February 25, 2000
|
Introduction to Intel Corporation Intel Corporation is engaged in the development, manufacturing, marketing and distribution of semiconductors for the computer and other industries (e.g., automotive, appliances, and home electronics). The Company's products include microprocessors, microcontrollers, memory chips, computer modules, motherboards, computer systems, networked and communication hardware and software products, personal conferencing software, and parallel supercomputers. Intel is considered to be the technological leader in the semiconductor industry. The Company employs approximately 70,000 individuals worldwide with revenues for fiscal year 1999 of $29 billion and a net profit of $8 billion. Intel is also involved in the emerging field of internet data services. In November 1999, Intel spun off its data services hosting business into a new wholly-owned subsidiary called Intel On-Line Services. Intel is also expanding its business through corporate acquisitions, primarily targeted at emerging internet-related technology. Intel's immigration transactions As a global company, Intel utilizes many visa classifications to facilitate the hiring, retention and global movement of our workforce. We sponsor individuals for H-1B, L-1, TN, H-3, and J-1 status. We have an approved blanket L-1 petition and are a Program Sponsor of our own J-1 Exchange Visitor Program (used for trainees and research scholars). Additionally, Intel sponsors the majority of our regular full-time U.S.-based hires for permanent residence. Before we hire a non-U.S. worker into a regular full-time position in the U.S. and consider sponsorship for permanent residence, we require our hiring managers to prove that they have rigorously - and unsuccessfully - recruited for a U.S. worker. This pre-employment screen is not required by law. It is Intel's own internal policy and demonstrates our commitment to abiding by both the letter and the spirit of the immigration laws. Intel's U.S. workforce currently numbers approximately 42,500. Less than 4 % are H-1B workers. Intel is not and does not anticipate becoming an H-1B dependent employer under the proposed H-1B regulations. Current INS issues and recommendations for improvement Following is a synopsis of the two procedural issues that we consider most pressing of those we are currently facing with INS/CSC: (1) processing delays; and (2) INS errors and cumbersome resolution process. Also included are some proposed solutions and improvements, focusing primarily on specific changes that may help to alleviate the immediate burden at INS. In the long-term, it is clear that a major overhaul of INS systems, procedures, and resource allocation will be required to rectify these problems. I. Processing delays at CSC
I-140 petitions are currently taking in excess of 13 months. Impact: Given the six-year limit on H-1B status, I-140/I-485 delays are causing significant problems for employers, who are faced with sending employees overseas for temporary assignments or terminating employment when the six-year limit is reached. This causes a serious disruption of our business, as well as a personal hardship on employees and their family members. I-485 delays also restrict our ability as an employer to move employees to new positions or sites, as our business needs change. H-1B petition processing slowdowns delay critical new hires beginning employment. With the rapid evolution of technology and growth in the hi-tech industry, critical product development and projects are delayed while awaiting H-1B approvals. Proposed solutions: Allow I-485 filing receipts to serve as travel and work authorization. This would immediately eliminate the need for EAD and Advance Parole renewals and would free INS resources. Although INS has issued interim travel regulations allowing current H or L nonimmigrants to travel without advance parole while their I-485 applications are pending, this regulation still requires nonimmigrant extension petitions. Allowing the I-485 filing receipt to serve as travel and work authorization would eliminate the need to extend the underlying H-1B or L-1 visa when the person has an adjustment case pending. Efficiency experts emphasize that the best way to save time and costs is to only touch a piece of paper once. INS touches the same paperwork several times by requiring NIV extensions while at the same time requiring similar paperwork for the immigrant side of the case. Such duplication simply consumes resources and adds to the constraints the Agency faces. By allowing a person to travel with an AOS receipt, we can save INS from having to adjudicate needless NIV extensions. Allow flexibility of job changes when processing of I-485 applications exceeds six months, as long as the new position remains within the same category/skillset of the original position. An employer could meet legitimate INS concerns about protecting the U.S. labor market by agreeing under oath that any change in the job would be the result of documented business necessity, and that any change would still be within the same skillset for which certification was granted. For example, this would allow us to move an employee from a Design Engineer position to a Product Engineer position without impact to the permanent residence process. The two positions require a virtually identical skillset and thus the labor market test remains valid, despite the fact that the duties of the position differ. Establish a centralized processing queue. Separating centralized processing cases into a different queue with dedicated centralized processing adjudicators will allow officers to process similar cases quickly and consistently. Although we understand that parameters must be established to ensure centralized processing companies do not receive a faster turnaround on petitions (particularly in light of the H-1B cap), the overall effect of a centralized processing queue would be increased efficiency and productivity, which would benefit all INS customers. In the long-term, develop and implement a system for on-line submission and approval of petitions. Additionally, allowing employers to pay INS filing fees by credit card would eliminate further paperwork and potential human error. II. INS errors and difficulty of resolution
It is nearly impossible to reach a "live" INS officer by phone to resolve
issues. Impact: Correcting errors on approval notices delays new hires beginning employment and restricts travel of our employees. If INS procedure is followed, obtaining a duplicate approval notice will take one year, during which time existing employees cannot travel outside of the U.S. and new employees cannot begin employment. Proposed solutions: Establish one point of contact for centralized processing and high volume customers. Designated INS officers to resolve issues for high volume customers will greatly reduce the burden on employers, and will also reduce the overall volume of inquiries and faxes to INS. The more efficiently INS serves its high volume customers - utilizing a "batch" approach to resolving customer issues - the more available time for serving other customers. Until INS errors are reduced, assign an adequate number of officers to resolve issues, emphasizing simple solutions. For example, INS officers should be encouraged to re-issue approval notices that have been lost, rather than directing employers to file yet another application, thus increasing the overall work in the queue at INS. Long-term, develop software incorporating functional logic to reduce human errors. For example, the system should not allow issuance of an approval notice with validity dates that are not possible, such as "9/1/99 to 9/1/98." The system should not allow requests for information to be issued which are clearly erroneous, such as a request for an LCA in connection to an H-3 or L-1 petition. Conclusion In order to maintain our leadership in the semiconductor industry and to grow our business in emerging areas, Intel Corporation must be able to recruit, hire, and retain non-U.S. workers for those positions that we cannot fill within the U.S. labor market. In this sense, we consider INS a business partner - a necessary and integral part of accomplishing the goals of our business. We are pleased to have the opportunity to participate in this forum and to share ideas and experiences. With the support of the California Congressional delegation, as well as INS officials, we hope that this will be the beginning of a turnaround of the outmoded and deteriorating adjudication function at INS.
|
Bay Area Congressional Delegation
Studies Chronic Delays at Immigration Agency Statement of Congresswoman Zoe Lofgren Statement of Jennifer Dineen-Ocon Statement of Sister Marilyn Lacey Statement of Jacob and Yetta Bromley Statement of Debra Jaramillo-Coker Statement of George Windsor Jones
|