sanooki

Thanks for the reply. Of course, I left out some details in my original post, including that during our first sessions I brought up many issues that nobody had thought through, and predicted the results would not be quality product. You are right that they have no idea what they're doing. There was absolutely no planning. They ignored my concerns.

They booked some time in a campus studio, gave us topics, and told us to go make some videos. They had 5 five teachers working on one course, and each one used a different style and materials. I have worked in video and technology projects and have taken online courses, so tried to get across that this is quite different from classroom teaching. They are using their staff, none of them with video experience, to slowly figure out how they think it should be done. Reinventing the wheel.

You mentioned my subject and this is one of my other contentions with them: I teach English, which I believe requires much more interaction than many other subjects.

We don't really have the choice to make short videos, and I don't think they have thought at this point to use any conferencing or group software. They'll probably get around to it. Assessment was not mentioned.

When they first told me about this, they said it was a pilot to see how it might work out. I used a PowerPoint that I made from a decent book I had used for a special class I had taught. They want me to use this copyrighted material in a video that will potentially be seen by the publisher. They have now hired someone to redo all the presentations to match what looks like a grammar school style, but keeping the original copy. I'm sure the publisher will be thrilled if they ever see mine. Plus, it's riddled with English mistakes and does not function in its original sequence.

I don't want to be tied to this disaster, and so unfortunately am facing the likely end of my time at this illustrious institution. This might at least be entertaining reading for some...

This is my sixth year as a lecturer. Recently, there have been rumors of Rajabhat universities being low on funding. I have also been told that our pool of students here is dwindling due to decreasing enrollments. Our latest department hire has been given a 6 month contract instead of 1 year. So, when I was told many of us are being required to record video lessons for a new GED online curriculum, and for free, I have begun to worry a bit about our department's survival.

Personally, I have already spent about 2 days on this project, thought it was done, but find out they want it recorded again. I am not happy about this work for a few obvious reasons. I have never been asked to do extra work here for free. Sure, I've done charity with no complaint. This, however, is very time-consuming and is being asked at a point in the semester where I have very little free time as it is.

I question whether this work is even validly part of my job duties, since I was never hired to teach on video or online. I actually don't like the idea of having videos forever on the internet and prefer my teaching sessions to be unique experiences. I can't get any straight answers about it from my immediate "handler" up to my boss and above.

I figure if I go through with it, they could very well be planning to use these videos to obsolete my job. This would really be underhanded on their part. If I refuse to do it, of course this will be a black mark against me IF I make it to contact renewal time again in 10 months.

I don't know what I'm trying to accomplish by posting here. Sharing in case anyone is having a similar experience and also thinking it through out loud, so to speak.

Believe you

It depends on from what you currently have. If you already have a non-immigrant visa you simply apply for an extension based on marriage. If you have a tourist visa or visa exempt entry for instance, you will need to actually convert and will need about two weeks left on your current permission to stay. Based on marriage you will probably be sent to BKK for the conversion.

Thanks, that sounds good. Actually I am in BKK and came in on a Non-O marriage visa. Then I received a 1 year marriage extension at Chaengwattana. My latest employer did 2 extensions for me based on employment, at the One-Stop center (along with the work permit). The paperwork had Non-B written on it, but the extension stamps don't mention anything (in English anyway).

So, from what you are saying, it seems I can just apply for the marriage extension again. The parts still unclear for me, is: am I to cancel the extension? Where do I need to cancel, and where do I apply for the new marriage extension? I don't think I can do the marriage extension at the One-Stop center, but not sure I can cancel the employment extension at Chaengwattana. Do I need to visit both places? Can there be an interval between the cancellation and the application, say within the 24-hour period you need to use to get out?

My employer made it so easy for the extensions, but now it seems a mess to get back to my previous state...

Indeed believe you will have to visit both but One-Stop seems to still provide 7 days to leave/convert/obtain new extension without application of extension so should be fine. Others have done this so they should be able to tell you exactly how/what to do.

Thank you much sir. That seems enough information to get started.

It depends on from what you currently have. If you already have a non-immigrant visa you simply apply for an extension based on marriage. If you have a tourist visa or visa exempt entry for instance, you will need to actually convert and will need about two weeks left on your current permission to stay. Based on marriage you will probably be sent to BKK for the conversion.

Thanks, that sounds good. Actually I am in BKK and came in on a Non-O marriage visa. Then I received a 1 year marriage extension at Chaengwattana. My latest employer did 2 extensions for me based on employment, at the One-Stop center (along with the work permit). The paperwork had Non-B written on it, but the extension stamps don't mention anything (in English anyway).

So, from what you are saying, it seems I can just apply for the marriage extension again. The parts still unclear for me, is: am I to cancel the extension? Where do I need to cancel, and where do I apply for the new marriage extension? I don't think I can do the marriage extension at the One-Stop center, but not sure I can cancel the employment extension at Chaengwattana. Do I need to visit both places? Can there be an interval between the cancellation and the application, say within the 24-hour period you need to use to get out?

My employer made it so easy for the extensions, but now it seems a mess to get back to my previous state...

Is this a theoretical scenario you are describing?...

If you have no other basis for an extension then at best you can get a 7 day extension before you must exit at a Thai Border. After that it's up to you if you come straight back on a 15/30 day (land crossing - 15 days/air entry -30 days) Visa Exempt Entry or if you go to a Thai Consulate to get a new Visa before you re-enter.

As a follow-up please: If you do have some other basis for an extension - such as marriage for instance - what are the logistics for converting to that extension without having to leave the country?

I went to the airport a few weeks ago and completely forgot about my re-entry permit. Applied there at the airport and job done. The girls at the desk have been the same ones for over a year and are bloody great.

+1 (4 months ago)

Hi, I was there a little less than 3 weeks ago and found the process fairly painless. Sorry, but I can't remember the hours, but they were as reported recently elsewhere on the forum. I think they actually filled out the form for me and just had me sign. There were no photos required, as I didn't have any ready. They have one of those little cameras.

A few tips I can relate: One is that I discovered there are two entrances to Immigration, one at either end of the departure hall. I had stood in line for about 10 minutes at the one on the far right side, looking in from the main entrance, when I realized there was not a Re-entry desk in sight. I asked an attendant, who told me I needed to go down to the Immigration entrance at the other end of the hall. I still had about 20 minutes before boarding, so rushed down there.

I saw the desk inside that Immigration entrance, and then also to the left inside there. There was no one sitting at the desk, but as soon as I walked up a lady came running out to help me. She took my passport and application and rushed to her office, I assume for a signature or something. I sat a few minutes wait, and wasn't sure whether I needed to go back to the other Immigration entrance afterward. I quickly found the answer when she came back and I was ushered into the front of the line inside this other hall, once I had the permit in my passport.

A few other passengers came up to queue while I waited, but it doesn't seem the wait is long. This was about 7 in the morning. I may have been lucky, but the service seemed very good to me. I wish public servants actually thought about serving the public back in the US like this.

Hope this helps a bit

Another Wish of a Happy 84th Birthday and a Long and Prosperous Life

for His Majesty King Bhumibol Adulyadej, Our Beloved King of Kings!

Left Ladprao Big C area couple days ago, now in Pattaya, where the streets are dry but the tons of insane escapees are far from dry...

In the last 40 years of getting visas to visit family (wife) all any consulate as needed was a simple letter with wife's signature. If she can scan and PDF a signed letter to you that would most likely work.

Thanks. We talked about the scan idea this morning. She is a bit technically-challenged, so prefers to go the hard-copy, snail-mail route. I guess that will be simplest, but won't be free.

Certified is signed in normal Thai usage so suspect that is what they will tell you.

Good point, that makes sense. I had automatically been thinking in terms of certifying the signature-- notarizing. They do mention notarizing, a little ambiguously, after the next section on the retirement visa.

http://www.thaiconsulatechicago.org/clate/non-imm.html

But what they seem to want for this one, on second look, is the letter certified by the writer. That saves some of the cost I imagined. Now if I could get away with a printed email, things would be very easy.

Cheers

Thanks for all the replies folks. Interesting that some places may not even need a letter. Reassuring a very simple letter would suffice. The Chicago consulate, where I will probably apply, lists:

"a certified letter from the Thai spouse stating that he or she is still married to the applicant."

I figure since it has to be certified, and that means my wife has to create it, get it certified, and send it to me, it will be a pain to have to re-do. So want to get it right the first time. I might give them a call and ask. This could open me up to the whims of the particular clerk, I realize...

Hi,

I'm planning to apply in the states for a Non-O visa based on marriage to my Thai wife.

I've seen many people talking about the required spousal letter, and I can imagine it is pretty simple. But I'd prefer not leaving anything to chance, so am hoping someone can either post or direct me to an example. I cannot find one on the site or off. Could be helpful to others in the future. This is the letter where the spouse confirms one is still married and desires a visit to Thailand.

Much appreciated,

Sanooki

Red-shirts Cancel Protest at Privy Council Chief's Home

The red-shirt group has canceled plans to protest and wear black at Privy Council President General Prem Tinsulanonda's home, on the occasion of his birthday today. They were asked by the police to refrain from the protest.

The group will instead gather at Imperial Lardprao, the headquarters of their People Channel, at 1 P.M.

Ok, this post was interesting, as I had been up on the floors where the radio station had been, a month ago, and it looked like they had cleared most everything out of there and closed down.

If the station is still up there, it would make sense this would be a remaining stronghold. Also, it appears the police prefer demonstrations to be held here. Oh, goody...

The movement will develop and grow again - that's for sure. Next year should be interesting.

Incidentally I heard from a colleague at work that there were quite a few Red-Shirts gathered near Ratchadamnoen a couple of Sundays ago but didn't see any media reporting of the event.

I find it curious too that I am apparently the only one who noticed this event. There was zero press coverage, even this website had none of the usual tweets or Facebook entries. The authorities did nothing about it.

More likely they are ignoring these events and hoping they will go away on their own? Perhaps the government is noticing, but quietly filing away evidence for keeping the SOE in place? There is a pretty large police presence a short distance away, under the highway viaduct. I am positive they were listening that whole day.

I get it that the Thai people are much more tolerant. But, from my admittedly western conditioning, it seems like it would be better to step in and lay down the law earlier. I really don't want to see the same thing happen again as happened a few months ago.

I guess it's none of my business, just reporting what I saw. Bending and not cracking down is likely the wiser play here.

Was the emergency decree lifted in Bangkok?

I was wondering that too, since I haven't been following things as closely lately. But I can't find any reporting that it has been lifted in BKK.

Of course the decree didn't seem to stop them too well last time, either...

All afternoon, from our apartment, several blocks away from Big C in Ladprao, we heard the sounds of grating voices on loudspeakers. I figured it was just the election trucks going around again, but my wife insisted she thought it was the Reds assembled out at Big C.

So we walked over to get some Som Tom and do a little shopping. Sure enough, there's a big stage set up at one end of the parking lot out front. They've got half the parking lot blocked off with their own vendors where the usual food and clothing stalls are set up.

Walking into the center to shop, we had to endure blaring loudspeakers that could still be heard inside. What is next?

The first photo shows a display with a couple effigies, apparently the innocent people killed by the soldiers, a toy tank and a dangling machine gun. Many people were sporting those Glock shirts again.

The second photo has a T-shirt stand. One of the shirts says Red never dies, another has a smiling photo of Jatuporn.

The third photo shows the stage, with their new banner claiming their love for Bangkok. I'm standing there thinking, yep they love this town alright, for lunch with some barbecue sauce.

Nothing about thick bra???

hilarious and pertinent! +1!

Re. his name.. "Seh Daeng" ---

My wife explained the "Seh" refers to having rank or position in the reds, not the "Se" for colour as maybe mis-spelt in the quote.

In fact, Seh refers to having high rank in military, and has nothing to do with the position in the reds.

(but daeng means red...)

YES, 'daeng' means red, but this was his nickname. Another word, he had his name 'daeng' since the day he was born from his parents. So, anyone can guess, it has nothing to do with his recent activity in the protest.

Interesting historical coincidence. Since we're picking nits, I think his nickname *had* nothing to do with his activity. But I'd say most people today-- especially the Reds-- now associate his nickname to his being the commander of the red warriors. His uniform and stance suggests he encouraged the same.

But in any case the original post was a distinction between sii, meaning color, and seh, meaning high rank. Red was not in contention.

Editing to add the point that I think it's also interesting to ponder how much he himself believed in the destiny of his name. Was he really completely mercenary, or did he believe the hype as well? I can't decide.

Re. his name.. "Seh Daeng" ---

My wife explained the "Seh" refers to having rank or position in the reds, not the "Se" for colour as maybe mis-spelt in the quote.

In fact, Seh refers to having high rank in military, and has nothing to do with the position in the reds.

(but daeng means red...)

Watching some of the things he said in the week before he was silenced, I think it is fair to say he was the tipping influence that led the Reds to their ill-fated decision to turn down the deal for an early election. This happened after he personally stopped the opening of a free passage to Chula hospital. His (and likely his boss') selfishness caused the simple protesters to lose the one thing they thought they had come to win. His legacy should be that he snatched defeat from the jaws of victory, as well as causing many more unnecessary deaths and destruction to the country that we are witnessing today.

Suthep could go to the police who by law would need to tell him they have no jurisdiction over the case now. This certainly would show, anyone with any doubt, just how clueless the red leaders are.

You are seriously underestimating the ability to spin and deny reality of the true believers.

Anyone remember the "Knights Who Say Ni" from Monty Python? I have been following this whole affair with serious interest since the beginning. But for some reason, this morning I keep expecting to hear the Red leaders say they want to be brought a shrubbery!

I truly hope this ends today--

Red Cup, like ya get in Sev-ven, with the Coffeemate, mate!!

Yep, that's right!

Assets held abroad are generally not considered by the officers when they assess ability to support a fiancee/spouse. Domicile and employment issues are also analyzed when dealing with an I-864 and can be highly complex in expat cases. It is best to deal with domicile on a case by case basis and not in a forum such as this as it can involve confidential information such as taxes, foreign earned income information, voter registration, etc.

I hope this was helpful.

All the Best!

Ben Hart

US Immigration Attorney

Integrity Legal

Ok, I can understand the privacy issues and that all cases are unique.

But I think what I'm also picking up here is that it is possible to have a job and/or assets (or even permanent domicile?) in Thailand and have an application go through for a visa.

These folks are already explaining other aspects of their cases. The support aspects are completely invisible, which could lead one to believe they are unnecessary. I believe that is not true, so raised the questions.

I have been under the impression I needed to live in the US with a US job or assets, and yet it seems that might not be completely the case. I don't need to know exact details, but some knowledge of what is possible is important to me.

Cheers

First off, domicile is a "loaded term" that people often misunderstand. From a legal standpoint, it means place of residence that one intends to return to. That being said, I think the Embassy, due to their often extremely heavy caseload, sometimes has difficulty discerning those who have a residence overseas and a domicile in the USA from those who are in Thailand without a domicile in the USA. Therefore, I think in an effort to streamline the process, they want to see that a Petitioner is taking affirmative steps toward re-establishing their residence in the USA. The evidence of re-establishing residence would depend upon the case.

As to a job, it is possible that a Petitioner could have assets which allow him or her to sponsor a fiancee or spouse notwithstanding the fact that they do not make enough income, but again, Consular Officers have wide discretion in adjudicating these matters so it is difficult to give concrete advice about what will "work" and what won't.

As to knowledge of what is possible: form a factual standpoint, whatever a Consular Officer says is possible. When it comes to matters of financial ability to provide support and the issue of domicile and residence the outcome of a case will often turn upon the facts of the case and Consular Officers have virtually limitless and un-appealable discretion in making factual determinations pursuant to the doctrine of Consular Non-Reviewability (Also Known As: Consular Absolutism). I don't mean to seem coy, but nailing down specific parameters with regard to these issues is difficult as it really is greatly dependent upon the Consular Officer's discretion.

I hope that this was helpful or at least somewhat enlightening.

All the Best!

Ben Hart

US Immigration Attorney

Integrity Legal

This discussion has been enlightening for sure, Ben. It is helpful, in the sense that it points up that there are potential unexplored factors that could weigh in a case, including my own.

Since no one has chimed in to add details, I'm still not sure what kinds of things have been practically experienced. Hearing more could give me a better idea whether I should have hope for a different outcome in my case. But I don't remember seeing these factors mentioned before here, or on the board dedicated to citizenship issues. I haven't read everything that is out there, of course.

After hearing the "rules" before, I had taken them at face value and determined all I could do is go to the US, find a job, and wait 8 or 9 months alone while my wife does the same. Now I believe I should dig deeper, and that it is possible I might have a more optimistic outcome. I would rather go back with my wife in tow.

My resources are limited. Otherwise, I would seek experienced counsel to cut to the chase. I've also seen I could be cleaned out in a flash without some preparation beforehand. Of course, if I had the funding I could use it for the sponsorship itself. In either case, being able to learn from others' experiences is one of the beauties of boards such as this.

Regards

Assets held abroad are generally not considered by the officers when they assess ability to support a fiancee/spouse. Domicile and employment issues are also analyzed when dealing with an I-864 and can be highly complex in expat cases. It is best to deal with domicile on a case by case basis and not in a forum such as this as it can involve confidential information such as taxes, foreign earned income information, voter registration, etc.

I hope this was helpful.

All the Best!

Ben Hart

US Immigration Attorney

Integrity Legal

Ok, I can understand the privacy issues and that all cases are unique.

But I think what I'm also picking up here is that it is possible to have a job and/or assets (or even permanent domicile?) in Thailand and have an application go through for a visa.

These folks are already explaining other aspects of their cases. The support aspects are completely invisible, which could lead one to believe they are unnecessary. I believe that is not true, so raised the questions.

I have been under the impression I needed to live in the US with a US job or assets, and yet it seems that might not be completely the case. I don't need to know exact details, but some knowledge of what is possible is important to me.

Cheers