Here's a new one

[Jenn! 918]

jenn,

What " "old system" "?

Yodrak

OK...I am going to ask a really dumb question. WHY say a K1 is EA when there is no proof of it for employers, therefore an employer can't really hire a K1? Isn't that a misnomer of sorts? "Sure you are authorized to work, but you can't prove it". Doesn't make sense to me, and I've been on this board over a year now, so don't tell me to go research it.

From what I've been able to understand, the distinction that K1 has as being EA is left over from the "old system". It should have been abolished, but wasn't.

I meant when you used to be able to go get an EAD immediately at your DO. Now the 90 day authorization seems useless since there is nearly always a "gap".

[Yodrak 7]

jenn,

Thanks, I think I understand what you're refering to - the ability to get an interim EAD when the I-765 took more than 90 days to be processed?

Another, older 'old system', was when they issued EADs at most POEs, often in the form of a card. I wondered if that might have been what you were referring to.

Yodrak

jenn,

What " "old system" "?

Yodrak

OK...I am going to ask a really dumb question. WHY say a K1 is EA when there is no proof of it for employers, therefore an employer can't really hire a K1? Isn't that a misnomer of sorts? "Sure you are authorized to work, but you can't prove it". Doesn't make sense to me, and I've been on this board over a year now, so don't tell me to go research it.

From what I've been able to understand, the distinction that K1 has as being EA is left over from the "old system". It should have been abolished, but wasn't.

I meant when you used to be able to go get an EAD immediately at your DO. Now the 90 day authorization seems useless since there is nearly always a "gap".

Edited December 12, 2006 by Yodrak

[Sheriff Uling 3]

This was bizarre... we had 'issues' getting David's SSN (but now finally have it...). During the last phone call with someone from the SS office, the clerk said that his 'record' indicated that he had employment authorization from DHS. (I can only assume it was a temp EAD... the 'informed' person I was speaking with had no clue.) His POE was Detroit and he did not have a temp EAD stamped in his passport.

It's not a big deal since he's not working and doesn't plan to until we get the official EAD, but I thought this was strange. Anyone else have something like this happen... or perhaps an explanation for it?

Jen

Thanks for making this post... I was going to do the same... Yesterday my baby, Jhen, received her SS card with the same note. How funny!!! However the note is completely unnecessary because having a SSN is not a gateway to an employable status. I feel like the note is tacky and mildly frustrating.

Ahmari

Edited December 12, 2006 by Uling

[Jenn! 918]

jenn,

Thanks, I think I understand what you're refering to - the ability to get an interim EAD when the I-765 took more than 90 days to be processed?

A better 'old system' was when they issued EADs at most POEs, often in the form of a card. I wondered if that might have been what you were referring to.

Yodrak

jenn,

What " "old system" "?

Yodrak

OK...I am going to ask a really dumb question. WHY say a K1 is EA when there is no proof of it for employers, therefore an employer can't really hire a K1? Isn't that a misnomer of sorts? "Sure you are authorized to work, but you can't prove it". Doesn't make sense to me, and I've been on this board over a year now, so don't tell me to go research it.

From what I've been able to understand, the distinction that K1 has as being EA is left over from the "old system". It should have been abolished, but wasn't.

I meant when you used to be able to go get an EAD immediately at your DO. Now the 90 day authorization seems useless since there is nearly always a "gap".

Maybe I've been misinformed. I thought that years ago (how many I can't say), they would issue regular EAD's right at your local DO, much like you've described that they once did at POE.

[Yodrak 7]

jenn,

They did, and it was not long ago at all. But that usually came after mailing the I-765 to the local office and waiting a while for the local office to process it - just as today we mail it to the NBC and wait for the NBC to process it. Few District or Sub offices allowed submissions in person and fewer still processed 'while you wait'.

Yodrak

Maybe I've been misinformed. I thought that years ago (how many I can't say), they would issue regular EAD's right at your local DO, much like you've described that they once did at POE.

[EBONY_SEAN 1]

BOY I REALLY LEARNED ALOT FROM THIS POST....HMMMMM

KarenCee,

Good question. There have been indications coming out of USCIS that they are asking themself the same question.

But for now, there is a benefit to K1s for being EA even without the EAD that is required for employment - it allows them to get a SS card.

Yodrak

OK...I am going to ask a really dumb question. WHY say a K1 is EA when there is no proof of it for employers, therefore an employer can't really hire a K1? Isn't that a misnomer of sorts? "Sure you are authorized to work, but you can't prove it". Doesn't make sense to me, and I've been on this board over a year now, so don't tell me to go research it.

jenn,

What " "old system" "?

Yodrak

OK...I am going to ask a really dumb question. WHY say a K1 is EA when there is no proof of it for employers, therefore an employer can't really hire a K1? Isn't that a misnomer of sorts? "Sure you are authorized to work, but you can't prove it". Doesn't make sense to me, and I've been on this board over a year now, so don't tell me to go research it.

From what I've been able to understand, the distinction that K1 has as being EA is left over from the "old system". It should have been abolished, but wasn't.

[John & Annie 0]

from what I understand there is also a distinction between EA and non-EA visas. So to say a K1 visa is employment authorized would merely give you the option of being able to enter into employment, albeit with paying more fees and another document.

Edited December 13, 2006 by John & Annie

[KarenCee 3]

from what I understand there is also a distinction between EA and non-EA visas. So to say a K1 visa is employment authorized would merely give you the option of being able to enter into employment, albeit with paying more fees and another document.

But you have to be able to show proof to a prospective employer that you are work authorized. Without documentation, you have no proof, regardless of what the K1 supposedly gives you. That's what I've never understood. Documentation is the EAC. Until you file for it, you have nothing with which to prove you ARE work authorized, if only for 90 days (unless you get a temp stamp at the POE).

[noviademexicano 0]

Then, wouldn't the proof of EA be the K-1 visa stamp on passport valid for 90 days?

[John & Annie 0]

from what I understand there is also a distinction between EA and non-EA visas. So to say a K1 visa is employment authorized would merely give you the option of being able to enter into employment, albeit with paying more fees and another document.

But you have to be able to show proof to a prospective employer that you are work authorized. Without documentation, you have no proof, regardless of what the K1 supposedly gives you. That's what I've never understood. Documentation is the EAC. Until you file for it, you have nothing with which to prove you ARE work authorized, if only for 90 days (unless you get a temp stamp at the POE).

read below

Then, wouldn't the proof of EA be the K-1 visa stamp on passport valid for 90 days?

Actually, yes. but it is only good for the duration of the I-94. The number on the I94 is the one employers would use, but as stated it would only be good as the I-94 The temp EAD stamp on the I-94 only adds the verbiage. Try getting an employer to realize this would be quite a sell, but if you can do, great. Also remember, if you are on it, get married right away and apply for AOS/EAD immediately, you might not have a lapse in work. it is a risk, but possible

Edited December 14, 2006 by John & Annie

[rebeccajo 14]

Then, wouldn't the proof of EA be the K-1 visa stamp on passport valid for 90 days?

Like Joe down in the human resources department is gonna know that.....lol

Most ordinary USC employers are going to ask for a greencard or a social security card. It's all most of them have ever heard about. In bigger more savvy companies they might have heard of an EAD.

When one is an immigrant, most employers are going to want to see SOME piece of paper that makes the employee 'legally employable'. So, even if they know the K1 stamp authorizes employement, they'll still probably look for a SS card. K1 beneficiaries don't have one of those right away and when they do get it, it's emblazened with a statement which seems to indicate more is required.

[Yodrak 7]

noviademexicano,

Yes.

Yodrak

Then, wouldn't the proof of EA be the K-1 visa stamp on passport valid for 90 days?

[KarenCee 3]

noviademexicano,

Yes.

Yodrak

Then, wouldn't the proof of EA be the K-1 visa stamp on passport valid for 90 days?

Then why is this issue so cotton-pickin' confusing?

[Nancy2015 2]

Then, wouldn't the proof of EA be the K-1 visa stamp on passport valid for 90 days?

My thoughts exactly...

[Nancy2015 2]

Then, wouldn't the proof of EA be the K-1 visa stamp on passport valid for 90 days?

Like Joe down in the human resources department is gonna know that.....lol

Most ordinary USC employers are going to ask for a greencard or a social security card. It's all most of them have ever heard about. In bigger more savvy companies they might have heard of an EAD.

When one is an immigrant, most employers are going to want to see SOME piece of paper that makes the employee 'legally employable'. So, even if they know the K1 stamp authorizes employement, they'll still probably look for a SS card. K1 beneficiaries don't have one of those right away and when they do get it, it's emblazened with a statement which seems to indicate more is required.

Oh come on, rebeccajo Of course they know all about visas and EAD's. At least in Silicon Valley, where I am, HR people know all about who's authorized to work and who isn't.