<<<<< JOB DESTRUCTION NEWSLETTER  No. 1933 -- 11/31/2008 >>>>>

The USCIS announced a new rule change on TN (Trade NAFTA) visas. The time
period of the visa has been extended from one year to 3 years. This isn't a
significant change because TN visas already have an unlimited yearly cap
and they can be extended in one year increments forever. Changing this rule
will not directly affect the numbers of TN visa holders but it could give
employers more incentive to use the visas since the costs to maintain the
visa goes down. As we all know, nonimmigrant visas such as H-1B/L-1/TN are
used because employers crave the lower cost of labor that foreign workers
provide, and this rule change makes the cost of maintaining TN status
cheaper.

TN visas are used in much the same way as H-1B except that only citizens of
Canada and Mexico can qualify for them. I have done a lot of newsletters on
the TN visa and wrote this paper which you can read:

http://www.thesocialcontract.com/artman2/publish/tsc1402/article_1200.shtml
Embedded Visas -- 'Free Trade' Means a Flow of Workers Across Borders

Perhaps one of the most interesting aspects of this rule change is that the
USCIS said that the TN time period of stay is now "equal to the initial
period of admission given to H-1B professional workers." Leave it to
government bureaucrats to standardize things: the three year cap was
originally used to import Basque sheepherders into Arizona in the 1950's!

This rule change is just another example of immigration regulations being
changed by bureaucratic fiat while ignoring the Constitutional requirement
for an act of Congress to change immigration laws. Just as a reminder, here
are two other recent examples of rule changing by bureaucratic fiat:

1) April 09, 2008: The DHS extended the Optional Practical Training (OPT)
visa from 12 months to 29 months. This is a huge blow to college students
seeking internships and it also acts as a de facto H-1B increase.

2) August 15, 2008: The USCIS announced rule changes to extend the time
that H-2B workers can stay in the U.S., which is a de facto increase to the
H-2B cap of 68,000 per year. They also gutted the labor certification
requirements to make it easier for employers to game the system.

In addition to ignoring the Constitutional mandate that Congress regulates
immigration, the TN rule change could be a violation of international trade
laws because the U.S. didn't re-negotiate NAFTA with Mexico or Canada. If
either of these two countries decided that the three year expiration period
causes too much of a brain drain on their country, they could in theory
file a complaint with the WTO. I know this is a highly improbable situation
because Mexico and Canada seem to be very happy to export their cheap labor
into the U.S., but in theory it could happen.

Most people in the United States don't think of NAFTA as an immigration
bill, but that's why it's called an agreement to trade goods and services
(services is a euphemism for people). The second article is a commentary by
former foreign minister of Mexico Jorge Castañeda which has the
illuminating title: "Trade agreements crucial to the immigration puzzle".


   If immigration is to become a less heated issue, the U.S. must
   address the needs of Latin America's economies. Here, one of the
   key challenges facing the next U.S. administration lies in the
   existing and pending free-trade agreements between the U.S. and
   Latin America.

Many in the U.S. think that Obama's insistence that FTAs should be
renegotiated to include labor protections is a sign that Obama is tougher
on free trade than McCain. Castañeda dispels that myth -- he believes
that Obama will give Mexico more favorable trade agreements, which means of
course that we will be forced deeper into the abyss!

   Free-trade advocates should not view Obama's demand that these
   deals be revisited as a mistake, but rather as an opportunity
   to improve and deepen them;

It's anybody's guess why Castañeda thinks Obama is the bigger pushover
considering McCain refers to himself as "Mr. Free Trade" and is author of
the McCain/Kennedy guest-worker/amnesty bill.

+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

http://www.uscis.gov/files/article/tn_nonimmigrant_changes_update.pdf

Oct. 14, 2008

USCIS Increases Period of Stay for Trade NAFTA Professional Workers from
Canada and Mexico

WASHINGTON -- U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) has
increased the maximum period of time a Trade-NAFTA (TN) professional worker
from Canada or Mexico may remain in the United States before seeking
readmission or obtaining an extension of stay. This final rule changes the
initial period of admission for TN workers from one to three years, making
it equal to the initial period of admission given to H-1B professional
workers. Eligible TN nonimmigrants may now be allowed to receive extensions
of stay in increments of up to three years instead of the prior maximum
period of stay of one year.

The TN nonimmigrant classification is visa category available to eligible
Mexicans and Canadians with at least a bachelor’s degree or appropriate
professional credentials who work in certain qualified fields pursuant to
the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA). Qualified professions
identified within NAFTA include, but are not limited to, accountants,
engineers, attorneys, pharmacists, scientists, and teachers.

This final rule will ease administrative burdens and costs on TN workers.
It will also benefit U.S. employers by increasing the amount of time TN
nonimmigrants will be able to work for them before having to seek an
extension of status. Spouses and unmarried minor children of TN
nonimmigrants in their corresponding nonimmigrant classifications will also
benefit from the new regulation.

This improvement to the TN nonimmigrant category was initially announced by
Homeland Security Secretary Michael Chertoff and Department of Commerce
Secretary Carlos Gutierrez on Aug. 10, 2007.  The effort is one of the 26
initiatives identified by President Bush’s Administration to address
current immigration challenges using the tools and authorities available
under existing law.

For more information on the TN nonimmigrant visa program or to view the
final rule, visit the USCIS Web site or call the National Customer Service
Center at (800) 375-5283.


+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

http://www.chron.com/disp/story.mpl/editorial/outlook/6079314.html

Trade agreements crucial to the immigration puzzle

Needs of Latin American economies must be addressed
By JORGE G. CASTAÑEDA
Copyright 2008 Houston Chronicle
Oct. 26, 2008, 9:42PMShare  Print Email Del.icio.usDiggTechnoratiYahoo!
BuzzMEXICO CITY — Although many Americans believe immigration is a
domestic issue that should be excluded from talks with other governments,
this is not a view held by other nations or by the United States. Indeed,
the U.S. negotiated its first immigration deal in 1907, maintained for more
than two decades by a controversial treaty with Mexico covering
immigration, and has kept up immigration talks and deals even with Fidel
Castro since the early 1960s.

For many Latin American nations, not just Mexico, immigration is the single
most important issue in their relations with the U.S. The Caribbean islands
all have a similarly high proportion of their citizens residing in the U.S.
and depend as much as Mexico on remittances. The same is true for much of
Central America. And no part of South America is exempt from this pattern.

So almost all of Latin America is deeply affected by the current
immigration climate in the U.S., and would benefit greatly from
comprehensive immigration reform. Everyone knows what viable immigration
reform in the U.S. will entail: tightening security at the border, but also
including gates in the walls currently being built; legalizing, with
expeditious and sensible fines and conditions, the 15 million or so
foreigners present in the U.S. illegally; and establishing a migrant or
temporary worker program that allows a sufficient number of foreigners to
satisfy the growing needs of the U.S. economy, with paths both to regular
visits home and to U.S. permanent residence.

A second component is political will and timing. Bush had it right at the
beginning: his willingness to negotiate an immigration agreement with
Mexico at the start of his term was probably the only way to get it done.
Moving quickly is probably the only way the next president can succeed on
this front as well.

If immigration is to become a less heated issue, the U.S. must address the
needs of Latin America's economies. Here, one of the key challenges facing
the next U.S. administration lies in the existing and pending free-trade
agreements between the U.S. and Latin America.

If John McCain is elected, tinkering with or overhauling NAFTA, CAFTA and
free-trade deals with Chile and Peru, as Barack Obama has proposed, will be
unlikely. But, given the likelihood that Democrats will retain their
majorities in the U.S. Congress, even McCain would need to modify the
agreement with Colombia in order to get it passed. The pressure to include
similar provisions in the other deals would then grow.

If the recession drags on and Americans continue to erroneously blame trade
agreements for growing unemployment, falling wages and yawning inequality,
opposition to these deals will grow. Instead of waiting for the pressure to
mount, the next president would do well to pre-empt it with an ambitious
agenda on free-trade reform that would benefit everyone.

In this respect, the U.S. could learn from the European Union. American
trade agreements have been faulted for limiting themselves to trade. The
response has always been: the U.S. is not Europe, nor is it in the business
of nation-building or reconstruction. But this is exactly what it did,
successfully, with the post-1945 Marshall Plan and, unsuccessfully, with
Iraq and Afghanistan today.

First, clear and explicit human rights and democracy clauses should be
included, along the lines of similar clauses in the Mexican and Chilean
Economic Association treaties with the EU. Second, more specific provisions
on labor, the environment, gender equality and indigenous rights are
needed, as well as antitrust, regulatory and judicial reform provisions,
for reasons both of principle and political expediency.

Although there have been enormous improvements in most of these areas,
there remains a huge agenda, particularly with regard to breaking up or
regulating monopolies.

These revised agreements should include bold, enlightened provisions for
infrastructure and "social-cohesion" funds, since these can make the
difference between muddling through and true success.

Free-trade advocates should not view Obama's demand that these deals be
revisited as a mistake, but rather as an opportunity to improve and deepen
them; McCain's supporters should not see the incorporation of all of the
aforementioned inclusions as "European nonsense," but rather as a way to
narrow the gap between the agreements' promise and their actual results.

Improving Mexican and Central American infrastructure, education and rule
of law, or improving Colombian and Peruvian drug-enforcement efforts and
respect for labor laws and human rights, are all in America's interest, and
free trade agreements can help rather than harm such efforts.

If the U.S. and Latin America can face up to the challenges of trade and
immigration together, the next U.S. president may leave a weightier mark on
the hemispheric relationship than any American leader in three generations.

Castañeda, former foreign minister of Mexico (2000-2003), is a Global
Distinguished Professor of Politics and Latin American Studies at New York
University.


- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Newsletter Homepage:
http://www.JobDestruction.com/shameh1b/JobDestructionNews.htm

Support this Newsletter and www.JobDestruction.com by donating:
www.zazona.com/Donations.htm

To Be removed from this mailing list, reply to this
email with UNSUbSCRIBE in the subject window
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -