So I'm married, and about to submit my EAD application along with AOS. I never actually applied for the interim one, and nor was my I-94 stamped. However, I was issued an SSN on the basis of a a SocSec memo that stated that "K-1 visa holders are eligible to work on the basis of their visa, though there may or may not be a stamp to this effect".

I've been working.

Now, there's a four month wait at my local processing office (Seattle WA). And this has me a little worried. Technically I can't work because I am (correct me if I'm wrong) "no longer K-1, but I-485 pending"?

My employer might be a little upset at this.

And whilst I realize I could probably work through that period, I'd rather not.

What's my best option for minimizing / eliminating time where I'm not allowed to work pending receipt of EAD?

Or do they really expect that I'll be able to walk away from the job for four months???

Legally you could never work and you can not until you have EAD in hand.

Not sure who they is, but not exactly uncommon to hear of undocumented workers.

This was one of the big points of contention. Many 'unofficial' places state this. Many official places state this, and I guess it'd come down to jurisdiction, but the memorandum the SocSec office states explicitly that a K1 visa holder is authorized to work /regardless/ of whether their I-94 is stamped thusly.

Makes life fun.

Realistically, I know that it'd be highly unlikely that I'd be put in a situation that couldn't be explained as a legitimate misunderstanding, given the above, but nonetheless.

Achromatic

Being employment authorised (EA - K1) and having an employment authorisation document (EAD) are two different animals.
To legally work you should have the EAD. As a K1 after your I-94 expires your employer should be asking for your work authorisation documents. Without that you are an undocumented worker. SoSec and USCIS have different ideas on what/where a K1 is allowed to work, the point being after your I-94 expires you are no longer work authorised and should therefore not be working until you recieve the correct EAD.

Wow. That is some arrogance!

Many of us K1ers never worked after arriving in the US, because we didn't go thru JFK (the only POE that gives the temp EAD stamp) and/or BECAUSE IT'S ILLEGAL without the EAD stamp. Then we wait the months it takes for our AOS/EAD to come thru after marriage. So yes, my hubby hasn't worked for 4+ months. Shocking, yet true.

Geez. Stop working illegally & wait like the rest of us.

Geez. Stop working illegally & wait like the rest of us.
[/quote]


This is a very stressful process with many curveballs. Many individuals go through this process without the knowledge of visajourney. I could imagine all of the illegal things I would probably engage in without the knowledge of VJ. It is not fair to judge people and make mean comments. You don't know this person's situation or knowledge base. Imagine what your VJ would be like without VJ! Many aren't fortunate like you to have access to VJ!

Regardless of whether the OP is working illegally or not, the fact is that USCIS doesn't care about it, they legally cannot hold it against him when adjudicating his AOS, so there is no consequence to him of just keeping his job while AOS is pending.

Also the requirement to check if the employee is authorized to work is the employers responsibility, not the employees. So the worst case scenario is that the OP's employer gets prosecuted for employing him. That said the chances of that happening are probably close to that of winning the lottery, as the current government doesn't consider enforcement of employment law when it comes to illegal workers a priority.

My husband (I'm still not used to calling him that!) hasn't worked since he came here either. He's busy studying for his driver's license and learning English at the library. Luckily, we're able to do that because we live at my parents house (they're out of the country for most of the year) and don't have to pay for rent and split the utility bill with my sister. I wouldn't recommend working illegally..or doing anything illegal right now.

BTW - EADs are processed at the National Benefits Center, not at your local office. Your best bet for EAD processing times is to look here:

http://www.visajourney.com/timeline/eadstats.php

Somewhat worrying trend in that graph!

To those concerned about it, note that the reason I am even posting here is because of the ambiguity (to my perception), and the growing realization that that my understandings would appear to have been wrong.

And re the "4 month" comment? Take it in context. It was said from the perspective of "Okay, so I've been working for 2 1/2 months on the basis of x (where x is admittedly what I am querying, as I believe my initial interpretation was incorrect, now) and according to that I /would/ have been required to leave a job, and wait".

As is exactly what I have read has happened to people who were employment authorized over the initial 90 days, prompting frantic letters from employers requesting expedited processing, etc.

So at least realize I am trying to clarify the legality of what I'm doing, not "HAHA! LOOK AT ME, I DON'T NEED NO STINKING EAD!"

As dr_Iha said earlier:

"Regardless of whether the OP is working illegally or not, the fact is that USCIS doesn't care about it, they legally cannot hold it against him when adjudicating his AOS, so there is no consequence to him of just keeping his job while AOS is pending.

Also the requirement to check if the employee is authorized to work is the employers responsibility, not the employees. So the worst case scenario is that the OP's employer gets prosecuted for employing him. That said the chances of that happening are probably close to that of winning the lottery, as the current government doesn't consider enforcement of employment law when it comes to illegal workers a priority. "

Everything else is paranoia and ignorance.

Regarding I-765 is waste of money

I wouldn't say EAD is a waste of money, I would have lost my job for 3 months without it.

Did the employers asked for it?

Oh yes. Well to be exact they told me: "If you don't show us a EAD or Green Card by September 30th, 2006 we will have to terminate your contract."

Note that I work for a University however, and they tend to be a bit more savvy when it comes to employment law and the issues with employing foriegn citizens.

Luckily my EAD turned up in time!

I had to physically stop my employer applying for a H-1B visa on my behalf - which would have made a mess of my visa application... "Oh, yes, it's a genuine relationship, I'm just covering all my bases!".

Their immigration attorneys had ZERO clue about the K-1 visa (understandable /to a degree/, but still). It was on their advice that I went about things a lot of the way I did, but having remembered how much I had to show them - links to USCIS.gov that directly contradicted what they said, etc, etc, I put very little stock in it.

It just warms the cockles of my heart to see such informative and well thought out advice dispensed in such a warm and congenial manner.

Ah, the arrogance of the truly ignorant!

Yes, people should do things the right way, i.e. apply for an EAD and spend the 3-4 months waiting for it before starting work.

However, it is not ignorance to point out that there are almost no consequences of doing it the wrong way.

It's ignorant to comment that I765 is a waste of money.

Anything that makes this process easier/less stressful is never a waste of money

Well that depends on the situation. If you're employed without an EAD and your employer doesn't care about you having an EAD, paying for one would be a waste of money wouldn't it?

Oh now let's start running around the board making suggestions about marginal behavior.

And does 'totality of circumstance' mean nothing to you?

Is it your intention lately to follow me around the forums and pick a fight? What the hell is your problem?

It’s OK to feel angry after doing something stupid.
I am sorry for all of you who quit your job after 90 days with temp. EAD and AOS pending.

Sorry - I thought it was a discussion, not a "fight". I will refrain from replying to your posts in future.

wtf?

Well, maybe it's just me, but "totality of circumstance" in this context means absolutely nothing to me. What are you talking about?

I've had a few fairly heated discussions with dr_lha in the past but in this case, his posts are right on the money. If the employer doesn't care about you not having an EAD and you know that USCIS will not hold it against you at the adjustment stage, what exactly is the problem? I am not suggesting that people should go around working without EAD's. What I am saying though is that there are circumstances when I-765's really are a waste of money.

I was under the impression that it is the impetus of the employer to confirm you have proper authorization to work. If they want to keep you employed, then you are doing nothing wrong. You can work, but they can't hire you... something like that. It's very confusing, and doesn't make a lot of sense to me (the process, I mean).

Don't mind people jumping on you - most people here are really helpful. No big whoop.

That does not make it right

May I point out that while it might not make a difference now. It may make a difference when applying for Citizenship, where they do tend to look at things deeper.

It may also make a difference with the person, ethically, morally.

Basically, you are agreeing in concept that it is technically wrong to work as an undocumented worker. regardless of the how and why.

Then anyone who listens and decides to ignore this, could very well face the consequences later, if there are any.

Personally, I could not do it.

Regardless, a crime is a crime. It does not matter.

Just because someone allowed it to happen, does not negate your involvement and the possibility of facing the consequences.

My wife was telling me about a LPR who fired a handgun to scare off a robber, years later when he applied for Citizenship, he was denied for the discharge of the firearm. He was eventually allowed to proceed with citizenship. This was a case that was understandable.

You all are talking about conspiracy to commit work fraud. What will be the excuse then, "but they let me work". I do not think if will fly.

IMHO

John

Following is a post from KitKat1 on another EAD thread in this forum. It is NOT a crime on the part of the immigrant. I understand your righteousness, however it seems to be misplaced in this matter.

I think it was made clear earlier in the thread but the concept is a strange and confusing one.

QUOTE

Forget about what millions of others are getting away with, or your "lottery" chances...Murphys law, if its the one thing that could mess up your future, It'll probably happen to you

bottom line...

if it could ever come back and bite you in the butt, dont do it!

good luck

You misunderstand me.

I am merely pointing out that there may be consequences to these actions later.

I work for a company that is facing a fine from a State Agency. The reason we are facing the fine is because the City we are in told us to do the very thing we are getting the fine for. The City has gone to the State and told them that they are the ones who directed us to do it. The State is saying that is not good enough.

While I understand the where the responsibility lies within employment law (as an employer). I am pointing out the fact that our Government may have a shift and use these kinds of things against LPR's when they try and become citizens.

If you do it right the first time, you will be beyond reproach.

The way I understand it, when it comes to K1 holders, being legally authorized to work and being able to legally prove this authorization are two different things. I don't think there is any doubt that K1 holders are allowed to work for 90 days after their entry into the country. If the employer does not care about K1 holder's employment document, then there is no possible way for the K1 holder to get in trouble for working during the initial 90 day period, either at AOS or at the Citizenship stage.

Right. Which is the frustrating part, because you CAN work, but they can't HIRE you. Odd.

Granted, the I-9 is very clear as to the fact that this is the employers responsibility.

We are talking beyond the 90 days. Technically the employer should ask for a new document.

The question here is, who will be held responsible after the 90 days.

I would not trust our Government to fully leave this on the employer.

Your reasoning certainly makes sense but it's all a question of risk tolerance. If you are concerned (and quite reasonably, in my humble opinion) that the immigration laws will change in the future to provide that illegal employment, which is presently forgiven if you marry a USC and apply for AOS, will be a problem at the citizenship stage, are you also concerned that any violation of law might cause such a problem? The reason that I am asking this is because in many states minor traffic violations, such as speeding, running a stop sign and running a red light are misdemeanors. The maximum punishment for misdemeanors in those states is typically up to $1,000 fine and up to 1 year in jail.

It's obvious that traffic courts do not impose jail sentences for those minor offenses, but if you are concerned about immigration laws punishing all violations, speeding tickets could potentially present a much bigger problem than unauthorized employment.

I'm not the stupid one here.

Firstly, I'm the USC.

Secondly, my immigrant husband never had a temp EAD - meaning he never had a job to quit prior to the pendancy of his AOS.

I'd hardly call if paranoid to file for the appropriate documents the government has put in place - I'd call it more like being proactive on one's own behalf.

I call it ignorance to suggest otherwise. And downright irresponsible on a public forum.

When you come at me continuously with colorful angles about an established immigration procedure, it looks like picking an argument.

I enjoy your input in our discussions and appreciate it. I do think it's a good idea to watch how far you push the envelope.

Evaluating risk involves some common sense.

You file for EAD. It costs a few bucks. You have to wait on it. But it's an immigration benefit that (compared to others) gets processed fairly quickly and is VERY RARELY denied.

Why take any risk?

yes, precisely.

an incidental violation may be forgiven upon review and justification, but a willful violation may not.

Annie and I have discussed this at great length and we would rather live above the board to disallow anything from preventing her path to Citizenship.

Ps. there is a big distinction between a traffic violation and a misdemeanor. Driving is a privilege and if you are going through the immigration process, don't break the law. This is the same for anyone who holds a Government Clearance, if they are caught violating the law they could lose their clearance and in turn their job. Immigrants are not being singled out, there are lots of people who need to maintain the same standard.

Oh we've had the discussion on here before about traffic violations and it raised some hackles!! I don't think any of us want to be alarmists.

Trust me

I would love to avoid any arguments.

I didn’t say you are stupid. How could I, but even smart people (regardless of their citizenship) sometimes are doing stupid things, such as assuming that K1 Fiance with I-94 is not allowed to work.

no one is suggesting a K1 does not have incidental EA while I-94 is valid. What people are stating is that there is a problem satisfying the I-9.

Well stated, i may use that later.

you will get alot of use out of it!

Title 8: Aliens and Nationality
PART 274a—CONTROL OF EMPLOYMENT OF ALIENS
Subpart B—Employment Authorization

§ 274a.12 Classes of aliens authorized to accept employment.

(6) An alien admitted to the United States as a nonimmigrant fiancé or fiancée pursuant to section 101(a)(15)(K)(i) of the Act, or an alien admitted as a child of such alien, for the period of admission in that status, as evidenced by an employment authorization document issued by the Service;

I just looked up your previous posts on the subject of traffic violations. In those posts you incorrectly stated that alleged traffic violations were and are a deportable offense (http://www.visajourney.com/forums/index.php?showtopic=49379&st=15), but they very clearly are not. The reason that it is quite clear is because deportable offenses have previously been codified as those that involve felonies and crimes involving moral turpitude.

there are articles outlining the use of state troopers who have been trained with the most basic immigration knowledge who rather than pursue the simple traffic violations, slap them with an immigration violations, thus *taking on the problem* one by one. Well, I don't know how easy that makes others feel, but this makes me feel pretty uncomfortable seeing as though our so-called status is PENDING which is essentially out of status accruing overstay. but as mentioned before, no one wants to be an alarmist, but i wanted to point out what i believe rebecca was citing and why it may be so worrysome.


quick search example.

http://article.nationalreview.com/?q=YjRiY...NjQ3NjRmY2RlZGY=

In quite a few states, traffic violations ARE misdemeanors. At this time a minor traffic violation clearly will not cause a problem at AOS or at the citizenship stage.

What I was trying to tell you above is that if you are concerned about the laws changing to cause problems for those who've previously worked without authorization but have since received Green Cards, you may very well be concerned about the change in the laws that will cause problems for all people who have ever violated ANY criminal statute, including traffic offenses. Once again, the fact that minor traffic offenses, even in those states that consider them misdemeanors, do not go on your criminal record, do not cause you to spend any time in jail and do not cause you immigration problems does not mean that the same treatment of those offenses will continue in the future.

The reason I am telling you all this is not to cause unncessary headaches. What I am telling you is that I do not see a very strong reason to be more concerned about unauthorized employment (in the context in which we are describing it here) than about traffic violations. Is there a reason that you see this differently?

This article talks about an ENTIRELY DIFFERENT situation than the one that rebeccajo incorrectly described in the thread I linked above. In that thread she specifically said to a person worrying about minor alleged traffic violations: "but you broke a law. You can be deported." This is CLEARLY FALSE.

Once again, you CANNOT be deported for alleged minor traffic violations. The law is very clear on that.

The article you have linked talks about state troopers helping to enforce immigration laws. Yes, this certainly means that they can overstep their authority (just like any other poorly trained law enforcement officer) but it does not change the fact that minor traffic offense are not and have never been deportable offenses. So, it doesn't matter how much a state trooper might overstep his/her authority -- you simply would not be deported for a minor traffic offense.