Career question: What are the job prospects for an international student attending a college in the US given the current H-1B scene?

Here is a recent question from an online forum:

What are the job prospects for an international student attending a college in the US given the current H-1B scene? (I am an undergraduate with a major in Finance.)

Hello! I am an Indian student and have been admitted to Binghamton University’s School of Management. I’ll be taking loans to fund my education. I’ll need a solid job to pay off these loans upon graduation. Please tell me if I should pursue education in US with the current H1-B policies.

Let us lay out a few facts:

• H1 visa policies are undergoing review and are most likely to change. (my earlier blog on the topic )
• A large percentage of H1B visas go to those with STEM majors and degrees. Check out the list of Top H1B sponsors from last year (link). The majority of them are IT/IS/Tech companies.
• Other non-STEM graduates do get H1 visas, but their numbers are too small and highly competitive.

Back to your case. Let us look at the best case scenario: A person majoring in Finance from a Top-tier school (or Ivy League), with great academic credentials gets and internship at an investment bank or tier-1 consulting firm. The firm is so impressed by her/his credentials that it agrees to sponsor a visa for the person. Alternatively, the firm agrees to hire the person and relocates them to their home-country (and later moving them to US on L1 visa)

Only you can answer if your credentials qualify for the “best case” scenario. All the best!

Why is the Indian government concerned over proposed H1-B visa changes?

My response to a recent question that came from a reader: 
Why is the Indian government concerned over proposed H1-B visa changes?

 

The Indian media, along with Indian Techies are closely watching the actions of Indian Government with regards H1. You are probably referring to the recent meeting between US Congressmen and Indian officials in India: “PM Narendra Modi counsels US Congressional delegation to rethink Fortress America - Times of India”

I don’t wish to simplify an overly complex issue, but the reason for Indian government to be monitoring this closely is because it impacts people (jobs), remittances and taxes.

A basic 101 on the business model: India and Indian IT shares a 360 relationship with Americans and American IT. H1 Visas are a necessary tool for Indian service companies to operate. They send people on short and long-term deputation – to gather requirements, engage with clients, explore new business etc. The people sent onsite support the operations offshore.

A few reasons for Indian government to be concerned

• Employment and remittances:
• Indian IT employs 3-5 million professionals. Many are well paid (by Indian standards) and any external factor that will impact jobs in this sector is closely monitored by the government
• By some accounts, Indians are issued the majority of H1 Visas. Visa holders travel overseas and contribute in remittances to India
• Business and Tax revenue
• Indian IT service firms contribute a sizeable amount in taxes (directly and indirectly) that benefits the Indian government
• US market accounts for 50-60% of revenue generated by Indian IT Service firms. This is billions in revenue (across the industry).

Indian Government is not alone in voicing concerns lobbying foreign governments. American government regularly lobbies on behalf of its industry – for example, when Boeing has a deal to sell Dreamliner’s or when a country X is trying to establish nuclear power plants and is calling for bids from American and European suppliers.

Q&A: How would you explain the H1B visa to a 10 year old?

An interesting question from an online forum

How would you explain the H1B visa to a 10 year old?Both old and new ones.

Think of it this way: THE Beyonce concert is coming to town and tickets are hard to come by. The tickets are expensive and available to a select few people (or people who know someone who know someone).

Then: You begged-borrowed really hard to get a couple of tickets for you and your 10-year-old.

Googled image

Now: A few days before the much awaited concert, the hard-nosed organizer decides that only those above 16 are going to be allowed in. He doesn’t clarify what happens to existing ticket holders, leaving a trail of heartbroken 10-year-olds and their dads and moms.

---

You might also be interested in my earlier reflection on the questions appearing in online forums “What effect will the H1B Visa Reform Bill have on existing H1B holders drawing salary of less than 100K P.A.?" (link)  

Scam Alert: H1-B, L1 visa Consultants on the prowl

This summary is not available. Please click here to view the post.

What effect will the H1B Visa Reform Bill have on existing H1B holders drawing salary of less than 100K P.A.?

Question from an online forum: What effect will the H1B Visa Reform Bill have on existing H1B holders drawing salary of less than 100K P.A.?

If this ISSA Bill becomes the Law, what will happen to the workers with a salary less than 100K annually? Is there any explicit provision to deport such people or they would not get affected?

My two cents on the topic and also reading through the draft of the bill. The rationale for Immigration reform and “HIGH-SKILLED INTEGRITY AND FAIRNESS ACT OF 2017” is certainly a valid one! Let us go by what we read in the text of the proposed bill (and not speculation in the media).
Let us look at the key provisions listed in the proposed bill:

SECTION 2. NUMERICAL LIMITATION TO ANY SINGLE FOREIGN STATE . Eliminates the “per country” cap for employment-based immigrant visas so that all workers are treated fairly.

• Great news for Indians and Chinese who currently have to wait for number of years for their Green Card (immigrant visa) applications to be approved!

SECTION. 3. STRENGTHENING INTEGRITY IN THE H-1B PROGRAM BY REFORMING THE EXEMPT H-1B DEFINITION - Re-sets the current dependent wage exemption level of $60,000 which was established in 1998 and has since remained unchanged. Per the Department of Labor May 2015 Occupational Employment and Wages (the most recent data available), the new annual wage exemption level would be greater than $130,000 (http://www.bls.gov/oes/current/oes150000.htm).

• Great news for Individuals in the long term: Folks on H1 Visas drawing less than $130K will get a raise if their employer needs them to remain in the US.
• Those who are not eligible for a raise may find it hard to remain in the US on H1 Visas (survival of the fittest)

SECTION 4. TRANSPARENCY FOR AND PROHIBITING PENALTIES AGAINST FOREIGN HIGHSKILLED WORKERS. Protects H-1B workers by prohibiting liquidated damages for H-1B workers who cease employment prior to a date agreed to by the nonimmigrant and the employer.

• Great news for Individuals in the long term: Removes the burden of “contracts” that some folks on H1 have to sign with employers

SECTION 5. REFORMING THE PREVAILING WAGE SYSTEM TO PROTECT AMERICAN WORKERS · Increases prevailing wage requirements to protect U.S. workers by replacing the current 4-level wage calculation with a new, more balanced 3-level wage formula.
and
SECTION 6-10
Good for employees if implemented with the right intent
———————————————- Bottomline ——————————————
In the short term : There will be ambiguity, new visas applications may be delayed and renewal of visas might be denied or delayed.
In long term: All workers - Americans and foreign workers (including Indians and Chinese visa aspirants) - will benefit. Employees who get sponsored for H1 and L1 Visas will get a much better salary and benefits!
Note: I have taken the viewpoint of “what’s in it for non-immigrant workers.” … I will continue to explore the topic from the perspective of employers (American and Foreign)

Why IT matters to Mr. Trump; and why he matters to the business of IT

Global businesses are tightly interwoven with governments and social policies; more so the business of IT sourcing and offshoring IT Services. Therefore, it is not surprising that Business leaders across a wide spectrum of industries are trying to read the tea-leaves and speculate on the continual stream of viewpoints emerging from tweets and media interviews of President elect Mr. Donald Trump. 

Mr. Trump’s scheduled meeting with Tech leaders on 14th December (New York Times) may or may not provide clarity to Information Technology (IT) executives and business leaders. A few facts about the global IT and global software services industry:

• Software services industry is extremely globalized. Large companies employ teams of software professionals from across the globe, with a large percentage from India: the IT industry collectively employs over 2.5 million people in India (Wikipedia)
• Indian services companies including TCS, Infosys, and Wipro employ over 150,000 people each. American and multinational service firms like IBM, Accenture, Deloitte and others employ over 100,000+ people (each) in India.
• In addition, software companies like Google, Microsoft, SAP, Adobe and others employ tens of thousands of people. Many American and multinational firms have also established their captive development centers, directly employing Indians for their “shared services” and IT business units.
• Nearly 50% of the software services business is focused on serving North American clients. Most Fortune 500 and other mid-size and small organizations across industry segments depend on these software service companies for their IT development and support needs.
• Work Visas (e.g. H1-B), company transfers (L1) and visas for routine meetings (e.g. B1 visas) are essential to the operation of the business model.

Mr. Trump’s viewpoints on outsourcing and “Make America Great Again” have been emphasized over and over. (Trump launches Twitter blast about outsourcing of jobs - politico.com).

Does this mean a rollback of offshoring IT?

What this means, and how it will be administered is anybody’s guess. Rolling back outsourcing that has been happening for over 15-20 years, even if feasible, would be extremely expensive. Companies have been trying to minimize dependence on offshoring by experimenting with insourcing and nearshoring, but mass insourcing by larger organizations would significantly impact their bottomline. Assuming there is no attempt at a widespread rollback by corporate America, the industry is still bracing for a slowdown, which tech executives are already hinting at (Infosys CEO says Trump election may weigh on margins - Reuters)

IT companies have successfully managed through challenges in the past decades, including the downturn following Y2K and the first dot.com bust, and the global slowdown during the past decade. One of the prime reasons for the emergence of offshore outsourcing was the lack of local talent. Technology companies need to take a lead in addressing this challenge:

• Increased hiring and training of local graduates. Software firms are beginning to make announcements on local hiring (example: IBM promises to hire Americans ahead of Trump meeting - news). The announcements should be followed by actionable change. For instance, Compuware, an American technology firm - that I worked for - had a successful practice of hiring graduates (mostly non-STEM majors). These graduates would be sent to a six-week intensive programming and systems admiration "bootcamp," before being paired to work with senior consultants and software engineers.
• Increasing corporate scholarships to encourage STEM education, especially to motivate women and minorities to take on IT careers. (Ref : my earlier post on STEM education: need to catch them young)
• Accelerating the hiring and training of qualified veterans who can be deployed on application development, system administration and technology support projects.

Tech sector continues to explore innovative uses of AI, robotics and machine learning in efforts to increase automation and productivity. Software companies are also trying to minimize the need for cross border travel by increased adoption of hi-definition video conferencing and tools for remote collaboration. If successful, these moves will improve productivity and business margins, but may not increase the number of jobs. Regardless of how all this plays out, status quo is not an option. 

Looking beyond the political debate on immigration and offshoring

Infosys, Wipro, TCS in a headline on offshoring visas is sure to attract attention in a highly charged immigration overhaul debate. Therefore, it is not surprising to see headlines like the recent one in Economic Times titled “TCS, Infosys and Wipro abusing H-1B visa system: Senator” The article like many recent ones starts by saying “Amidst Congressional debate on the comprehensive immigration reform, a top US Senator has accused big Indian IT companies - TCS, Infosys and Wipro - of abusing the H-1B visa system.
"There are some specific abuses of H-1B," Senator Richard Durbin, said during a Congressional hearing on immigration reform by the powerful Senate Judiciary Committee on Monday, during which the lawmakers discussed threadbare the H-1B visa issues.”

The immigration debate and the proposed bill is focused on ensuring that companies that bring in people on H1 visas also hire a good percentage of local Americans (citizen, residents). Rightfully so, one might argue. The argument is that visas should be issued to hi-tech companies that generate value to American economy – Microsoft, google and the like - and also happen to be based in America, with a majority of employees being American.  (ref: NYT blog “New American Bill Threatens Indian Outsourcing Companies”)

Offshoring firms, many of which are headquartered in India (Infosys, Wipro, TCS) or incorporated in Bermuda (Accenture) try to neutralize the argument by trying local hiring and promising future growth with “onsite, proximity development centers.” Offshoring firms have been trying hard to hire and retain the few Americans (native or naturalized) whom they happen to employ. They also try and go the extra length to retain employees who gain permanent residency (green cards). Of course, the business model is skewed towards cost arbitrage that comes from serving clients with an offshore cost base, not being onsite-heavy.  (Personal note, in my past work-life, I joined and enjoyed the offshoring wave for nearly eight years with an offshoring major, despite being a US permanent resident. In a sense, I was an exception to the norm.)

Hiring local is an argument offshoring firms cannot win, leading to a lot of fuzzy math. For instance, NYT blog had to post a correction "An earlier version of this post said that Indian companies have invested $820 million in the United States to set up offices closer to their American clients. The correct figure is $5.9 billion." Rather than trying to argue on the exact investment - 820 million or $5.9 billion - there may be a better argument to be made in the TCO and value of offshoring

Outsourcing has long been a win-win proposition for corporate America. Sourcing non-core functions, including IT development and maintenance activities helps companies free up capital and resources to invest in other core activities that help in revenue generation. Offshoring extends the benefits of sourcing by leveraging a larger pool of resources across the globe, aided by seamless communication and technology. The fact is that much of Corporate America relies on cost benefits of offshoring. And while Microsoft, google and other hi-tech companies benefit from "foreign born" talent imported on H1 visas, rest of the corporate world also benefits by retaining the services of offshoring firms who need to import talent from offshore locations to service clients onsite.  The Microsofts and Googles may certainly be leading the technology innovation curve, but most other companies, large and small also leverage Information Technology to run their business. The "development and maintenance" of such IT systems requires armies of skilled technologists.

Refocusing the visa debate on the basic need from Corporate America is not as tenuous as it sounds.  However most logic is sure to get muffled in the rhetoric of political arguments.

Should CIO's worry over a visa fraud trial? Musing on Immigration, visas and Offshoring

Last week I was musing about Indian Outsourcing firms hiring "thousands" in U.S. I briefly touched on the visa angle in the post. Continuing the thread, there was an interesting blog post by, Joel Schectman on Wall Street Journal’s CIO Journal titled "Infosys Visa Fraud Trial Should Leave CIOs 'Worried'" The blog states
"The practice of improperly using business travel visas is common for outsourcers that send workers to client sites, said Phil Fersht, CEO of HfS, an outsourcing research firm. The H1B work visa–the appropriate document for longer-term onsite work–costs companies thousands of dollars per employee and the federal government has reduced their availability in recent years. "Outsourcers are trying to get staff to work an engagement as quickly as possible and they will work the system as much as possible," Fersht said."

A few days after that Phil Fersht posted a viewpoint (perhaps clarifying his quote) "Give Infosys a break" stating
"Forgive me if I am wrong, but if an India-based expert visits a US client temporarily to support a contract process or consult on getting an onsite-offshore project working, then there really ain’t too much wrong with using said visa for said purpose."

Not surprisingly, Don Tennant who has blogged extensively on the "Infosys visa issue" had a viewpoint on this "Who Will Infosys Throw Under the Bus in Visa Fraud Case?"


Besides the sensational titles, the blog posts are perhaps a case of the same old wine in new bottles.

There are new issues/risks that a CIOs have to ponder over. Sure, CIO’s or their proxies sometimes have to sign off on invitation letters - for staffers of sourcing vendors - which are attached to visa applications. And if a vendor is indeed found culpable of systematic fraud, one would have to really dig deeper to research whether the person/s signing the invitation letters did so in good faith or was equally culpable.

Bottomline: what’s new here? Such letters have been required by immigration authorities for as long as business and work visas have been in vogue. And such requirements for invitation letters and documentation is not unique to US visa applications alone. Most western governments that have stringent work-visa policies require similar support letters and documents.

(footnote: none of what is stated above is legal opinion…. Just simple common sense!)

Musings on body shopping, IT Service Firms, visas and the 7 Year itch

Technology sourcing companies have long struggled with the "7 year itch" but now with a few forces coming together, the problem seems to be getting magnified: Sluggish global economy coupled with continued demand for offshoring, protectionist visa policies, and IT service companies continuing to go after a slice of the same big pie. The unsung beneficiaries of this: small, mid-size body-shops (And no, in this blog, I am not adding to the debate on Whether Infosys Is a 'Body Shop')

Firstly, defining the 7 Year Itch. Many IT professionals who have grown in a service firm, especially those with an extended experience working on hot technologies in more than a few projects feel the need to explore the grass-on-the-other side. These Tech-lead/Junior-Architect level folks are also backbones of successful IT sourcing projects, and are much in demand.

Case in point. Here is a practical problem that managers of sourcing firms face. My client just awarded a million-dollar six-month contract for the next phase of eCommerce program to my firm. Most of the existing technical folks in my project are already locked into working on the previous phases. I don't have a pool of experienced IBM Websphere, IBM Portal and IBM Commerce programmers currently available in my organizational bench pool to join the team at a short notice. Flying in folks from out of US is not a practical option for two reasons: we don't have a pool of "visa ready" folks waiting on bench, and getting visas for other folks at short notice would be impossible.

What do I do? I turn to sub-contractors in the local market. The sub-con has a database of Websphere professionals working for other tier-1outsourcing and offshoring firms - possibly my competetors. These also happen to be folks either going through a 7-Year-Itch at their firm, are looking for a subcon to sponsor their immigrant visa or simply an opportunity to make a few dollars more as an IT contractor.

There are a few interesting market forces coming together here, something that the body-shops are looking to capitalize on.

• Sluggish global economy with continued outsourcing. Sluggish global economy means most companies either have a hiring freeze or a slowdown in hiring. The slowdown in hiring does not always mean a corresponding freeze in the technology initiatives, which translates to an opportunity for sourcing vendors.
• Let the big dogs fight over the slice of the same pie. A client may decide to award an eCommerce project to a Vendor A and a SAP upgrade program to Vendor B. Vendor A scrambles to put together a team of Managers, Architects, Tech Leads and Developers proficient in eCommerce technologies. Vendor B likewise does it for the SAP program. Just like organizations realize they can easily interchange and deploy resources across client programs, the ‘resources’ realize they can switch employers and continue to work on same technologies.
• Fewer Work Visas: Not wishing to go against political headwinds, service companies are applying for fewer work visas. Even the few applications are going through additional scrutiny by immigration officials, which means one thing: fewer experienced IT professionals available in any geography.

Opportunity: Body Shops promise mobility while carving out a niche. Technologists with the 7-Year-Itch are motivated and unencumbered by a baggage of loyalty and need to work for a single employer. However, their mobility is restricted by their immigrant/visa status and sluggish hiring by end-clients. Also, most large sourcing firms are reluctant to hire candidates in the US if they also have to sponsor visas for them. The body shops are stepping in to provide a bridge: hiring talented individuals who can be sub-contracted to larger sourcing firms with the only overhead of having to sponsor their paperwork.

ps: As with any opportunity, there are risks, especially for those being "body shopped." Risks include being out of visa status if the body-shopper is unable to get the right paperwork to sponsor visa extension …. but that is another topic in itself.

Rhetoric vs reality: Global body shops, chop shops and sweat shops

A week after U.S. legislator Charles Schumer called Infosys a “chop shop,” setting off a wave of outrage in India, he clarified that he meant that firms like Infosys are “body shops.” Senator Schumer clarified “In the tech industry, these firms are sometimes known as ‘body shops’ and that’s what I should have said.” Having spent much of my working life in the technology services industry across the globe, such statements by politicians don’t really surprise me, but the media in India and America seems to have had its share of fun ‘analyzing the stories. Another related story was that of the hike in fee for US Work Visa (H1 visas). This again lead to interviews with industry gurus who had views and counter views on the impact of the hike. Visas and travel are an integral cost of doing business for offshoring firms. Such cost do go up over a period of time. Again me thinks: So what's the big deal?

In all the rhetoric, the politicians and analysts quoted in the media seem to have forgotten a basic fact: While Indian service firms Infosys, TCS and Wipro pioneered Global Delivery model and offshoring, it is the western and American software service giants including IBM, Accenture, HP and others that have taken to it like ducks to water. I guess most poeple outside the software services industry didn’t realize IBM was among the top public sector employers in India, employing over a hundred thousand people (WSJ: Is Big Blue India’s New Big Boss?)

With Big Blue is getting bigger in India should Senator Schumer go after them too and include IBM in his next speech as a chop shop, body shop, or sweat shop?!

Fact is that the software Services industry, whether co-located in a geography continues to be labor intensive. Automation of software development continues to be the holy grail of Software Engineering though better tools and techniques continue to emerge. Software development and maintenance requires an army of programmers, developers, analysts and managers.

Politics and rhetoric aside, software services industry is more globalized than most analysts and journalists realize. For those of us in the industry however, this is not much of a surprise. Case in point, James McGovern, an Enterprise Architect with a Fortune 500 Insurance firm used to be a rabid outsourcing critic. In the past few blog posts, one can see a much more pragmatic voice on offshoring emerging. (Re: The Secret Relationship between Enterprise Architecture and Outsourcing)

Blogs and Links:

• Visa fee hike: Indian cos will become more competitive, says Murthy
• US visa fee hike wont affect Indian IT
• India outsourcers angered by US job visa hike
• India may join China over US visa row
• US visa move to hit Indian IT firms
• India's top employers in private sector
• Mohan's viewpoint Cutter IT: EA's Role in Outsourcing: Retaining Technical Expertise

Musing on Immigration and work visas

There is an interesting article in Forbes this week titled "Your Alpaca For A Visa" The basic question that the author seems to wonder: Why the slowdown in the west and the continued resilience of Chinese economy has not diminished the eagerness to migrate to the land of honey-and-milk, America?
The author hypnotizes "The going rate for a full-service visa package, including fake documents, coaching for your visa interview and help landing a job once you're in the U.S., is as much as $15,000 to $17,500, and for that, a customer may end up as, say, a cook in a Chinese restaurant, working 70 to 80 hours a week for less than $2,000 a month. Who wants to go to that kind of trouble to seek that kind of opportunity? . . . What about their backgrounds made them want to go to the U.S.? We may never know, but the most likely answer is the most obvious one, that they believed there would be more attractive economic opportunities abroad than at home"
There was another similar essay by John Tamny, in Forbes a while ago "Markets Solve The Immigration 'Problem'" John says how a decline in foreign migrants is a bad sign for any economy. "So if it's established that the somewhat natural ups and downs of our economy serve as a natural, market-driven regulator of worker inflows into the states, this reality should cause us to rethink policies meant to keep immigrants from reaching the U.S. altogether. As the aforementioned downturn has revealed, worker demand, or lack thereof, does a good job in that regard."

While the debate on H1-work visas continues in the US, Mark Kobayashi-Hillary is perhaps trying to see if a similar debate will be rekindled in United kingdom. Mark blogs "IT firms working in the UK with global resource are just getting used to their newly found freedom, where the government trusts them to follow the guidelines and supervision is minimal. Will the weight of the ‘British jobs for British workers’ debate mean the work visa system is overhauled again before the ink is dry on the last revision?"

Debate on work visas go beyond the fundamental hypothesis of division of labor: in The Wealth of Nations, Adam Smith used a pin factory to show the wonders of the division of labor. In modern world it is about high-skilled workers, programmers and analysts who are a part of the global economy, willing to travel and migrate where opportunities (and need) exist, but may sometimes be restricted by protectionist immigration and visa regulations.

Bloggers and authors seem to be missing a basic driver here: Immigrants, and those looking to migrate to foreign lands to live and work are taking a "big picture" perspective, looking beyond the boom-and-bust cycles. For many, moving and living in the US (or even UK) is a the persuit of the “American Dream” And it is perhaps not just about the ability to earn in Dollars or Pounds (though that is certainly a factor too)
Trackback to blogs Mark

Globalization and American hi-tech : H1 work visas

For American tech workers, managers and executives nothing personifies globalization more than H1 work visas that are used by American companies to bring in foreign-born workers. As the US government begins the application process for 2009-10 year in April, writers, analysts and bloggers continue to eagerly watch out for the quota of about 65,000 to be filled.

Quoting Ann All “Already, the pace appears to have slowed. In 2007, the number of applications exceeded the available number of visas on the first day the government began accepting them. Citizenship and Immigration Services stopped accepting applications after two days, then used a lottery to award visas. The agency received 163,000 applications in the five days it accepted them in 2008. Of those, 131,800 were for standard H-1Bs, of which 65,000 are available under the current cap. The USCIS also got 31,200 applications for the 20,000 H-1Bs reserved for applicants with advanced degrees. Again, a lottery was used.”

A recent New York Times blog summarizes: "For the high-tech industries, particularly, foreign-born workers on temporary H-1B visas are an important labor pool. Many of these workers arrived in the United States as students and stay on through the H-1B program. Many also go on to become permanent residents and founders of startup firms. But there is longstanding criticism among some labor groups that workers on such visas suppress engineering salaries and actually make it easier for employers to move more jobs to low-cost countries like India." The blog has already attracted over 860 comments

Similarly Steve Hamm recently blogged on his Business Week entry "Today, I’m focusing on protectionism and its fallout. The New York Times published a Page 1 story this morning showing how protectionism is on the rise worldwide in response to global economic pressures. I picked up a piece of analysis over the weekend from economist and author Paul Collier’s book, The Bottom Billion: Why the Poorest Countries Are Failing and What Can Be Done About It. He points out that the last period that the world went protectionist in a big way was the years 1914 to 1945. We can see what a raging success that was!" Steve`s entry also attracted hundreds of comments

One is left to wonder if the writers, bloggers and those commenting are merely expressing their views in a new medium or are they genuinly concerned about fixing a system that many agree is broken?- MB
Ps: Just for the record, I entered the US on H1 visa years ago before I applied for and became a permanent resident, a Green card holder