OPT延长至24个月政策急需你的支持评论 否则很可能失败！！！

已评论：1jz-8mbq-bgr1

写的时候就觉得自己英文写作水平还有待提高啊 QAQ 不过我已经尽力了OTZ...

Comment:
I strongly support this proposal. In my opinion, this is a win-win opportunity for both USA and the STEM students with F1 visa.

I am working in clinical research department of a biotech company. In this area, depending on the characters of the product, the end-to-end lifecycle of a project (usually takes quite a few years. Thus, companies would like to have relatively stable employees.

For example, more than one of senior colleagues told me that they feel like new employees stay in the company for at least three years, because it usually takes so long to accomplish at least a stage of a project and understand how we operate. Though I am working in China, I also heard likewise comments from people working for multinational companies during symposiums and conferences. Working in clinical research area usually involves numerous of different tasks and they all interspersed with one another, just like a jigsaw puzzle. As employees of the sponsor of the study, we are responsible of designing the study, screening of principal investigator, training investigators and staff, on-site monitoring, data management, statistical analysis, scientific writing and so on. A pre-licensure projects usually include trials from phase I to III whereas post-licensure studies are phase IV trials. If one leave the job in the middle of a phase of the study, others need more time to sort out and finish the half-done tasks, which may have negative impact on the quality and/or rate of progress of the product. These products, which are medicines, vaccines, biological products, medical devices, are potentially useful to almost everyone.

Thus, longer OPT extension can encourage qualified F1 students stay longer in such projects, at least finish one phase of a project, and facilitate the development of medical products. On the other hand, the OPT extension can help F1 students get better chance to participate in at least one complete study and gain a deeper understanding of it, just like one can understand a puzzle much easier when looking at the whole picture.

1jz-8mbr-jzii

http://www.usnews.com/opinion/articles/2014/09/15/the-stem-worker-shortage-is-real

One last day to go

Comment Tracking Number: 1jz-8mbr-v2fw

Comment Tracking Number: 1jz-8mbr-xj4a

1jz-8mbq-1zcl

但是我发现，邮件回执中我写的好多论据部分被吞了。。。。因为前面有个url被blocked掉，后面的详细论据也没有了。。。。本来很supportive的，现在看看就变得好水了。。。。怎么会这样

Comment tracking number:  1jz-8mbr-tysc

最后一发了吧
Comment Tracking Number: 1jz-8mbr-wz3q

Comment Tracking Number: 1jz-8mbr-gegq

OPT extension brings all benefits and no harm to the economy, science and technology of the United States. It’s the key to keeping the leadership and dominance of the United States in the world.

First of all, the OPT extension attracts many talented international students to come and contribute to the academia and industry of the US. If OPT extension were aborted, those international students may instead go to Canada, the UK, Australia, Japan or simply stay at their home country, and make those countries, not the US, stronger and more competitive in the world. Who would suffer from such loss? American people.

Second, as some of the opposite opinions argue, those international students are taking jobs away from Americans, i.e. unfair competition. But the truth is the OPT extension indeed guarantees the fairness of the job market. As said in the proposed rule by DHS on the OPT extension issue, only companies involved in the e-Verify system can hire OPT holders. And the e-Verify system is designed to assure the equality and integrity of job markets for all applicants. Therefore, Americans and those OPT holders are treated completely fairly on job markets.

Admittedly, some of Americans may also argue why on the earth we have to FARILY compete with those OPT holders since we’re citizens of this country? OK. Let’s assume such argument makes sense at first. But in fact, the OPT holders have their natural disadvantage of getting a job. Imagine you’re hiring new employees for you own company and you have two applicants, one American, one international OPT holder, both of which are similarly competent. Who would you choose? Are you gonna choose the intentional OPT holder in spite of the cultural discrepancy, the tedious job visa procedure and accompanying law issues, the difficulty of the OPT holder to involve in your company and the possibility that one day he/she just decided to go back to his own country all of a sudden? I think a wise manager would undoubtedly prefer the American applicant over the international OPT holder. As a result, it’s much easier for an American to get a job than his/her similar intentional counterpart.

As I just said above, if an international OPT holder is hired, he/she must be significantly more capable than his American competitors to compensate the extra effort the company spent. Thus he/she is able to contribute more to the company. What if the OPT extension were stopped and all those talented workers would be forced to leave? Who would suffer the most? Those American companies, which provide products and services to all American folks, which pay taxes to make the US government running and all the public facilities working, which make the US excellent in almost all industries. Should the OPT extension really be aborted, so that American people would lose all of those welfares?

As a conclusion, the OPT extension does all the good to the US and its people. Americans just can not afford losing it.



1jz-8mbr-xg4i

As an international student, I'd like to make a support on OPT-extension from my own perspective, which I believe is also critical to the industry of the states. Here're my points.

1. If, assume if the OPT could not extend at this time, it should not have an impact on current students and the students who are applying for US universities. As far as I know, for many international students, including me, OPT extension was a major consideration that led our preference to US universities other than those of other countries when we were applying. Thus, if OPT extension became invalid unexpectedly, it would terribly hurt our feeling, which I believe many students would regret not choosing an university in, like, Canada. So the point is, if this could not work out, it should take another formal and long-term process to minimize the impact on coming, current, and OPT-ing international students.

2. From the perspective of companies, they were expecting international students to work at least 2 years when hiring them. If the extension stopped unexpectedly, it'll be a great loss for companies and the industry, since companies pay a lot on hiring and then training a new-grad.

3. Do international students really have an impact on citizens at job market? I have read a lot those comments saying the impact on citizens. However I think this point is really short-sighted. Consider if all the future international students are moving from the states to other countries, I can see many "third pole" of various industries would be cultivated and developed outside the states. In this scenario, there'll be more companies competing with google, facebook, ibm and etc in the near future, which leads to a serious impact on industries in US and consequently there'll be lay-off and reducing new hires. Thus, my point is that competition will not be eliminated by driving international students away, especially in this global industry environment. So in a higher level of view, OPT extension is not essentially affecting the job opportunities for citizens, however it means a lot to the US industry.


1jz-8mbr-p9ts