Reality Check

[mox 298]

A lot of the posts I read in this section are of the "USCIS bashing" variety, which is cool I guess because god knows we all need to vent a little steam. But we as a group really need to be a little more focused on the source of our unhappiness, and especially where that source is not.

1) The problem is with the system and top level managers, policy makers, and to a large extent, congress.

2) Your average USCIS desk-jockey is *not* the problem. I read a lot of posts that say things like "what do you expect, all government employees are slackers," and other nonsense. Having been a government employee, and also having worked in the private sector, I can tell you that people are people, no matter who they work for. The problem with government employees is that they work under very rigid systems, and are simply not allowed to go the extra mile that someone in the private sector would be allowed to go. They do not hate you because you are marrying a foreigner or because you put every page of your packet into a plastic page protector. (it annoys them I'm sure, but I doubt they'll have it in for you.) They operate within the strictest of guidelines, and they don't like it any more than you. I'm sure they'd love for nothing more than to just rubber-stamp your petition and get rid of the backlog as soon as possible. So if there's any comfort to be taken, at least know that these people are professionals (yes, they make mistakes). If they were slacking, you'd be getting NOA2 about 10 minutes after NOA1. Great for you, not so great as pertains to immigration policy.

3) From a practical point of view, you should consider that at least some USCIS employees read this site. When they read a lot of these posts, they probably nod their heads sadly, and wish there was something they could do about the terrible system they have to work with. But when they read a post that lambastes them and their co-workers in the trenches for slacking off and not doing their job, it's just human nature to become angry and possibly start caring a little less about your situation. When you write a post that attacks these people as a group, you are potentially doing more harm to your cause than good.

4) When you call USCIS, you will run into rude people who have no business answering a phone. Unfortunately the government isn't very good about putting the people with the best customer service skills where they belong. So you will run into people who are probably otherwise very good at what they do, but have terrible customer service skills. And sometimes people are just having a bad day, or you're the 350th person to scream at them today, and they just don't feel like taking it anymore. Yes, it's their job to "take it," and you should rightly be angry with someone who treats you less than professionally. But these are individual actions, not some kind of secret handshake between all of them. The best defense in the face of rudeness is kindness and patience. One of the best ways to disarm a grumpy customer service rep is to set the tone first. Difficult when you're about ready to cry in frustration, I know. But it'll increase the likelihood of having a positive conversation. If they're still being abusive, ask to speak to a supervisor.

5) When a USCIS customer service rep gives you bad information, it is extremely unlikely that they are lying to you. They are relying on a system that we all know is broken. It's the old garbage-in, garbage-out syndrome. Some people seem to think they're the equivalent of the French guards in Monty Python's Holy Grail ("I told them we already got one! *snicker!*") but they have no reason to lie to you.

To summarize, the system is broken, and many of the leaders who should be fixing it aren't qualified to fix their own dinner, let alone an organization as large and complex as USCIS. But generalized attacks on the people who, through no fault of their own, have to work within that system, are misguided and potentially harmful to our cause.

That is all. Flame on!

[*JG* 2]

I've never bashed them. Besides some phone frustrations....and that due to the wait times....they were nothing but helpful to me. And, they obviously were speedy cause we went through in a relatively short time without any issues.

I see what you are saying, though. Same kind of disagreement I had over people who work fast food restuarants on here last week. It's almost always the system and not the individual employees.

I also can see where people are frustrated and take it out across the board. Some of it I think is their own making cause some people want to control the process and call entirely too much to check on things.

You are right. Nice post.

[~Nini~ 2]

Great post.

I entirely agree about a few things - I think most of our frustration about the process is in the waiting period, which has to do with the system itself. The employees at USCIS aren't collectively agreeing that they want to make us wait a significant amount of time for our petitions to go through. I think what really rubs us about this process, more than fast food and bad customer service, is that the process overall has a very significant impact on our lives, and as a result we're more liable to be twitchy and caustic at the person on the other end of the line.

I often wonder why USCIS customer service, separate from the attitudes of bad customer service in itself, is often riddled with people who don't know what they're talking about. Is it because they're receiving bad training? A poorly written manual? I don't agree that they're lying to us through their teeth on purpose - they're getting bad information which they're relaying to us. Really, I think that's where the system should be revamped. Without a great source like VJ, I wonder how anyone manages to get through the "misinformation" line.

Edited October 15, 2007 by Nini & Bee

[Krikit 1,164]

LOVED your post, moxcamel. Thank you. And just as there are many USCIS workers who are-and-are-not good at what they do, there are just as many VJ members who are-and-are-not rude or diplomatic. Such is life. Sure makes it interesting, though.

[Jasman0717 9]

Policy certainly isn't set by the worker bees.

[Bob & Kim 0]

I agree Moxcamel. The huge problem is with the system and their prioritization rules, lack of offering premium processing for K1/K3 folks, miscalculating the influx of petitions due to the fee increases, closing the Nebraska & Texas Service Centers for K1/K3 applicants, etc. "The problem is with the system and top level managers, policy makers, and to a large extent, congress." Totally agree and I see many of the folks on this forum are doing everything in their power to improve things in this manner...which many seem to think it won't help at all. I give them kudos though for trying. I would tend to agree with you that most of the adjudicators there have no control on what they are assigned to do a particular day, or had anything to do with the massive backlog they have, and probably are trying to do a good job at what they do. I make no excuses though for apathetic customer service reps.

Edited October 15, 2007 by Bob & Kim

[mox 298]

LOVED your post, moxcamel. Thank you. And just as there are many USCIS workers who are-and-are-not good at what they do, there are just as many VJ members who are-and-are-not rude or diplomatic. Such is life. Sure makes it interesting, though.

This is so true, Krikit. I'm certain that if petition times were running 30 days, there would still be VJ'ers complaining that it should be 2 weeks. Fortunately I think the majority of our membership are realistic in their expectations, and the frustration mostly comes from just wanting information. As one poster noted, for example, they just want to know if they can make plans for Christmas. Such a simple request really, and yet it would mean the world to this couple if they could have that simple question answered.

[weedebz 0]

My name is Debz and I am USCIS basher.

But it is nothing against the everyday workers...god knows we have all been bottom of the ladder. With me it's simple frustration, when I started all this I thought...mmm process averaging 6 months....We'll organise our wedding giving them 10months (well 9months 3 weeks). Now it looks like that isn't going to be possible even though most things booked. I know some people here going to say that was stupid but what can we do, we want to be together and we want the wedding we've dreamed of. The only thing we have done 'wrong' is fall for someone on opposite side of atlantic.

Thankfully we have back up plan, go there and have 'wedding' but not sign register so it's more of a promise ceremony than an actual wedding. Then I'll come back to scotland and wait rest of visa application out then go back and sign papers in courthouse. Biggest drawbacks of back-up plan..... firstly, convincing POE officer that I intend leaving US again. secondly, additional cost of an extra return flight.

Anyway...I agree that it is the SYSTEM that is flawed, common sense is all thats needed to envisage a dramatic increase in applications before a HUGE fee increase. Procedures and facilities should have been put in place prior to prevent delays rather than as a short sighted damage control 'we better at least look like we trying' excercise.

SEE YOU GOT ME ALL WORKED UP AND I'M VENTING AGAIN!!! *tries to think of calm blue oceans*

[Buck and Natalia 0]

I do not want to bash USCIS but, as a starting point, they could ask themselves why the Vermont Service Center is so much more efficient than the California Service Center.......... and then strive to make their other service centers more like Vermont. Is it management? Is it caseload per officer? Why are documents sitting 3 to 4 weeks in the California mail room but not in the Vermont mail room? Simply adopting procedures that work in other Service Centers would shave about 2 - 3 months off the total wait time for those of us not lucky enough to be processed in Vermont.

Just a thought.................

[mox 298]

I do not want to bash USCIS but, as a starting point, they could ask themselves why the Vermont Service Center is so much more efficient than the California Service Center.......... and then strive to make their other service centers more like Vermont. Is it management? Is it caseload per officer? Why are documents sitting 3 to 4 weeks in the California mail room but not in the Vermont mail room? Simply adopting procedures that work in other Service Centers would shave about 2 - 3 months off the total wait time for those of us not lucky enough to be processed in Vermont.

Just a thought.................

Well, again, this is a management level issue. The average desk jockey is not in a position to mandate these kinds of changes, even if they wanted to.

However, I will say that you're making a lot of assumptions. Unfortunately we don't know why VSC is so jammed up. It could be, as you say, that they are less efficient than CA, although I don't really buy that. I mean, that kind of inefficiency doesn't just happen overnight, which is almost exactly what happened. There *is* some evidence that they are severely understaffed, and maybe that's the problem. Or it could be something in the water. We just don't know. Which is why it's unconscionable for USCIS to keep everybody in the dark about the real reasons. I was in on the conference call the other day, and it was a complete smoke screen. They continue to refuse to release real answers, which is all we really want. But until they do, it's all speculation.

[Rob & Jin 0]

I do not want to bash USCIS but, as a starting point, they could ask themselves why the Vermont Service Center is so much more efficient than the California Service Center.......... and then strive to make their other service centers more like Vermont. Is it management? Is it caseload per officer? Why are documents sitting 3 to 4 weeks in the California mail room but not in the Vermont mail room? Simply adopting procedures that work in other Service Centers would shave about 2 - 3 months off the total wait time for those of us not lucky enough to be processed in Vermont.

Just a thought.................

Well, again, this is a management level issue. The average desk jockey is not in a position to mandate these kinds of changes, even if they wanted to.

However, I will say that you're making a lot of assumptions. Unfortunately we don't know why VSC is so jammed up. It could be, as you say, that they are less efficient than CA, although I don't really buy that. I mean, that kind of inefficiency doesn't just happen overnight, which is almost exactly what happened. There *is* some evidence that they are severely understaffed, and maybe that's the problem. Or it could be something in the water. We just don't know. Which is why it's unconscionable for USCIS to keep everybody in the dark about the real reasons. I was in on the conference call the other day, and it was a complete smoke screen. They continue to refuse to release real answers, which is all we really want. But until they do, it's all speculation.

I agree it is a leadership and system issue, and have said so in many posts, but was constanly ignored , just to watch the bashing of the workers go on, which is frankly boring and unproductive.

I also think everyone should remember something, this is not a "drive through visa" checks have to be done, people put incorrect or conflicting info in their petitions,show up to interviews with no evidence, etc slows the process down, effects timelines.

I know its frustrating we are in this process to, but there is no "right in law" that the govt will give this visa , and 9/11 and IMBRA have made it harder. Finally while people (as many posts reflect) continue to file imcomplete and incorrect petitions its never going to be speedy, people need to read the intructions (they are clear) before filing" its not rocket science".

Maybe when USCIS get their "new service line" going which will be paperless things will change, but thats years away. Remember something they have a job to protect the country, protect woman against sex slavery and indirectly the applicant against being suckered by a fraud. So give them a break

[Bob & Kim 0]

I do not want to bash USCIS but, as a starting point, they could ask themselves why the Vermont Service Center is so much more efficient than the California Service Center.......... and then strive to make their other service centers more like Vermont. Is it management? Is it caseload per officer? Why are documents sitting 3 to 4 weeks in the California mail room but not in the Vermont mail room? Simply adopting procedures that work in other Service Centers would shave about 2 - 3 months off the total wait time for those of us not lucky enough to be processed in Vermont.

Just a thought.................

Well, again, this is a management level issue. The average desk jockey is not in a position to mandate these kinds of changes, even if they wanted to.

However, I will say that you're making a lot of assumptions. Unfortunately we don't know why VSC is so jammed up. It could be, as you say, that they are less efficient than CA, although I don't really buy that. I mean, that kind of inefficiency doesn't just happen overnight, which is almost exactly what happened. There *is* some evidence that they are severely understaffed, and maybe that's the problem. Or it could be something in the water. We just don't know. Which is why it's unconscionable for USCIS to keep everybody in the dark about the real reasons. I was in on the conference call the other day, and it was a complete smoke screen. They continue to refuse to release real answers, which is all we really want. But until they do, it's all speculation.

I agree it is a leadership and system issue, and have said so in many posts, but was constanly ignored , just to watch the bashing of the workers go on, which is frankly boring and unproductive.

I also think everyone should remember something, this is not a "drive through visa" checks have to be done, people put incorrect or conflicting info in their petitions,show up to interviews with no evidence, etc slows the process down, effects timelines.

I know its frustrating we are in this process to, but there is no "right in law" that the govt will give this visa , and 9/11 and IMBRA have made it harder. Finally while people (as many posts reflect) continue to file imcomplete and incorrect petitions its never going to be speedy, people need to read the intructions (they are clear) before filing" its not rocket science".

Maybe when USCIS get their "new service line" going which will be paperless things will change, but thats years away. Remember something they have a job to protect the country, protect woman against sex slavery and indirectly the applicant against being suckered by a fraud. So give them a break

I agree with some of what you said but...

Are you saying they weren’t doing a good job in 2004 when they cranked out I-129F NOAs in 2-4weeks or as early as March/April when they were doing them in less than 30 days? Actually the process for these takes an adjudicator about 15 minutes or so each, same as before, but now taking 4 1/2 - 5mo or more now so I can see why people are angry. They have a right to be.

We have a right to Life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness and also fair and reasonable service from Government agencies.

Let us remember

The Preamble of the Declaration of Independence: We hold these truths to be self-evident that all people are endowed by their creator with certain inalienable rights. Among these are life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. It is not ok for them to destroy the love US citizens hold in their heart or crush their hopes, their dreams, their longings, and their aspirations. I understand if there is good reason to deny someone entry to the US based on sound evidence that they would be a danger to our society or the person petitioning would be a danger to the beneficiary.

The right to marry who we want holds up in International Law

“As regards the test for selecting the means that causes the lesser harm, which, as stated, is not an absolute test, the selection of the means will be affected by the right that is infringed. When this is a particularly important fundamental right, greater care will be taken in selecting the means that cause minimal harm, even where the cost of employing the means is substantial.†We should remember that the present case revolves around the fundamental right granted to the individual—every individual—to marry and to establish a family. Needless to say, this right has been recognized in international conventions accepted by all [. . . .] Indeed, the magnitude of the right and the powerful radiation that shines from within it, would dictate, as if of themselves, that the means chosen by the Ministry of Interior be milder and more moderate than the harsh and drastic action that it decided to take. And it is hard for us not to conclude that the Respondents completely disregarded—or gave minimal weight to—these fundamental rights of the individual to marry and to establish a family.â€

Insofar as it concerns the naturalization process, the Supreme Court has held that an immigrant who is a foreign spouse constitutes a special category, and therefore, his or her right to citizenship “is superior to the right of others.†This, too, is based on the recognition of the fundamental right to family life.

Edited October 16, 2007 by Bob & Kim

[Bob & Kim 0]

I do not want to bash USCIS but, as a starting point, they could ask themselves why the Vermont Service Center is so much more efficient than the California Service Center.......... and then strive to make their other service centers more like Vermont. Is it management? Is it caseload per officer? Why are documents sitting 3 to 4 weeks in the California mail room but not in the Vermont mail room? Simply adopting procedures that work in other Service Centers would shave about 2 - 3 months off the total wait time for those of us not lucky enough to be processed in Vermont.

Just a thought.................

You are kidding right? You better look at the VSC times now-a-days for NOA2s. I see you got yours from CSC about a month ago. We have many with the same NOA1 date or before yours that have no NOA2 yet. 4 1/2 - 5 months wait is the norm for the NOA2 at VSC now. I certainly wouldn't call it a model to follow. Heck in September we had only 8 NOA2s issued and in October so far only 6.

Edited October 16, 2007 by Bob & Kim

[mox 298]

We have a right to Life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness and also fair and reasonable service from Government agencies.

Let us remember

The Preamble of the Declaration of Independence: We hold these truths to be self-evident that all people are endowed by their creator with certain inalienable rights. Among these are life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. It is not ok for them to destroy the love US citizens hold in their heart or crush their hopes, their dreams, their longings, and their aspirations. I understand if there is good reason to deny someone entry to the US based on sound evidence that they would be a danger to our society or the person petitioning would be a danger to the beneficiary.

The right to marry who we want holds up in International Law

This is a logical fallacy called "appeal to emotion." It also begs the question. These are not Constitutional issues, and it muddies the waters to try to portray them as such. The focus needs to be on the real problems, not on ideals that tug at our heartstrings. The real problem is ineffective leadership and incompetent management of a very large organization. Nobody is trying to violate our basic Constitutional rights, they are just doing a poor job of managing the USCIS.

[Bob & Kim 0]

We have a right to Life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness and also fair and reasonable service from Government agencies.

Let us remember

The Preamble of the Declaration of Independence: We hold these truths to be self-evident that all people are endowed by their creator with certain inalienable rights. Among these are life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. It is not ok for them to destroy the love US citizens hold in their heart or crush their hopes, their dreams, their longings, and their aspirations. I understand if there is good reason to deny someone entry to the US based on sound evidence that they would be a danger to our society or the person petitioning would be a danger to the beneficiary.

The right to marry who we want holds up in International Law

This is a logical fallacy called "appeal to emotion." It also begs the question. These are not Constitutional issues, and it muddies the waters to try to portray them as such. The focus needs to be on the real problems, not on ideals that tug at our heartstrings. The real problem is ineffective leadership and incompetent management of a very large organization. Nobody is trying to violate our basic Constitutional rights, they are just doing a poor job of managing the USCIS.

I agree the cause of the major problem is at the high levels and in current USCIS policies as well as outdated automation and not at the adjudicator level, however…

There was nothing untrue stated and the reasoning does apply. Furthermore;

The First Amendment states, “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.”

Marriage is a religious institution and if not allowed between a consenting man and woman and sanctioned by the church it would be a violation of our First Amendment. Granted National Security and actions to protect the petitioner or beneficiary would and have held up in courts, but one cannot simply state we have no rights in this regard.

One must remember, the United States was formed on a base of religion. One does have a privilege to be married if a church chooses to marry them and that my friends falls under their First Amendment rights to free religion. Therefore the indirect right to marriage exists because their religion agrees that they can be married and someone is willing to wed the two parties.

By the way, whether they are trying or not to violate our Constituitional rights is besides the point. Negligence is not a sound defense in a court of law.