Dismissal Forms: Fill & Download for Free

A2A.This new rule is an excellent step toward curbing the massive abuse of the US asylum system. Over 90% of asylum claims are dismissed s unqualified, which clearly shows the massive fraud and abuse of the system by unqualified people who are seeking to overwhelm US border control and judicial resources in hopes of being released into US society to disappear, and begin mooching off US taxpayers.Asylum is a form of protection for people who have suffered actual persecution for their Race, Religion, Nationality, Membership in a particular social group, or Political opinion. Notice what is NOT on this list: wanting a job, wanting a higher standard of living, escaping domestic violence, crime in their community, wanting a “better life for themselves or their children”, wanting their children to be considered US citizens, or wanting to mooch on free education, free medical care, and social benefits paid for by the citizens of another country. An asylum seeker, like other refugees, is presumed to return to their home country as soon as the problem conditions have abated. Going to a far distant country belies that intent, and is not asylum. It is immigration, for which there is a separate legal process that must be followed.If a person is leaving their home country because of conditions there, and reaches another country of relative safety, and could apply for asylum there but refuses and travels onward to the US in belief that the benefits in the US are better, then that person is an economic migrant, not an asylum seeker. Notably, most migrants to the US across our southern border are ignoring the opportunity for asylum and work in a country with the same language, culture, history, and customs as their home country, to go to a country with a different language, climate, culture, history, and customs. Why do they do that? For money and free benefits. That makes them economic migrants, not asylum seekers.There is no basis to grant asylum seekers a choice of countries where they want asylum. That defeats the point of asylum and makes the person an economic migrant, not an asylum seeker. This new rule prevents economic migrants from getting away with pretending to be asylum seekers.

Lets answer this mathematically.As Ranjeet R Patil rightly pointed out, Mark Boucher had 998 dismissals.Dhoni Stats currently -Tests - 294 dismissals in 90 matches. Dismissals per match - ~3.27ODI’s - 404 dismissals in 318 matches. Dismissals per match - ~1.27T20’s - 78 dismissals in 88 matches. Dismissals per match - ~0.89Now, as per reports, MS Dhoni will hang up his boots once World Cup 2019 is over with. This is team India’s schedule for 2018-19. (As on 22nd Feb, 2018) -T20’s - 26/27 matches - Likely dismissals @ 0.89 - 24ODI’s - 30 matches - Likely Dismissals @ 1.27 - 38Tests - As we all know MS Dhoni has retired from Tests. Can someone please bring him back?Fast Forward to the 2019 Word Cup. As per the format all 10 teams will play each other once. Basically each team gets to play 9 matches. Top 4 will advance to the Semis and then subsequently top 2 to the final. Lets assume India reaches the final(This time for MS Dhoni). Therefore, 11 more games @ 1.27 - 14Total dismissals - 24 + 38 + 14 = 76. Lets look at the best case scenario that the average will be much better in the future and add 20% more dismissals per match. Therefore, 76 * 1.2 = 91 dismissals. Hey, thats the score MSD made in the 2011 World Cup. Ahh. Maths + Cricket = Magic.Basically, total dismissals would, in my opinion be - 776 currently + 91 prospective = 867 dismissals.Sorry buddy, the likelihood of Dhoni breaking Boucher’s 998 record is bleak. Forget Boucher, the likelihood of Dhoni breaking Gilchrist’s record also seems far-fetched. But then knowing Dhoni, this would be the last thing on his mind :)Side Note - Dhoni will end up with the highest stumpings ever. And that makes sense. Because Dhoni not only stumps the batsmen, he stumps every viewer too!!

Freedom of speech does not allow to make racist or patronizing comments which get associated with an employer, or which show that the person employed is not suitable for the job. I know three cases where dismissals on the basis of comments which were derogative towards refugees happened in Germany. When you read the cases, you know why:Repeatedly, a person stated that even more temporary homes for refugees should be burnt down in arson attacks. His job was to maintain the safety of a refugee home.On Facebook, a person publicly posted racist hate-speech comments, leading to criminal proceedings. When hovering the mouse on the “Facebook name”, the information “works at X", appeared. X is a company engaging world-wide, and the person actually worked at X. The dismissal was considered justified.The CEO of a company accidentally met a Syrian refugee on a train. The refugee was looking for a job, and the company which was represented by the CEO had an open position. So the CEO asked the refugee to send in a job application. Staff manager S received the application and replied to the refugee in writing, on company paper, that the refugee should go home to Syria and build up the country there, instead of applying for jobs in Germany. This reply was leaked to the internet and got viral, and the company was facing a s*itstorm. The CEO was hit by surprise by this on a business trip, had to arrange an immediate public reaction, and dismissed S for writing that letter.Firing the spouse for such conduct is not permissible.