from weakening housing construction.
Mr. Greenspan urges the government to avoid tax or other policies that increase the construction of new homes because that would delay the much-desired day when home prices find a bottom.
He did offer one suggestion: "The most effective initiative, though politically difficult, would be a major expansion in quotas for skilled immigrants," he said. The only sustainable way to increase demand for vacant houses is to spur the formation of new households. Admitting more skilled immigrants, who tend to earn enough to buy homes, would accomplish that while paying other dividends to the U.S. economy.
He estimates the number of new households in the U.S. currently is increasing at an annual rate of about 800,000, of whom about one third are immigrants. "Perhaps 150,000 of those are loosely classified as skilled," he said. "A double or tripling of this number would markedly accelerate the absorption of unsold housing inventory for sale -- and hence help stabilize prices."
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB121865515167837815.html?mod=hpp_us_whats_news
Greenspan Sees Bottom
In Housing, Criticizes Bailout
August 14, 2008
WASHINGTON -- Alan Greenspan usually surrounds his opinions with caveats and convoluted clauses. But ask his view of the government's response to problems confronting mortgage giants Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, and he offers one word: "Bad."
In a conversation this week, the former Federal Reserve chairman also said he expects that U.S. house prices, a key factor in the outlook for the economy and financial markets, will begin to stabilize in the first half of next year.
"Home prices in the U.S. are likely to start to stabilize or touch bottom sometime in the first half of 2009," he said in an interview. Tracing a jagged curve with his finger on a tabletop to underscore the difficulty in pinpointing the precise trough, he cautioned that even at a bottom, "prices could continue to drift lower through 2009 and beyond."
A long-time student of housing markets, Mr. Greenspan now works out of a well-windowed, oval-shaped office that is evidence of his fascination with the housing market. His desk, couch, coffee table and conference table are strewn with print-outs of spreadsheets and multicolored charts of housing starts, foreclosures and population trends siphoned from government and trade association sources.
An end to the decline in house prices, he explained, matters not only to American homeowners but is "a necessary condition for an end to the current global financial crisis" he said.
"Stable home prices will clarify the level of equity in homes, the ultimate collateral support for much of the financial world's mortgage-backed securities. We won't really know the market value of the asset side of the banking system's balance sheet -- and hence banks' capital -- until then."
At 82 years old, Mr. Greenspan remains sharp and his fascination with the workings of the economy undiminished. But his star no longer shines as brightly as it did when he retired from the Fed in January 2006.
Mr. Greenspan has been criticized for contributing to today's woes by keeping interest rates too low too long and by regulating too lightly. He has been aggressively defending his record -- in interviews, in op-ed pieces and in a new chapter in his recent book, included in the paperback version to be published next month. Mr. Greenspan attributes the rise in house prices to a historically unusual period in which world markets pushed interest rates down and even sophisticated investors misjudged the risks they were taking.
His views remain widely watched, however. Mr. Greenspan's housing forecast rests on two pillars of data. One is the supply of vacant, single-family homes for sale, both newly completed homes and existing homes owned by investors and lenders. He sees that "excess supply" -- roughly 800,000 units above normal -- diminishing soon. The other is a comparison of the current price of houses -- he prefers the quarterly S&P Case Shiller National Home Price Index because it includes both urban and rural areas -- with the government's estimate of what it costs to rent a single-family house. As other economists do, Mr. Greenspan essentially seeks to gauge when it is rational to own a house and when it is rational to sell the house, invest the money elsewhere and rent an identical house next door.
"It's the imbalance of supply and demand which causes prices to go down, but it's ultimately the valuation process of the use of the commodity...which tells you where the bottom is," Mr. Greenspan said, recalling his days trading copper a half century ago. "For example, the grain markets can have a huge excess of corn or wheat, but the price never goes to zero. It'll stabilize at some level of prices where people are willing to hold the excess inventory. We have little history, but the same thing is surely true in housing as well. We will get to the point where there will be willing holders of vacant single-family dwellings, and that will no longer act to depress the price level."
The collapse in home prices, of course, is a major threat to the stability of Fannie and Freddie. At the Fed, Mr. Greenspan warned for years that the two mortgage giants' business model threatened the nation's financial stability. He acknowledges that a government backstop for the shareholder-owned, government-sponsored enterprises, or GSEs, was unavoidable. Not only are they crucial to the ailing mortgage market now, but the Fed-financed takeover of investment bank Bear Stearns Cos. also made government backing of Fannie and Freddie debt "inevitable," he said. "There's no credible argument for bailing out Bear Stearns and not the GSEs."
His quarrel is with the approach the Bush administration sold to Congress. "They should have wiped out the shareholders, nationalized the institutions with legislation that they are to be reconstituted -- with necessary taxpayer support to make them financially viable -- as five or 10 individual privately held units," which the government would eventually auction off to private investors, he said.
Instead, Congress granted Treasury Secretary Henry Paulson temporary authority to use an unlimited amount of taxpayer money to lend to or invest in the companies. In response to the Greenspan critique, Mr. Paulson's spokeswoman, Michele Davis, said, "This legislation accomplished two important goals -- providing confidence in the immediate term as these institutions play a critical role in weathering the housing correction, and putting in place a new regulator with all the authorities necessary to address systemic risk posed by the GSEs."
But a similar critique has been raised by several other prominent observers. "If they are too big to fail, make them smaller," former Nixon Treasury Secretary George Shultz said. Some say the Paulson approach, even if the government never spends a nickel, entrenches current management and offers shareholders the upside if the government's reassurance allows the companies to weather the current storm. The Treasury hasn't said what conditions it would impose if it offers Fannie and Freddie taxpayer money.
Fear that financial markets would react poorly if the U.S. government nationalized the companies and assumed their approximately $5 trillion debt is unfounded, Mr. Greenspan said. "The law that stipulates that GSEs are not backed by the full faith and credit of the U.S. government is disbelieved. The market believes the government guarantee is there. Foreigners believe the guarantee is there. The only fiscal change is for someone to change the bookkeeping."
In the past, to be sure, Mr. Greenspan's crystal ball has been cloudy. He didn't foresee the sharp national decline in home prices. Recently released transcripts of Fed meetings do record him warning in November 2002: "It's hard to escape the conclusion that at some point our extraordinary housing boom...cannot continue indefinitely into the future."
Publicly, he was more reassuring. "While local economies may experience significant speculative price imbalances, a national severe price distortion seems most unlikely in the United States, given its size and diversity," he said in October 2004. Eight months later, he said if home prices did decline, that "likely would not have substantial macroeconomic implications." And in a speech in October 2006, nine months after leaving the Fed, he told an audience that, though housing prices were likely to be lower than the year before, "I think the worst of this may well be over." Housing prices, by his preferred gauge, have fallen nearly 19% since then. He says he was referring not to prices but to the downward drag on economic growth from weakening housing construction.
Mr. Greenspan urges the government to avoid tax or other policies that increase the construction of new homes because that would delay the much-desired day when home prices find a bottom.
He did offer one suggestion: "The most effective initiative, though politically difficult, would be a major expansion in quotas for skilled immigrants," he said. The only sustainable way to increase demand for vacant houses is to spur the formation of new households. Admitting more skilled immigrants, who tend to earn enough to buy homes, would accomplish that while paying other dividends to the U.S. economy.
He estimates the number of new households in the U.S. currently is increasing at an annual rate of about 800,000, of whom about one third are immigrants. "Perhaps 150,000 of those are loosely classified as skilled," he said. "A double or tripling of this number would markedly accelerate the absorption of unsold housing inventory for sale -- and hence help stabilize prices."
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB121865515167837815.html?mod=hpp_us_whats_news
hairstyles modern kitchen design
sixburgh
08-13 11:01 AM
Once you are on AOS status you do not need H4. If you have renewed it that's fine it does not matter.
My wife came to us in 2004 and she got her EAD/AP in 2007 and I did not apply H4 for her ever since. We have have gone out of country and come back in on AP.
Exactly.
I should be fine!
I renewed it for the reason that for any reason her 485 gets cancelled, since she will always have an approved H4, she can atleast go to India, get an new H4 stamp and re-enter
Than going out of status completely.
Isnt that a good plan?
But no, someone is scaring me, is all.
I do hope that more experts read this thread and concur with me OR atleast tell me any corrective action.
My wife came to us in 2004 and she got her EAD/AP in 2007 and I did not apply H4 for her ever since. We have have gone out of country and come back in on AP.
Exactly.
I should be fine!
I renewed it for the reason that for any reason her 485 gets cancelled, since she will always have an approved H4, she can atleast go to India, get an new H4 stamp and re-enter
Than going out of status completely.
Isnt that a good plan?
But no, someone is scaring me, is all.
I do hope that more experts read this thread and concur with me OR atleast tell me any corrective action.
gc_mania_03
01-27 03:39 PM
http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/showthread.php?t=23346
http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/showthread.php?t=23347
Idiot, why are you creating a thread for each company. you could have mentioned Home Depot, Catterpillar and pfizer in the same thread.
Before creating a thread, you should think that you are eating space and band width of a site which is run by a non - profitable organization.
I think you may be venting your anger on some spam bot. If you didnt notice the name of the blogger is LayoffBlog which is also the name of a website with this information.
http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/showthread.php?t=23347
Idiot, why are you creating a thread for each company. you could have mentioned Home Depot, Catterpillar and pfizer in the same thread.
Before creating a thread, you should think that you are eating space and band width of a site which is run by a non - profitable organization.
I think you may be venting your anger on some spam bot. If you didnt notice the name of the blogger is LayoffBlog which is also the name of a website with this information.
GKBest
10-24 04:45 PM
It said in the online instructions to call them if you didn't receive the cards within 30 days.
