When to apply for Work Permit

[geowrian 22,337]

17 minutes ago, Boiler said:

I thought that had always been the case, a job offer is in most cases linked to financial loss, after all financial loss without a remedy - a job offer - is not a solution.

 

Maybe one of those assumptions all this time and I had misunderstood.

I can't say what was actually required before, but I had always assumed it fell under severe financial loss as well.

The difference I saw was when they moved the expedite criteria to the USCIS policy manual (instead of just an info page on the main website), they added those footnotes to clarify.

 

Specifically the items in bold:

Quote

Severe financial loss to a company ^[1] or person, ^[2] provided that the need for urgent action is not the result of the petitioner’s or applicant’s failure: (1) to file the benefit request or the request to expedite in a reasonable time frame; or (2) to respond to any requests for additional evidence in a reasonably timely manner;

...

1. [^] Severe financial loss to a company means the company would be at risk of failing.

2. [^] The need to obtain employment authorization, standing alone, without evidence of other compelling factors, does not warrant expedited treatment.

Previously, a severe financial loss to the company was basically understood as "the company would lose a lot of money". Now it's meant to mean the company would be at risk of failure, which seems to be a higher burden to me.

Previously, a severe financial loss to a person was basically understood as "I would be at a large financial loss by nature of being unable to earn that income". Now, it seems like they want evidence of other factors than just being unable to work = not having income.

Edited February 20, 2020 by geowrian

[Boiler 45,520]

I am not sure if I have seen many cases which have used financial loss by a company and certainly that qualification takes it to a new level, so for practical purposes I doubt I will seen one again.

 

Perhaps I just read into the old verbiage for financial loss to the individual the added words, for the majority of applicants not having an income versus having one seems an easy option and easily provable.

[Ontarkie 14,225]

~~Moved to Working and Traveling, from K1 P&P - the OP is looking into what is needed for working after arriving.~~

[Orangesapples 1,954]

11 hours ago, Hannah12 said:

I was told that route takes way longer than the K1, that’s why we decided to hold off on the marriage and go the K-1 route. 
I suppose it is best for me to get over there and be with my fiancé as quick as possible, but hope it doesn’t jeopardise any work opportunities.

 

Thanks to everyone for your comments so far.

It certainly will jeopardize your work opportunities for any company, that's why it's best to cancel the petition, get married and apply for a spousal visa instead. 

[POA 178]

17 hours ago, Hannah12 said:

Unfortunately as the transfer is my choice, I was told I would have to arrange the visa myself.

I would honestly consider switching to CR1 so you can work as soon as you land to the US. It will be a longer wait and you the K1 is wasted but at least, you can transfer and work as soon as you get here.

[Lucky2Lucky 2,526]

If being together the fastest way possible is most important then k1 is the choice. If needing to work in the USA ASAP is most important then CR1 is the choice. There are positive and negatives to both visas and it’s important for all couples to do their research to see what their priorities are and which fits them best.

[Scandi 4,166]

The K-1 really isn't THAT much faster. And including the process to get the greencard, the K-1 is usually taking much longer than the CR-1 path.

[DaveAndAnastasia 2,092]

17 hours ago, Scandi said:

The K-1 really isn't THAT much faster. And including the process to get the greencard, the K-1 is usually taking much longer than the CR-1 path.

Very much depends on what processing times are at the time.

 

By current VJ averages, a CR-1 is taking over twice as long from petition to interview (which wouldn't be much if it were 90 days vs 180, but it's 223 vs 499). There are a lot of downsides to a K-1 vs a CR-1, but 9 months is not a short amount of time.

[Boiler 45,520]

The issue seems to be the gap between leaving the UK employer and starting with the US employer, seems that the US employer knows that this is not going to be soon no matter what route is taken. Well apart from the L1 which seems a no goer.

[Scandi 4,166]

1 hour ago, DaveAndAnastasia said:

Very much depends on what processing times are at the time.

 

By current VJ averages, a CR-1 is taking over twice as long from petition to interview (which wouldn't be much if it were 90 days vs 180, but it's 223 vs 499). There are a lot of downsides to a K-1 vs a CR-1, but 9 months is not a short amount of time.

True, not long ago it was a ~3 month difference.

[Hannah12 3]

20 hours ago, Boiler said:

The issue seems to be the gap between leaving the UK employer and starting with the US employer, seems that the US employer knows that this is not going to be soon no matter what route is taken. Well apart from the L1 which seems a no goer.

Yeah that’s right, I just don’t want to be annoying to the new employer or seem like I’m messing them around. Hopefully they are aware of the timings and stuff and are understanding....and I suppose being a lady of leisure in SC during hopefully mainly summer months, can’t be something to complain about too much!