Can't get paid, anyone had the same circumstance?

[spacebar]

WELL, I'm sure some of you have heard or dealt with a similar issue but I just wanna let loose some frustration and let the crap out of the bag hehee. Pardon my french, anyway. Not too long ago, USCIS sent MY wife and me a letter about a RFE regarding some info saying USCIS wouldn't process our I-485 or I-765 until they received it the evidence required. Fortunately almost 3 weeks later, we have sent them all the information the speediest way possible. So, my wife has been teaching for almost 6 weeks now and hasn't gotten paid yet because the lousy employer can't use the SS card because it's imprinted with those evil little words saying not authorized to work without approval ..... blah blah. We are entrusting our faith that the woman will pay her which another person would probably say , don't do it!!!

 

So, here we are waiting for our case pending and processing has resumed .... on our I-485 and I - 765 hoping she can receive her EAD. I'm just so frustrated that the US government makes people go through such a frigging hassle. In China, I didn't need to do so much other than sign a friggin application to teach English in China. I just can't understand why the hell it's so difficult to just send the EAD quickly.

 

Here's my suggestion to all for future reference, Those OF YOU who are planning on using a household member or Joint sponsor in their I-864. Make sure you include all the proof including their EMPLOYMENT LETTER ( SHOULD INCLUDE everything the government requires which is TITLE of position, Dates of employment: Start date, currently, hourly/salary rate, FULL time/ Part time, Hours per week, Prospects of future employment: Are you a good or bad worker' get the hint?' , Name of employer, and finally the name and title of person making the letter, and for more security you should tell your HR person or whoever is making the letter to address it to whom it may concern at USCIS gov blah blah. , PAYSTUBS, and their income taxes last 3 years, their I-864A , I864 notarized (probably better and safe than sorry). You don't wanna get the stupid RFEC Request for Evidence Crap. You have to wait longer and longer!!! At least I can pass along the info to those planning to later do it and don't wanna wait as long as I have.

 

Which isn't that long but I guess I'm just whining and hate waiting long!!!!!!

 

Anyway, if you've read this far!! Thanks and let me know what you all think!!

Edited June 12, 2008 by spacebar (see edit history)

[Randy W]

So, my wife has been teaching for almost 6 weeks now and hasn't gotten paid yet because the lousy employer can't use the SS card because it's imprinted with those evil little words saying not authorized to work without approval ..... blah blah. We are entrusting our faith that the woman will pay her which another person would probably say , don't do it!!!

 

So, here we are waiting for our case pending and processing has resumed .... on our I-485 and I - 765 hoping she can receive her EAD. I'm just so frustrated that the US government makes people go through such a frigging hassle. In China, I didn't need to do so much other than sign a friggin application to teach English in China. I just can't understand why the hell it's so difficult to just send the EAD quickly.

 

 

They are flat-out lying to you. You need to report them to the state authorities. There is nothing wrong with her SS card. My wife has been working for over 2 years with the same notation on the card.

 

The problem is with the employer, not the SS card, although they may be holding out to see the EAD card

You will not be able to remove the notation until she gets her green card.

Edited June 12, 2008 by Randy W (see edit history)

[david_dawei]

This is possibly the hottest USCIS potato around... Since the SS office first tried to clarify it's position relative to K1 work authorization in the 2000 memo, there is nothing but continued confusion and further misalignment to the regulations that USCIS follows;

 

I'll only make a few points in a subject which I decided a while ago to wash my hands of since the applicable agencies cannot resolve their differences.

 

DOS: The only POE which I know of which still will stamp a K1 as "work authorized" upon entry is JFK... Seems about 2 years ago on CFL, many got interested to arrive at that POE !! This was a 90 day authorization.

 

SS: SS says the I-94 is proof of K1 authorization to get a SS card, which is obviously required to work... They then issue a card with the evil words saying one needs DHS approval.

 

USCIS: USCIS says an EAD is required to work since the regulations say that. Actually, they step all over themselves by saying another non-immigration class (asylum) don't need EAD for work authorization.

 

SS: SS write-ups lump K1 and Asylum into the same class and says they are treated the same... not by USCIS...

 

In a USCIS Ombudsman review, they said they saw no reason that K1s needed EAD to work.

 

In a meeting between SS and CIS and lawyers, CIS admitted that it appeared K1 doesn't need EAD to work, although the regulations appear to require it.

 

So there you have it... the EAD "circle jerk"...

 

This can only be complete by referencing the I-9 for employers:

 

"if employees are authorized to work, but are unable to present the required document(s) within three business days, they must present a receipt for the application of [sic] the document(s) within three business days and the actual document(s) within ninety (90) days."

 

This suggests a hybrid approach; If the K1 doesn't have the EAD, but does have a receipt of having filed for EAD, then that is good enough [for 90 days].. since after 90 days they are supposed to get the EAD anyway.

[pkfops]

"So there you have it... the EAD "circle jerk"..."

 

I tend to disagree with that.

 

I believe it is more of a "cluster fuck"......

[dnoblett]

This is possibly the hottest USCIS potato around... Since the SS office first tried to clarify it's position relative to K1 work authorization in the 2000 memo, there is nothing but continued confusion and further misalignment to the regulations that USCIS follows;

 

I'll only make a few points in a subject which I decided a while ago to wash my hands of since the applicable agencies cannot resolve their differences.

 

DOS: The only POE which I know of which still will stamp a K1 as "work authorized" upon entry is JFK... Seems about 2 years ago on CFL, many got interested to arrive at that POE !! This was a 90 day authorization.

 

SS: SS says the I-94 is proof of K1 authorization to get a SS card, which is obviously required to work... They then issue a card with the evil words saying one needs DHS approval.

 

USCIS: USCIS says an EAD is required to work since the regulations say that. Actually, they step all over themselves by saying another non-immigration class (asylum) don't need EAD for work authorization.

 

SS: SS write-ups lump K1 and Asylum into the same class and says they are treated the same... not by USCIS...

 

In a USCIS Ombudsman review, they said they saw no reason that K1s needed EAD to work.

 

In a meeting between SS and CIS and lawyers, CIS admitted that it appeared K1 doesn't need EAD to work, although the regulations appear to require it.

 

So there you have it... the EAD "circle jerk"...

 

This can only be complete by referencing the I-9 for employers:

 

"if employees are authorized to work, but are unable to present the required document(s) within three business days, they must present a receipt for the application of [sic] the document(s) within three business days and the actual document(s) within ninety (90) days."

 

This suggests a hybrid approach; If the K1 doesn't have the EAD, but does have a receipt of having filed for EAD, then that is good enough [for 90 days].. since after 90 days they are supposed to get the EAD anyway.

My 2 cents on this.

 

K-1 is the only K-Visa that has "Work Auth" as part of the visa, the only logical reason I can think of is because the K-1 is here to marry, the others are not.

 

Here is my take, USCIS calls K-1 work auth so that SSA will issue the K-1 an SSN not to work, but to marry, another federal law (TITLE 42 CHAPTER 7 SUBCHAPTER IV Part D ¡ì 666) has as a requirement of issuance of a marriage license, that both persons applying for the license to have SSN.

 

K-1 is not a work visa, it is a fiancee visa for entry to the USA and marriage, K-1 is "Work Auth" primarily to be able to get the SSN, some states are strict in their interpretation of a federal law that requires persons applying for a "license" to have SSN, this can cause a problem with marriage license if only one person has SSN and the other (the K-1 holder) does not.

 

Several states are strict in their interpretation of: TITLE 42 CHAPTER 7 SUBCHAPTER IV Part D ¡ì 666

 

US code has this:

¡ì 666. Requirement of statutorily prescribed procedures to improve effectiveness of child support enforcement

 

(13) Recording of social security numbers in certain family matters.¡ª Procedures requiring that the social security number of¡ª

 

(A) any applicant for a professional license, driver¡¯s license, occupational license, recreational license, or marriage license be recorded on the application;

http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/html/usc...66----000-.html

[david_dawei]

This is possibly the hottest USCIS potato around... Since the SS office first tried to clarify it's position relative to K1 work authorization in the 2000 memo, there is nothing but continued confusion and further misalignment to the regulations that USCIS follows;

 

I'll only make a few points in a subject which I decided a while ago to wash my hands of since the applicable agencies cannot resolve their differences.

 

DOS: The only POE which I know of which still will stamp a K1 as "work authorized" upon entry is JFK... Seems about 2 years ago on CFL, many got interested to arrive at that POE !! This was a 90 day authorization.

 

SS: SS says the I-94 is proof of K1 authorization to get a SS card, which is obviously required to work... They then issue a card with the evil words saying one needs DHS approval.

 

USCIS: USCIS says an EAD is required to work since the regulations say that. Actually, they step all over themselves by saying another non-immigration class (asylum) don't need EAD for work authorization.

 

SS: SS write-ups lump K1 and Asylum into the same class and says they are treated the same... not by USCIS...

 

In a USCIS Ombudsman review, they said they saw no reason that K1s needed EAD to work.

 

In a meeting between SS and CIS and lawyers, CIS admitted that it appeared K1 doesn't need EAD to work, although the regulations appear to require it.

 

So there you have it... the EAD "circle jerk"...

 

This can only be complete by referencing the I-9 for employers:

 

"if employees are authorized to work, but are unable to present the required document(s) within three business days, they must present a receipt for the application of [sic] the document(s) within three business days and the actual document(s) within ninety (90) days."

 

This suggests a hybrid approach; If the K1 doesn't have the EAD, but does have a receipt of having filed for EAD, then that is good enough [for 90 days].. since after 90 days they are supposed to get the EAD anyway.

My 2 cents on this.

 

K-1 is the only K-Visa that has "Work Auth" as part of the visa, the only logical reason I can think of is because the K-1 is here to marry, the others are not.

 

Here is my take, USCIS calls K-1 work auth so that SSA will issue the K-1 an SSN not to work, but to marry, another federal law (TITLE 42 CHAPTER 7 SUBCHAPTER IV Part D ¡ì 666) has as a requirement of issuance of a marriage license, that both persons applying for the license to have SSN.

 

K-1 is not a work visa, it is a fiancee visa for entry to the USA and marriage, K-1 is "Work Auth" primarily to be able to get the SSN, some states are strict in their interpretation of a federal law that requires persons applying for a "license" to have SSN, this can cause a problem with marriage license if only one person has SSN and the other (the K-1 holder) does not.

 

Several states are strict in their interpretation of: TITLE 42 CHAPTER 7 SUBCHAPTER IV Part D ¡ì 666

 

US code has this:

¡ì 666. Requirement of statutorily prescribed procedures to improve effectiveness of child support enforcement

 

(13) Recording of social security numbers in certain family matters.¡ª Procedures requiring that the social security number of¡ª

 

(A) any applicant for a professional license, driver¡¯s license, occupational license, recreational license, or marriage license be recorded on the application;

http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/html/usc...66----000-.html

I follow but it's ignoring the regulatory side of "non-immigrant" visa holders... other non-immigrant visas are work authorized (ie: the ones that have immigration intent!!), but somehow the K-1 has slipped inbetween the non-immigrant/immigrant divide...

 

Also ignores that the audits and eventual admission by CIS that K1 was probably lost in the shuttle and never dealt with correctly from the regulatory side.

 

In true fashion, after admission comes no action... In a word: Gov'ment.

[spacebar]

Thank you david and everyone else for the comments!!! I am very much thankful for the replies and support of everyone. I guess this is the price to pay if you make a mistake in the initial process of filing. I probably should have been more careful and more relentless to gather my initial proof and evidence to avoid this RFE. It's ok b/c what doesn't kill us only makes us stronger.

Anyhow, I scheduled an INFO Pass appointment with USCIS in Chicago and will be speaking with some yahoo at the local office and see whether they can help me.

Hopefully I can try getting some type of proof in a letter statement or at least have the USCIS representative call the president of the school my wife is teaching at to show proof. It's a shame that the school insists on her providing proof in the means of the EAD or the green card. They really don't want to pay her that soon and are making her wait. Anyhow, I'll keep everyone posted and let you all know whether INFO pass helps us so future couples are aware of what happens in these types of situations!!

 

Thanks everyone for the extremely helpful advice and information!!!!

 

This is possibly the hottest USCIS potato around... Since the SS office first tried to clarify it's position relative to K1 work authorization in the 2000 memo, there is nothing but continued confusion and further misalignment to the regulations that USCIS follows;

 

I'll only make a few points in a subject which I decided a while ago to wash my hands of since the applicable agencies cannot resolve their differences.

 

DOS: The only POE which I know of which still will stamp a K1 as "work authorized" upon entry is JFK... Seems about 2 years ago on CFL, many got interested to arrive at that POE !! This was a 90 day authorization.

 

SS: SS says the I-94 is proof of K1 authorization to get a SS card, which is obviously required to work... They then issue a card with the evil words saying one needs DHS approval.

 

USCIS: USCIS says an EAD is required to work since the regulations say that. Actually, they step all over themselves by saying another non-immigration class (asylum) don't need EAD for work authorization.

 

SS: SS write-ups lump K1 and Asylum into the same class and says they are treated the same... not by USCIS...

 

In a USCIS Ombudsman review, they said they saw no reason that K1s needed EAD to work.

 

In a meeting between SS and CIS and lawyers, CIS admitted that it appeared K1 doesn't need EAD to work, although the regulations appear to require it.

 

So there you have it... the EAD "circle jerk"...

 

This can only be complete by referencing the I-9 for employers:

 

"if employees are authorized to work, but are unable to present the required document(s) within three business days, they must present a receipt for the application of [sic] the document(s) within three business days and the actual document(s) within ninety (90) days."

 

This suggests a hybrid approach; If the K1 doesn't have the EAD, but does have a receipt of having filed for EAD, then that is good enough [for 90 days].. since after 90 days they are supposed to get the EAD anyway.

My 2 cents on this.

 

K-1 is the only K-Visa that has "Work Auth" as part of the visa, the only logical reason I can think of is because the K-1 is here to marry, the others are not.

 

Here is my take, USCIS calls K-1 work auth so that SSA will issue the K-1 an SSN not to work, but to marry, another federal law (TITLE 42 CHAPTER 7 SUBCHAPTER IV Part D ?666) has as a requirement of issuance of a marriage license, that both persons applying for the license to have SSN.

 

K-1 is not a work visa, it is a fiancee visa for entry to the USA and marriage, K-1 is "Work Auth" primarily to be able to get the SSN, some states are strict in their interpretation of a federal law that requires persons applying for a "license" to have SSN, this can cause a problem with marriage license if only one person has SSN and the other (the K-1 holder) does not.

 

Several states are strict in their interpretation of: TITLE 42 CHAPTER 7 SUBCHAPTER IV Part D ?666

 

US code has this:

?666. Requirement of statutorily prescribed procedures to improve effectiveness of child support enforcement

 

(13) Recording of social security numbers in certain family matters.¡ª Procedures requiring that the social security number of¡ª

 

(A) any applicant for a professional license, driver¡¯s license, occupational license, recreational license, or marriage license be recorded on the application;

http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/html/usc...66----000-.html

I follow but it's ignoring the regulatory side of "non-immigrant" visa holders... other non-immigrant visas are work authorized (ie: the ones that have immigration intent!!), but somehow the K-1 has slipped inbetween the non-immigrant/immigrant divide...

 

Also ignores that the audits and eventual admission by CIS that K1 was probably lost in the shuttle and never dealt with correctly from the regulatory side.

 

In true fashion, after admission comes no action... In a word: Gov'ment.

Edited June 16, 2008 by spacebar (see edit history)

[spacebar]

I totally agree with your point Randy and I probably should report them but the office may take a huge offense to that and I don't want to ruin her chances of teaching experience in the states. So, I'm gonna have to take it in the A-hole and wait patiently until we can provide some sort of proof.

Thank you anyways, I had a feeling that she didn't need the EAD to work but these employers can be a handful and very strict regarding proof. I guess it all depends the type of person you meet. Some can be very nice and others can be downright A-holes#%$#$. haha

Pardon my french hehehe.

 

So, my wife has been teaching for almost 6 weeks now and hasn't gotten paid yet because the lousy employer can't use the SS card because it's imprinted with those evil little words saying not authorized to work without approval ..... blah blah. We are entrusting our faith that the woman will pay her which another person would probably say , don't do it!!!

 

So, here we are waiting for our case pending and processing has resumed .... on our I-485 and I - 765 hoping she can receive her EAD. I'm just so frustrated that the US government makes people go through such a frigging hassle. In China, I didn't need to do so much other than sign a friggin application to teach English in China. I just can't understand why the hell it's so difficult to just send the EAD quickly.

 

 

They are flat-out lying to you. You need to report them to the state authorities. There is nothing wrong with her SS card. My wife has been working for over 2 years with the same notation on the card.

 

The problem is with the employer, not the SS card, although they may be holding out to see the EAD card

You will not be able to remove the notation until she gets her green card.

[warpedbored]

One can't blame employers for being cautious. In their shoes I wouldn't hire an alien unless they at least had an EAD. Even though the K-1 is supposed to be work authorized that authorization is only good for 90 days, it is expensive to train a new employee. If for some reason they couldn't show proof of being eligible for work after that 90 days I would have to let them go. When you brought your wife over here on the K-1 visa you filled out an I-134 affidavit of support that says you or your co-sponsor are responsible to make sure she doesn't become a burden on the state. You were required to show adequate income that she wouldn't need to work in order to make ends meet. I presume you have filed AOS which includes the more binding I-864 which by signing you agree to the same stipulations. If she has been here longer than the 90 window of employment eligibility you are also taking a big risk by her working without work authorization. If caught she could be denied AOS, deported and banned from re-entry to the USA. I sympathize with you but we all know the wheels of the immigration process turn slow.

[AmyAndDoug]

You guys just got me really confused... The "not for employed" on SS, is that for K-1 or also for K-3? Cuz according to the paper I got when I went to picked up the visa in GUZ, it says to go get the SS card as soon as I get in and it should be able to let me work. I've lived in the U.S. before and have a SS card that says "not valid for employment" cuz i was on student visa before. Now that I'm back, I'm hoping to go update my SS card so that it doesn't say "not for employment". Am I misunderstanding it or will that be the case? @_@

[Randy W]

"not valid for employment without DHS authorization" is the specific wording. Not valid for employment should be changed - get a new card with your present documentation

[dnoblett]

"not valid for employment without DHS authorization" is the specific wording. Not valid for employment should be changed - get a new card with your present documentation

Correct that is the wording for all NON-Immigrant K-Visa holders until they have green-card. After getting green-card you should visit SSA and get the card replaced with one without the notation.

 

Having one without the notation is useful in several situations like:

 

For example.

• Renewing a driver's license. (Card with no notation and ID, gets a DL with longer expiration date in most states)
  
• Continued employment when removing conditions. (I-9 used by employer indicates no DHS work auth needed to be shown like a green-card, if SSA card has no notation, and a photo ID is provided like State ID)
  

[AmyAndDoug]

"not valid for employment without DHS authorization" is the specific wording. Not valid for employment should be changed - get a new card with your present documentation

Correct that is the wording for all NON-Immigrant K-Visa holders until they have green-card. After getting green-card you should visit SSA and get the card replaced with one without the notation.

 

Having one without the notation is useful in several situations like:

 

For example.

• Renewing a driver's license. (Card with no notation and ID, gets a DL with longer expiration date in most states)
  
• Continued employment when removing conditions. (I-9 used by employer indicates no DHS work auth needed to be shown like a green-card, if SSA card has no notation, and a photo ID is provided like State ID)
  

 

Hmm...DHS authorization is the EAD card? So I just bring my passport (with I-94 and visa inside), birth certificate, old SS card, and U.S. driver's license? And also fill out the change request form downloaded from the internet. That's all?

[Randy W]

"not valid for employment without DHS authorization" is the specific wording. Not valid for employment should be changed - get a new card with your present documentation

Correct that is the wording for all NON-Immigrant K-Visa holders until they have green-card. After getting green-card you should visit SSA and get the card replaced with one without the notation.

 

Having one without the notation is useful in several situations like:

 

For example.

• Renewing a driver's license. (Card with no notation and ID, gets a DL with longer expiration date in most states)
  
• Continued employment when removing conditions. (I-9 used by employer indicates no DHS work auth needed to be shown like a green-card, if SSA card has no notation, and a photo ID is provided like State ID)
  

 

Hmm...DHS authorization is the EAD card? So I just bring my passport (with I-94 and visa inside), birth certificate, old SS card, and U.S. driver's license? And also fill out the change request form downloaded from the internet. That's all?

 

 

That's it! Go as soon as you get your EAD card.

Edited June 18, 2008 by Randy W (see edit history)

[AmyAndDoug]

 

That's it! Go as soon as you get your EAD card.

what?! I have to wait til I get my EAD card? they won't update it for me without the EAD??? And it'll still say "not valid for employment without DHS authorization" even if I bring the EAD? @_@