HOW LONG IS IT CURRENTLY TAKING FOR AN APPROVED K1 FIANCEE PETITION TO BE SENT FROM THE CALIFORNIA SERVICE CENTER (CSC) TO THE NATIONAL VISA CENTER (NVC)?

OUR NOA2 WAS ISSUED SEPTEMBER 19. IT STILL HAS NOT ARRIVED TO THE NVC.

WE HAVE BEEN WAITING 6 WEEKS AND COUNTING.

TELL ME YOUR HORROR STORIES.

MISERY LOVES COMPANY.

AAAAAAUUUGGGGGHHHHHHHHHHHH

I know how frustrating it can get - ours took about 2 week or so I think

Looking at the stats under the Immigration Timelines you are way over. Have you tried to call them? Sometimes things get lost between the service center and the NVC so a littl proding can help.

My Noa 2 was oct 5, it's been like 4 weeks and today I called, the guy said it has not arrived yet.
He said it could take up to 90 days.
That soundds like BS, why would my NOA2 tell me to contact them if I did not hear anything in 4 weeks?
The Approval notice is only good for a few months, if I burn up 3 waiting on them to get it, it could expire before completion, especially if there were to be any problem or delay at Moscow.

If I don't hear something in 2 more weeks, I am going to ask my Congressman for help simply because of the fact the approval notice has an expiration date. Why should it take 4 or 6 weeks to send a package from one agency to another?

It amazes me how anyone who has been involved in dealing with agencies of the Govt would ever sign on to the Govt. Running something as complex a Health-care

When you become one of the 50 million uninsured people and growing in this country you too will want the government to provide you with some kind of health care. Especially if you had to choose between rent, food, and health care each month because of the out of control prices for the latter.

You think you have it bad now, just wait

I think Ronald Reagan said it best,

Government is not the solution, it's the problem.
-----------------
My friend, I am 45 years old and I have NEVER seen a sick person on the street... that was sober

K1 buddy I'm helping just got his Embassy number today and he had CSC aprroval the same day as you did.
Senator may have "given it a boost tho".

I think it is very evident that the machine has slowed down considerably and all of our anticipated dates are becoming protracted. We just received our Packet 3, which I had computed to arrive 18 days after the Petition left the NVC. My 18 days turned into 33 days. That’s 183% longer than expected. From our timeline, you’ll see it took our Petition 29 days from the NOA2 date to be received by the NVC. Just playing with some numbers: Your NOA2 date is 19 September 2007 and if I add 29 day times 183% (for machine slowing) = 53 days – this may be your NVC receipt date: 11 November 2007, a Sunday, so say may be 12 November? You’ve sent an e-mail inquiry to the NVC I hope.

Mike & Svetik

I called the NVC again this morning and again was told they should have received it by now but
it can take up to 90 days.
I explained to her the Approval expires in 4 months. How could the system reasonably expect to complete the process if it took 3 of those months to simply transfer documents from one department to another.

I called back to the California center to ask why they have not forwarded the paperwork, .. they did a "report" and will get back to me in a month.

In a week or so, if nothing shows up at NVC, I will contact my rep... and why not, they are the ones which voted an increase in the fees with the understanding that it would make the system run faster and better when in fact it has gotten worsex2.

I am usually a pretty patient person but this failure to transfer Documents is BS.

I'm not talking about the sick people in the streets. As I doubt there are 50 million people in the streets. I am talking about the working folks who work several part time jobs or even a full time one where medical benefits are not offered. Hard to imagine right? So what are those people to do? They can either choose to buy health care, food, or pay for rent each month. They can have only two of these three each month based on their salary and the cost of the latter. Yet they are too far above the federal poverty guidelines to receive assistance for either three!

Thanks for the tip Mike & Svetik. I sent off email and fax inquiries today. We will see if anything comes of it. My fiancee is a strong and loving woman but it is becoming increasingly difficult to keep her and her family's spirits up when the anticipated dates are becoming longer and longer. CSC is making the Russian bureaucracy look speedy by comparison.

Buck

Sadly, the government already makes many of us choose between food, rent and health care. COBRA was not much of a solution for those of us below retirement/Medicare age because many, myself included, could not afford the COBRA premiums. By the time I hit retirement age I doubt there will be much, if anything, left in the way of Social Security benefits. In other words, the US Government has not given me much "bang for the buck" for the healthy amount of taxes withheld each month from my paycheck. However, our government has been good at using our tax money to fund dubious military excursions into the Middle East and other less noble projects. I have no problem with part of my wages being used for the public good such as public schools, caring for the elderly and underprivileged, and properly staffing necessary government offices such as CSC....... but, as you can see, our money is being put to other uses.

Yeah, if only we could pick n choose what our tax dollars were spent on.
I would have a whole long "Do not spend" list.

--------------------
First of all your 50 million number suggests that 50 million people actually want insurance. There are a lot of healthy (usually young people) who are not interested, I know I wasn't at 25 either. (no matter how affordable it was)
Of course if "someone else" is going to pay for it... sure they would I guess sign up for it and I guess that is what you are suggesting... "someone else" pay for your trip to the doctor.

I bet if you compared the percentage of people without health insurance today and compared it to 10 or even 5 years ago, I bet you would see every year this percentage grows smaller and smaller.
It's amazing really, even people like me who goofed around in school instead of doing what I should have are able to get jobs which offer health insurance. But back when I had no health Insurance, I never looked at everyone else to provide it for me. After all we make our own bed in life (with a few exceptions). When others we hitting the books, I was playing guitar or watching TV.


The biggest problem with socialized medicine is not just the financial boondoggle it would quickly bring about but, rather "It" opens the already cracked door of the Govt having the right to control your life in ways you never could believe... and one step at a time.
I mean after all, if "we" are all paying for your healthcare, ...what you eat, how much you weigh, how often you exersize, what activities you par take in are no longer just your biz, it's "ours" too.

At any rate, my friend if you get sick, feel free to mosey on down to the emergency room they will treat you... it's the law. (just ask any illegal)

I think the numbers and statistics point to the opposite.
http://www.spine-health.com/news/insurance/art532350.html

I am about to get a JD degree. Never messed around, 25, and have yet to have a single job that has offered me health insurance. I have not gone to the dentist in two years, since I lost the privilege of being on my parents plan. Right now I am working two jobs, 42 hours a week and no insurance, no vacation pay, and only because the city of San Francisco mandated employers to have sick days do I have that as of 2007. My two jobs are 1. law office clerk and 2. circulation assistant at the university library.
Neither allow me to work full time to get benefits. By the way our income is way above the federal poverty line but sure feels like poverty here in San Francisco.
My wife luckily gets coverage from her school, I do not. Pretty much I hope every day that I do not get sick. Dropping a couple hundred dollars a month for insurance or $100 and having a $8000 deductible does not seem reasonable to me. I am already carrying $130k debt for school and I don't need another $100k debt for a week or so stay at a hospital.
Obviously having children is out of the question as my wife's school policy does not allow for dependents.

I understand all the problems with socialized medicine and that is not what I am proposing. Rather, I am all for either a government insurance plan that has to be accepted by all doctors or like the state of California is proposing, force employers to provide coverage to all employees.

Sure, and I'll send you the bill

Even though I am for smaller government, socialized medicine is necessary. The government has created a system (through laws, licensing, and regulation) that allows only large insurers and the government to get fair prices. Everyone else is charged a 1,000% markup.

The current system is horribly inefficient. Too much money is wasted on billing, advertising and administrative costs. The government already spends enough to insure everyone in the US, yet only about 25% of the population actually recieves any benefit from this.

Look at the numbers
Per capita expenditure
Canada 2,519
Germany 3,204
UK 2,428
USA 5,711


We already spend twice as much as the rest of the world per capita. The governement already pays for 44% of all health expenditures to cover just 25% of the country. I think that all of the medicare/medicaid money should be used to provide BASIC and Emergency care for everyone, and let private insurers cover everything else.

My private insurance in Europe, by the way, covered far more than my US policy does, and cost much less. (about one tenth the price)

In Florida, they used to have a state run insurance plan for those of us that could not get insurance; because of previous medical conditions and such. It was supposed to be guaranteed insurance; they turned me and my ex-wife down. Me because of depression and hypothyroidism and her because of arthritis; so much for guaranteed insurance; and we were willing to pay the premiums but could not get insurance. I have been self-insured for over 20 years now, but not by my choice.

PS My depression is under stable treatment for 9 years and hypothyroidism under stable treatment for over 30 years; her arthritis was untreatable and she did not take medication or seek doctor care. Stable treatment is defined as seeing the doctor once a year and getting a prescription for a year of medication.

Short answer - a group plan is the only thing that will work if you have any medical history of any kind. Individual plans will only insure exceptionally healthy people.

To get around this, create a group plan. This isn't that hard to do.

But really, it shouldn't be like this.

Do you really need to go to the dentist?



You could consolidate all those hours you work into one job with benefits. (And you'd probably make more money!)



So $130K for school is reasonable but paying a couple hundred bucks a month for insurance is not?




This is a classic example of the reason our healthcare system is in the situation it's in.

We've developed a dependency on medical care whether we need it or not. I'm not saying yours isn't needed, what I'm saying is we've all been placed into a system that distinguishes between someone with a chronic condition and someone who is a healthy 25-year-old student that needs nothing more than check-ups and emergency coverage.

Obviously the person that needs a year's worth of medication is going to cost an insurance provider more than someone who needs a check-up every two years. That's why there should be a realistic system in place where the govt. regulates the percentage an individual has to pay to a private company based on that individual's needs. Need a year's worth of meds? OK, you pay the first $2,000 (or an equivalent percentage of your below-poverty salary) then the govt. steps in and pays the rest.

Since the govt. would never go for system like this, where they pay the bills a private company charges them without being regulated (well, except in the rebuilding of a country or running a war) it would have to be a govt. system entirely or a semi-govt. system with private companies being heavily regulated on where they could send individuals for treatment. But, the govt. is in no way near being able to do something like that, so it's going to stay pretty much like it is for quite a while.



If there was only the "govt. healthcare plan" then everyone would have equal coverage and would pay an equal amount.

It's just impossible to do.

The idea behind all insurance is to spread the risk among many individuals. The risk models for health insurance do not work the same way as automobile or property insurance. There are progressively more costs as people age, which is not random.

Any insurance scheme needs the healthy 25 year olds paying in to support the unhealthy 75 year olds that consume most medical services.

Even if costs in the US were brought in line with the rest of the industrialized world, 50% of the population would not be able to afford care on their own.

Exactly why there needs to be a govt. system in place.

No money for it you say? Well, I know where we can liquidate about $81BILLION right now.....

Politically, it is a nearly impossible thing to do. Those who benefit the most under the current system (those over 65) vote, and will not like any changes that take away from them. Right now, most goverment spending is directed at retired people.

Giving the same coverage to everyone would require raising taxes, and retired people generally won't like that either.

I promised myself I wouldn't get into this discussion. But I just need to say....WORD!

It drives me up a freaking wall that the most wealthy country on the planet can justify a war that's costing multiples of what a modest NHS plan would cost (all the while giving lovely little tax cuts to the wealthy and asking future generations to fund this disaster) but we can't take care of our own citizens. That somehow you are only entitled to a healthy life if you happen to bring in $x per month is ludicrous. The U.S. is (if it's not already) fast becoming the most unhealthy country on the planet and a large part of that is because so many Americans lack access to preventative care. (The fact that it's cheaper in some areas to buy McDonalds instead of groceries doesn't help.) I used to work for a large pharma, and saw study after study that showed that diseases such as COPD and diabetes typically cost less than a couple dollars per day to treat in a managed environment, but ran into the thousands if left untreated until the patient had to go to the emergency room. And as someone else hinted at earlier, those ER costs are typically left unpaid by the patient, making private healthcare even more expensive. The system as it stands now is ridiculously broken.

That's exactly right!

I think so. Used to have preventive cleanings twice a year and the dentist would fill cavities before they became a huge dental nightmare.

That was exactly my point. I cannot consolidate. Because neither employer wants to pay benefits! They said so when I asked. That is why I and so many other working Americans have to take multiple jobs to get a good income flow but no associated benefits / overtime.

Both are unreasonable. But I don't want to manufacture plastic bags either, no offense. This 130k debt will hopefully open the door to more money in the future. The health insurance costs / outrageous debt you can acquire if you need services when you are sick will bring no such future benefit. If you want to open another discussion we can talk about how Federal Stafford Loans vary from 6.8% to 8.5%! Your car loan and mortgage loans have smaller percentages! What is wrong with this administration. The average student finishes now with something like 20k debt and that is only for undergraduate!
http://www.azcentral.com/arizonarepublic/n...ntdebt0415.html

Both are unreasonable. For the first few years I was in school, the Air Force was picking up the tab and paying me. About $40,000 a year for tuition, room and board and books, plus what they paid me. After my discharge, I was on the hook paying this myself. I worked with no benefits 40 hours a week to do that, and it wasn't easy. Fortunately it wasn't for very long.

I was an Electrical Engineering / Computer Science major. This was a good career 10 years ago, but these days, much of this work is being moved to India and China. An engineering education is becoming so expensive in the US that is is difficult to graduate enough engineers. At the same time, those that do graduate here have so much debt that it is difficult to pay them enough. As a result, I do mostly consulting and sales work now - very little actual engineering. That being said, what I do pays quite well for my age, and has great benefits.

You really don't have much choice, though. My wife's masters degree is at a state school, which has the lowest in-state tuition in the US. We wouldn't be able to afford it otherwise. A US master's degree makes you far more employable here. It will cost less than $7,000 for the MA degree, which is a good deal (from a pretty good school by Florida standards).

As for the debt for law school - the better firms pay starting salaries of about $135-150K a year to associates now. It is a fair trade to take on that debt for future earnings. On the other hand, those jobs go primarily to Harvard/Yale/Duke/etc grads in the top 25% of thier class. This also tends to be Corprorate/Tax/Patent/IP work.

Many lawyers end up doing contract work that these firms farm out for $25-$40 an hour (or less).

Given how much university degrees increase earnings, they are worth the money. I have a bigger problem with the poor job done by US high schools, which do not prepare students adequetely for University level work. Comparing the rigor of mathematics my fellow engineering students did to future mathematics teachers in education was a joke.

Unfortunately. having your kids adequetely prepared for college requires a huge investment to live in an affluent area with good schools. This is the real crime.

What is the average cost of a 4 yr university these days?
How could the guy working 35 hours a week afford that?
Why not have the Govt pay for this too?

I am sure if getting my teeth cleaned is a responsibility of the Federal Govt. My complete education
must be as well.

How in the world do young couple just starting out, buy a first home in NYC or many other parts of the country?
Certainly Housing is a "basic human right". Why is not the Govt helping these people get safe affordable housing?
How do we allow the rich to have three car garages when some of us don't even have a house?

It's amazing people even survived the first couple of hundred years in this country without the Govt doing it's "Fair-share" for them.

Are there any known ways to track how long it is taking to get from NOA2 to NVC
getting the info?
I wonder if the delay Buck and I are having are now typical?

The government has created the rules, we must live within them. I can't just hang up a shingle and call myself a doctor, or lawyer, or engineer like I could 200 years ago. I am required to be licensed, insured and educated to the standards set by the state and federal governments. This is true of most professions now. The government did not tax your income heavily 200 years ago either. Medical insurance wasn't a necessity 50 years ago either, since a few days in the hospital did not cost several years salary for the average American paying out of their pocket.

The states also dictate how insurance companies may sell their products, which dictates the cost. I paid much less outside the US for private insurance with better coverage. If the market was truly competitve here (it isn't) costs would decrease and care would improve.

Expensive housing is a problem fundamentally caused by the government - giving away money in tax breaks, setting interest rates too low, and buying mortgages (fannie and freddy) and assuming the risk. The real estate bubble was caused by the government, the speculation was just a symptom of the rules they put in place.

High health care expenses are also caused by the government, as they are the ones setting the rules an paying most of the money. Government spending and tax breaks are heavily tilted towards two groups - retirees and families making between $80,000 and $150,000. These tend to be those who vote the most.

It is much harder for 20 somethings starting out now. Buying a house in your twenties for a married couple is near impossilbe in much of the country. Staring out several years salary in debt makes it very difficult. My parents could afford to buy a house (at 25 years old) where I grew up in Boston with blue collar jobs.

True - we do choose to spend our money differently than my parents. Far more on education (they spent nothing, no school for Mom and the Navy paid for Dad). The biggest expenses (housing, insurance and education) have grown far faster than inflation, and this hits younger people harder. We are also on the hook for retirement savings (parents had pensions, we have to save in IRAs and 401ks).

We also work much longer hours than our parents did. I don't remember mom or dad ever working over 40 hours a week. I have never had a salaried job were I was expected to work less than 60 hours (except for my current one, which I have no plans to leave).

All that being said, if you are smart and willing to work hard, the US is still one of the best places in the world to get ahead in life.

$12,796 a year for public and $30,367 a year for private for the whole package.
http://democrats.senate.gov/dpc/dpc-new.cf...me=fs-109-2-151

Most cannot.
http://efinancedirectory.com/articles/San_...y_Analysis.html

It does. My wife is getting a completely free education and about $3,000 for room and board thanks to the Federal and State government. Reason, we are poor according to FAFSA and the university's guidelines.
http://www.fafsa.ed.gov/

See Russ's post on how the federal government combined with some of our proud employers have made it so one person can have his teeth cleaned for 0-$20 and others have to pay hundreds of dollars. As for the education, they are already paying for my wife's but I was not eligible for it because my parents made too much when I was an undergraduate and as a graduate student I can only receive private funding in terms of scholarships.

Most are renters and do not. However, the city of San Francisco does have a lottery system where qualified people can buy a home priced below market price but would be affordable if you made somewhere between $58,00 to $98,000 a year. Remember the classic pie chart of Americans spending no more than 33% of their gross income on housing. I find it quite unfair that some follow the pie charts but a growing number of others are spending like me somewhere around 75%.
http://cbs5.com/bayarearealestate/local_story_299215710.html

It does, see above. And if you are very poor there is section 8 housing which brings rent into that classical pie chart I described above.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Section_8_%28housing%29

It's called a market economy and democratic society. But it only works so long as people believe that by working hard and following the law they too can achieve that. As soon as you have an overwhelming majority of havenots, a revolution occurs. You can use many African nations as an example of this.

Again, see Russ's post, he explains it very well.

I don't think there are. But I can assure you that getting a foreign fiancée to live in the US is just as much a government involved issue as is housing, education, and health care.

I grew up in Boston, a very high cost area like San Francisco. The reality of the housing market is what caused me to move to Florida. At least in the US, you have this choice - in many places (such as Russia) you still need permission from the government to live someplace.

Apartments here (Tampa Bay) average $900 monthly at 90 cents a square foot to lease. This is reasonable. San Fran rents are about $3.20 a square foot. This is about what I paid in Boston. I don't see this as sustainable.

If you can make the same money in a low-cost area (Tampa and Dallas come to mind), moving from high cost cities may be a good decision. I am paid the same no matter where I live, but at least in Florida we get to live near the water, downtown, with parking (garaged!), with nice weather. The cost of living in Boston is 248% higher than the national average, so I would proabably want a 300% raise to move back there (to make up for the higher tax bracket).

Russ, I used your same housing to income rational some 17 years ago when I (along with many others) departed from the North-East too.
It was one of the reason I have grown to embrace strong local Government on domestic issues.
1. States can each experiment with various programs, Methods of Governance and shape themselves to local appeal.
People can then decide if they like it or not and leave or stay. Almost like a freeMarket.
2. When the Fed Govt rolls out it's big "one size fits all" plan, no matter how disastrous it is there is no escaping it.

Sure the state by state Method is not without weak spots too but overall it has worked pretty well.

it took five weeks for ours, but finally they got it and sent to the Embassy with 4 working days


kEEP THE fAITH, yOU WILL GET IT SOON


BRIAN

The issue for me hasn't been making it or not making it, healthcare, no healthcare, buying vs. renting.....

It's been trying to explain it all to my wife.

There's such a disparity between "the system" in Russia and "the system" here. There are several things that are really irksome:

1. Budgets
2. Applications/Licensing/(and the subsequent fees/waiting involved)
3. The "long-term" goals that must be worried about and the processes involved that must be adhered to
4. and probably a whole bunch of others that I can't think of right now because I'm too tired from making plastic bags all night (but I did go to the dentist twice last week. For FREE!)

Trying to "save" for something is possible, but the concept of - saving for this means not spending on that (FOR A LONG, LONG, LONG TIME) - seems to be hard to grasp.

Anyone have any tips/pointers?

Saving is a lot easier if it happens automatically (automatic payroll deductions). No temptation to spend it then.

I budget things pretty carefully - daily cash flow forecasts typically 6 months in advance. Being married is difficult, since you no longer control all of the spending yourself.

My current employer throws in a lot of savings incentives. Stock purchase plan (payroll deductions for 6 months, then you get shares at a 85% of the closing price). This is a free return for doing nothing (pays much better than leaving it in the bank). 401k match - this is also free money. Finding "free" money like this is one of the easier ways to save.

You can use something like quicken, but a spreadsheet works fine for me.

Make a one year budget and review it with your wife. I think that it is important to do cash flow forcasting before you make a budget. If you don't have positive cash flow, the budget will not be workable. The hardest thing for me when I was running a business wasn't making enough money, it was keeping cash flow positive enough of the time.

GREETINGS, BUCK AND NATALIA,

Our CSC to NVC timeline was 5 weeks and we were also concerned. But finally NVC recieved it and sent to the Embassy within 3 business days.
When you call NVC, use the operator option and have them look up your case by the beneficiarys name and Date of birth. I was told they do not
input the k1 or k3 in the automated system and you will need to talk to the Operator. As of this date, our NVC case number is not in the automated phone system, so I see truth to what the NVC supervisor told us. My wife faxed all the PKG # documents and verified the embassy got it, which they did, now we are waiting for the Interview date.

Good Luck and keep the faith, I am sure you will hear good news soon !!!!!

BRIAN

"You could consolidate all those hours you work into one job with benefits. (And you'd probably make more money!)"

This is a little niave, I think. Depending on the nature of the work done, many businesses won't hire any full-time employees other than in management, so that they don't have to give benefits to all the part time employees who wind up covering all the full-time hours. I have some personal experience with this.

Well I got this in my Email today.
The letter pretends they are doing all these checks when in fact they don't even have my file yet.

Boy I tell you, "sept 11" has become a catch-all excuse for everything now, I need to some how work this angle in my job as well to cover up what I am not doing or didn't do right.

----------------------------------------

Good Afternoon,

Your inquiry has been received at the National Visa Center (NVC).

As part of the aftermath of the events of September 11, 2001, there are
additional security check requirements for visa applicants. While it is
not possible to predict when the clearances for this case will be
finished by all involved Washington agencies, please be assured that as
soon as the results are received the NVC will be able to schedule this
case for an interview at the assigned US Embassy or Consulate General.
As soon as an interview is scheduled notification will be sent to the
designated agent by mail.

Regards,
National Visa Center
OH2

I think that's also part of our problem here. That's probably everyone's problem!



Consolidating two or more part-time jobs into a full-time job and hoping to keep the same job (or even the same line of work) is a little naive. Consolidating 42 hours of work each week into one job isn't very difficult.

What is difficult is the job itself or the hours you must work (typically evenings, weekends or 3rd shift) and maybe even swallowing your pride a little and getting your hands dirty.

If you lack the money to simply pay for everything you want, then sacrifices must be made in the pursuit of attaining the lifestyle which you choose to live. Want to be a lawyer and don't have an extra $150,000 laying around? Well, you may have to go without health insurance for a while. Want to have three kids and make only $24,000/year at the video store? Well, you may have to go without seeing your kids on the weekends while you're working at a pizza restaurant for extra cash.

Or, what you could do is work at a factory or similar type of job that pays benefits and a decent wage, live in an affordable housing/rental unit, and budget your money accordingly.

I know that's not possible for everyone to do. But, here in the U.S. there is a system in place, and it's a pretty clearly defined system of wanting something and what you must do and what you must sacrifice in the attainment of that goal. To make the argument that it's not fair or not right, or the system isn't fair is true, however, it's not an argument that's going to change the system or our place in it. I don't want to make plastic bags forever, but I didn't have the luxury of being covered under my parent's dental plan until I was 23. So, as a result of that, I'm now (and have been since) covering myself by the means necessary to do so. I would love to go to college and work two part-time jobs, and hopefully some time in the not-so-distant future I'll be able to do just that. But, for now, I have to sacrifice doing that to ensure myself and my wife are covered. Call it being naive, but it works.



You could try a PTSD angle or even something like a disclaimer on all your e-mails you send out "messages may be late due to mandatory Sept. 11, 2001 security checks" or if you're in a line of work where they'd buy it "We're about six months behind on that project because of the new 9/11 laws.... yeah, it's a real drag, but you know, govt. regulations. We've gotta do it."

CONGRATULATIONS BRIAN AND YENYS !!!

The NVC received our petition on 11/02/2007 which was 44 days (6.3 weeks) from our 9/19/2007 NOA2 date. Now we will hope and pray that the NVC's review is problem free and that they forward the petition to the Moscow Consulate quickly.

We thank all of you that responded for your kind words of encouragement and advice....... plus, we had some interesting political/socio-economic chat thrown in as well.

Buck & Natalia

Slim, you must have misread my post. I stated that both of my employers refuse to offer anything beyond 20 and 22 hours a week to avoid paying benefits. Therefore, to consolidate, I would have to seek out a third employer. It's not about extra hours, shifts, or different line of work.

Same situation while I was going through school - no benefits, since I had the title of "Intern" for about 2 years. Still worked 40 hours a week though.

Finding a good job while you are in school is difficult, as employers know that school will be your first priority.

Sadly, most law firms really stick-it-to the clerks to limit benefits. The clerks then get to stick-it-to the firms when negotiating starting salary requirements when they become associate attorneys. However, the firms then stick-it-to the associates again regarding billable hour requirements. I don't miss any of this. It is probably too late to change course now, but are you really certain that you want to go into a profession where for the next several years you will mean nothing more to the partners of the firm than your billable hour totals? Of course, they will state just the opposite when hiring you. I am hard pressed to think of any profession more demanding on your time at the entry level or less suitable for starting a new family with a spouse immigrating from another country. On a more constructive note, if you do want to stay with the law, have you thought about working as an attorney in place with no billable hour requirements....... such as government attorney, in-house corporate counsel, or other less time-demanding area? Just a thought.

Buck

The consulting business (what I do) is very similar - low pay and long hours at the begining, with the added benefit of being out of town most of the time. It does get better though, after a few years.

Actually, at both places that I have interned one was a solo practitioner and another is a professional corporation that is really just a one man team with occasional of counsel help were far from the typical firm structure.
To be honest if I could land an associate position with partnership track that would be pretty amazing considering the kind of debt I am in. The work or treatment wouldn't really scare me. My wife has been here for 3 years she is pretty much American now. Not an issue at all.
Of course the other options all sound fine except working for the government because it doesn't pay much. Might have to go solo too if I can't find a job. I am more scared of generating clients, since I seem to lack those kind of skills.
My schedule is crazy as it is already with working full time and going to school full time. For example today I left the home at 6:00am and won't return until 12:15am. So it can't be much more demanding than that.
Actually looking forward to BAR preparation where I will take the recommendation of not working for 2 months!

Buck & Natalia I am glad your paperwork went on to the next step, I am of course still waiting on mine.
Do you have a projected time-line when you expect visa to be in-hand?

That was exactly my point. Picking up a full-time job with a third employer that paid benefits would elimnate your need for working part-time at the other two.

I realize you're getting experience in your field and getting your foot in the door, so to speak, and in doing so, there are no benefits. That's the sacrifice that must be made in trying to work your way through school while gaining experience in your field. If you were to work your way through school at a different employer, you could have benefits.

However, it doesn't look so hot on your resume when you list "Night-time stock boy, Piggly Wiggly SuperMarket, 2002-Present" while applying at a law firm. So, the trade-off must be made.

If everything stays on track, then VISA in hand will probably be somewhere between mid-January and mid-February 2008.

OK then..... she has been here for some time and it sounds like you two are weathering the working full-time/law school full-time schedule OK. If you two are surviving that schedule reasonably well then law firm work shouldn't pose that much difficulty. A little about BAR preparation: I was sooo ticked off after I finished my BAR preparation course and realized that they could have taught me all I really needed to know in a matter of months rather than zinging me for 3 years of law school tuition. Oh well...... I think law school is what they call an "informal market barrier entry." Good Luck studying for exam and passing the bar. After you take the bar exam, take a nice holiday with your wife if you can. You have both more than earned it at this point !!!

I guess if there is a bright-side to all this, the airline ticket will be at the lowest price of the year.