H1-B visa and the need for reform(medium.com)
medium.com
H1-B visa and the need for reform
https://medium.com/@fwiwm2c/lets-talk-about-the-h1-b-visa-6e5d5def2b00#.cznxn16s7
97 comments
What many policy makers and C-levels don't understand, is once freed to their home country, the H1's now have process knowledge that they, and their peers, lacked. They know how your company works. They can extend that model in their home space to come after you. All of those processes that cost millions to form are now "free" in a low cost country.
I very much doubt they don't understand this, it's not exactly rocket science. Boosting earnings QoQ or YoY to pop the share price can easily result in many millions of immediate payout in stock options, what happens in the longer term (to the corporation, to the country) is not necessarily a big concern for those who are temporarily calling the shots at any given corporation.
...and they often leave with source code. (I've personally helped 3 companies deal with that very issue in the last year)
I love to take source code away. It's fun.
Would like to know how many instances have you seen where the home country got millions in this fashion.
> There shouldn't be a work visa that doesn't lead to a green card/permanent residency within two years. Anything less is merely legalized human trafficking.
Note that it isn't a flaw in the visa, but rather in the green card application process. A European citizen on a dual-intent/immigrant visa will be able to get permanent residency within 2 years. Not true for Indians, Chinese, ... no matter their visa.
Note that it isn't a flaw in the visa, but rather in the green card application process. A European citizen on a dual-intent/immigrant visa will be able to get permanent residency within 2 years. Not true for Indians, Chinese, ... no matter their visa.
How does this work in other countries btw? Can an american get a work visa and get permanent residency in EU countries with ease?
In Canada, you get an Open Work Permit as soon as you finish your degree. The length of the work permit depends on the type and length of the program. Once you get a proper job (full-time, related to your degree), you file for Permanent Residency, which if all checks out, takes around 6-8 months to process.
Source: did my undergrad in US, spent 5 miserable years on H1B tied to a single employer who kept delaying my PR application, because of which I couldn't travel freely internationally. Moved to Canada, finished my Masters, got my PR in 6 months. Now I can travel whereever I want. Thanks, Trudeau!
Source: did my undergrad in US, spent 5 miserable years on H1B tied to a single employer who kept delaying my PR application, because of which I couldn't travel freely internationally. Moved to Canada, finished my Masters, got my PR in 6 months. Now I can travel whereever I want. Thanks, Trudeau!
>Can an american get a work visa and get permanent residency in EU countries with ease
Nothing is easy, especially when it comes to moving countries.
I can offer insight on the Netherlands specifically. Other EU countries might have similar systems in place, though each is different.
There are generally three options for an American to move to the Netherlands for work:
1) get a highly-skilled job outright with a Dutch company that fulfills certain criteria in a position which cannot be filled locally. Not all companies are eligible to hire highly-skilled migrants from abroad (they have to apply to do so, and there are considerable costs involved). There are some nice tax perks to this (see 30% ruling).
2) start your own business with relatively small investment capital (<5000eur) and gain residence through the Dutch-American Friendship Treaty (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/DAFT)
3) get a Master's degree from a Dutch university, after which you'll have full access to the Dutch job market for one year, then you'll receive a highly-skilled migrant work visa
The above provide a path to a renewable residence permit for highly-skilled migrants. Typically you'll start working with a temporary 1-yr contract which, assuming things go well, will be extended for another year. After 2 years of temporary contracts and if the company still wants to keep you they'll give you an indefinite contract. After this, you'll next receive a highly-skilled migrant visa valid for 5 years.
An American is eligible for permanent residence after having lived uninteruppted in the Netherlands for 5 years and after passing an integration test. The integration test requires that you speak Dutch, though honestly this is not so difficult (it's at an A1 level and the tests are fairly basic; they also test your ability to function in the Dutch job market and society which is a bit silly to ask of a highly-skilled migrant who's already successfully lived there for 5 years).
I'm sort of in the process of gaining permanent residence. I have the time, the degree, the job, and most of the Dutch; it's only a matter of passing the test and submitting the paperwork. But since I have a 5-yr permit and permanent job contract already I'm not in a major rush.
edit: I feel like it's important to point out that the highly-skilled migrant permit is obtained for you on behalf of your employer, however it is not tied to that employer. You're free to find other work elsewhere without any retribution.
Nothing is easy, especially when it comes to moving countries.
I can offer insight on the Netherlands specifically. Other EU countries might have similar systems in place, though each is different.
There are generally three options for an American to move to the Netherlands for work:
1) get a highly-skilled job outright with a Dutch company that fulfills certain criteria in a position which cannot be filled locally. Not all companies are eligible to hire highly-skilled migrants from abroad (they have to apply to do so, and there are considerable costs involved). There are some nice tax perks to this (see 30% ruling).
2) start your own business with relatively small investment capital (<5000eur) and gain residence through the Dutch-American Friendship Treaty (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/DAFT)
3) get a Master's degree from a Dutch university, after which you'll have full access to the Dutch job market for one year, then you'll receive a highly-skilled migrant work visa
The above provide a path to a renewable residence permit for highly-skilled migrants. Typically you'll start working with a temporary 1-yr contract which, assuming things go well, will be extended for another year. After 2 years of temporary contracts and if the company still wants to keep you they'll give you an indefinite contract. After this, you'll next receive a highly-skilled migrant visa valid for 5 years.
An American is eligible for permanent residence after having lived uninteruppted in the Netherlands for 5 years and after passing an integration test. The integration test requires that you speak Dutch, though honestly this is not so difficult (it's at an A1 level and the tests are fairly basic; they also test your ability to function in the Dutch job market and society which is a bit silly to ask of a highly-skilled migrant who's already successfully lived there for 5 years).
I'm sort of in the process of gaining permanent residence. I have the time, the degree, the job, and most of the Dutch; it's only a matter of passing the test and submitting the paperwork. But since I have a 5-yr permit and permanent job contract already I'm not in a major rush.
edit: I feel like it's important to point out that the highly-skilled migrant permit is obtained for you on behalf of your employer, however it is not tied to that employer. You're free to find other work elsewhere without any retribution.
I can speak for NZ. I originally got a Holiday Work visa (if you're under 30, America has several agreements. You can live and work in Australia, New Zealand, Ireland if you just graduated and a few other countries. I highly recommend them).
My holiday work visa ran out and I switched to an Essential Skills visa. I wish I had ticked the other box and gotten "Work to Residence." It cost more but you get a residence without travel restrictions after a few years. You can also apply for a full resident (a few thousand dollars) visa and you become a resident, but with travel restrictions. If you leave for more than six months, you lose it. If you stay past a certain point (I think it was 2 years or something like that), you can apply for a permanent resident without travel restrictions.
The US doesn't have the concept of "Resident without travel restrictions." If a customs agent asks you questions and thinks you don't actually live in the US (e.g. you only visit once a year), you can potentially lose that green card. It's arbitrary though, because the US is only of the only countries that doesn't do a customs check on exit (it's impossible to determine if someone overstays in America, unlike every other developed country in the world).
For most countries, to immigrate you must be on their essential skills list. I've considered getting another Australian visa (I lived there too; holiday work visa only), and the process involves putting in a letter of intent. If you're selected, you can apply. The fees are steep (usually a few thousand dollars), but if you're selected, you get residence and a window which you must arrive by. After a few years of holding a job or being able to support yourself in your field, you can apply for permanent residence.
Immigration without an essential skill is extremely difficult, for all countries. This is a stark contrast to immigration only a few decades ago, when countries like the US and Australia were in desperate need of all types of workers.
My holiday work visa ran out and I switched to an Essential Skills visa. I wish I had ticked the other box and gotten "Work to Residence." It cost more but you get a residence without travel restrictions after a few years. You can also apply for a full resident (a few thousand dollars) visa and you become a resident, but with travel restrictions. If you leave for more than six months, you lose it. If you stay past a certain point (I think it was 2 years or something like that), you can apply for a permanent resident without travel restrictions.
The US doesn't have the concept of "Resident without travel restrictions." If a customs agent asks you questions and thinks you don't actually live in the US (e.g. you only visit once a year), you can potentially lose that green card. It's arbitrary though, because the US is only of the only countries that doesn't do a customs check on exit (it's impossible to determine if someone overstays in America, unlike every other developed country in the world).
For most countries, to immigrate you must be on their essential skills list. I've considered getting another Australian visa (I lived there too; holiday work visa only), and the process involves putting in a letter of intent. If you're selected, you can apply. The fees are steep (usually a few thousand dollars), but if you're selected, you get residence and a window which you must arrive by. After a few years of holding a job or being able to support yourself in your field, you can apply for permanent residence.
Immigration without an essential skill is extremely difficult, for all countries. This is a stark contrast to immigration only a few decades ago, when countries like the US and Australia were in desperate need of all types of workers.
For France: It takes about one month to get a long term work visa for if you have a job (the name is a trick, it's just one year). Then you can upgrade from inside the country up to naturalization (it's a long journey, something like 10 years from first entry to passeport), you are not tied to your first employer after the visa is issued. There are some really disagreeable moments, when you have to go to the Prefecture, but I think the entire procedure is free*
* actually you might have to pay to get some translations certified, or if you want a lawyer.
I even know 2 Americans citizen who have a long term self employed permit.
One detail: you can travel all over the Schengen Zone for tourism, but you still can work only in one country.
* actually you might have to pay to get some translations certified, or if you want a lawyer.
I even know 2 Americans citizen who have a long term self employed permit.
One detail: you can travel all over the Schengen Zone for tourism, but you still can work only in one country.
It depends on the country. It ranges from much easier (compared to the other way around) to quite hard. There may be quotas but no lottery involved though.
A lot of EU countries have programs that do not tie the work visa with a specific job, at least for engineers. On the top of my head, Portugal,Sweden,Germany and Belgium do and France with implement some form of "tech visa" like that. Canada does too AFAIK. I think it's fair. "H1-B" should be paid as much as their local equivalent and shouldn't fear being fired.
I don't know the process, but 2 of my (American) coworkers recently left my company (in the US) to work for companies in Europe.
Didn't seem at all hard to get to work there. Don't know about permanent residency, though.
Didn't seem at all hard to get to work there. Don't know about permanent residency, though.
Not to mention getting rid of the nonsensical anti-asian bias in the GC process. It is not really fault of Indians and Chinese that they are not trying to enter USA as refugees and instead coming as well educated special skilled individuals. The 9 year waiting period is one of the worst kind of discrimination.
There is no reference to lots of dubious universities exist only to have candidates from India/China. The students immediately get a CPT and start working at places nothing to do with their fields. They appear mostly for exams and some weekend classes and keep working full time.
Unless higher education criteria defined and universities scrutinized for bad behavior, most of the H1 abuse will shift to F1.
Unless higher education criteria defined and universities scrutinized for bad behavior, most of the H1 abuse will shift to F1.
That is a fair point - agree that there is no clear threshold on the "quality" of education provided by various universities. Thus admissions into the lower rung of universities is quite easy which can be exploited. I didn't want to get into this as it opens another can of worms on whether US universities should be certified to give an OPT period (which eventually becomes a stepping stone for H1-Bs).
Do you have any suggestions here?
Do you have any suggestions here?
Considering the problem has existed for long time and very smart people tried to find solution. I do not think there is really easy solution lurking around.
From my perspective US gives the best combination of features to a very large section of Indians who hold H1 visa. These are (relative)large american salary, a high quality 'Indian' lifestyle which includes large availability of movies, cricket, food etc and other assorted luxuries which in US are called middle class things but they are almost very top end luxuries back home.
The intersection of these features makes it very unique for Indians in US as compared to European/Canadian/Australian in US. If first world person get laid off, or decide to leave, it may be monetary loss but other things back home will compensate. But for most Indians it may a unequivocal loss in term of money and lifestyle.
The only solution I think is massive infrastructure improvement in India affordable at Indian salaries. This is very difficult to achieve. For now it is whining about traffic on US-267 or whatever in a luxury car vs 2-3 hr of soul crushing train and bus ride 1-way. So once things improve drastically back home people will have much less incentive to leave just for money.
From my perspective US gives the best combination of features to a very large section of Indians who hold H1 visa. These are (relative)large american salary, a high quality 'Indian' lifestyle which includes large availability of movies, cricket, food etc and other assorted luxuries which in US are called middle class things but they are almost very top end luxuries back home.
The intersection of these features makes it very unique for Indians in US as compared to European/Canadian/Australian in US. If first world person get laid off, or decide to leave, it may be monetary loss but other things back home will compensate. But for most Indians it may a unequivocal loss in term of money and lifestyle.
The only solution I think is massive infrastructure improvement in India affordable at Indian salaries. This is very difficult to achieve. For now it is whining about traffic on US-267 or whatever in a luxury car vs 2-3 hr of soul crushing train and bus ride 1-way. So once things improve drastically back home people will have much less incentive to leave just for money.
> Don’t read too much into IBM, Accenture, CapGemini as being American companies — all of them have very large bases in India and they use H1 visa to get low cost Indian workers on the client side in US.
I've never seen anyone prove the claim that tech firms (or any companies for that matter) use H1B workers for cheap labor. Also, this paragraph is just garbage "Don't read too much into it..." as if we should just trust the author.
I've never seen anyone prove the claim that tech firms (or any companies for that matter) use H1B workers for cheap labor. Also, this paragraph is just garbage "Don't read too much into it..." as if we should just trust the author.
As someone who worked at Accenture, I'm not sure how to prove it? It was literally the entire business model. It was made quite clear to me, as an American hire, that I was a white american face to slap onto projects to talk to clients, and to act as educated engineering quality control / failsafe, for all work done in India or by Indians that they would fly into the US and rotate according to whatever the legal requirements were for each individual.
When I left, they had completely stopped hiring in America all together. Instead, they were focusing on hiring in Monterey, Mexico. When I asked how they were going to get these new "developers" to work on stateside projects, I got to learn about the logistics of literally buying and driving school buses full of 'developers' over the US - Mexican border on a weekly basis.
When I left, they had completely stopped hiring in America all together. Instead, they were focusing on hiring in Monterey, Mexico. When I asked how they were going to get these new "developers" to work on stateside projects, I got to learn about the logistics of literally buying and driving school buses full of 'developers' over the US - Mexican border on a weekly basis.
It doesn't necessarily sound like any of this is H1B related, it's just job outsourcing.
I'm not saying it isn't a problem in it's own, but it's not relevant here. If they were indeed hiring Indian workers on H1Bs, and paying them less than their counterparts, then we can complain about that. Outsourcing != H1B problems.
Also, anecdotal, but the work I shipped out to India when working for KPMG was absolutely not work I wanted to be doing and being able to send it to colleagues in India to complete was pretty nice from my admittedly small world view at the time.
I'm not saying it isn't a problem in it's own, but it's not relevant here. If they were indeed hiring Indian workers on H1Bs, and paying them less than their counterparts, then we can complain about that. Outsourcing != H1B problems.
Also, anecdotal, but the work I shipped out to India when working for KPMG was absolutely not work I wanted to be doing and being able to send it to colleagues in India to complete was pretty nice from my admittedly small world view at the time.
H1B was just another way to outsource. The ran entire departments for some companies. And at those departments, the IT for would be a mix of people offshore and H1Bs that constantly rotated back and forth between the two countries.
Author here. Though IBM hasn't officially confirmed this themselves as they have stopped calling out the number of employees in each of their countries, but there have been several pieces out there corroborating the size of its Indian workforce exceed their US ones (and these articles are more than 4 yrs old when IBM US workforce was still large and the recent layoffs hadn't happened): http://nypost.com/2013/10/05/ibm-now-employs-more-workers-in... http://www.computerworld.com/article/2493565/it-careers/in-a...
IBM, Accenture and CG make a large amount of their revenue from IT outsourcing [1] where their largest competitors are TCS, Infosys etc. They can't win the cost game without having a significant presence in India and getting some of their employees client side.
[1] http://revenuesandprofits.com/how-ibm-makes-money/
IBM, Accenture and CG make a large amount of their revenue from IT outsourcing [1] where their largest competitors are TCS, Infosys etc. They can't win the cost game without having a significant presence in India and getting some of their employees client side.
[1] http://revenuesandprofits.com/how-ibm-makes-money/
> Don’t read too much into IBM, Accenture, CapGemini as being American companies —
Nitpick, but yeah, CapGemini is French ;)
Nitpick, but yeah, CapGemini is French ;)
IT outsourcing is not an H1B problem.
If they are hiring Indian workers in India, it has absolutely nothing to do with H1B visas. A comment above discusses that Accenture seemingly used Indian workers on H1B, but also alludes to simply outsourcing work to India. These problems are significantly different and arguing for H1B reform based on international hiring practices is misleading. I'm not saying the H1B system isn't a problem, but I don't think your "sources" backup your claims.
All of your sources are about hiring in India, not hiring Indian workers in the US.
If they are hiring Indian workers in India, it has absolutely nothing to do with H1B visas. A comment above discusses that Accenture seemingly used Indian workers on H1B, but also alludes to simply outsourcing work to India. These problems are significantly different and arguing for H1B reform based on international hiring practices is misleading. I'm not saying the H1B system isn't a problem, but I don't think your "sources" backup your claims.
All of your sources are about hiring in India, not hiring Indian workers in the US.
A simple solution: Auction the visas.
This will raise the price of foreign talent until it reaches a balance point so it will be more difficult to abuse the visa system to bring "cheap labor".
This will raise the price of foreign talent until it reaches a balance point so it will be more difficult to abuse the visa system to bring "cheap labor".
This hurts folks from non STEM fields who are also entitled to H1-B visas..
This is the correct answer.
In particular, the suggestion in the article that there be some extra visa for "client side" consultants is pretty naive. Pretty much every job has some complex mixture of dealing with external clients, "internal clients", and internal work that doesn't relate to a specific client. The federal government is in no position to accurately make this assessment for any given job in a way that can't be trivially gamed.
Most obviously, a sudden spike of "joint venture" companies between Wipro and companies, where the employees work only on company work for the JV, and never for an external client...
In particular, the suggestion in the article that there be some extra visa for "client side" consultants is pretty naive. Pretty much every job has some complex mixture of dealing with external clients, "internal clients", and internal work that doesn't relate to a specific client. The federal government is in no position to accurately make this assessment for any given job in a way that can't be trivially gamed.
Most obviously, a sudden spike of "joint venture" companies between Wipro and companies, where the employees work only on company work for the JV, and never for an external client...
The math facts aren't completely correct since we don't know the ratio of Advanced degree vs. non advanced ones.
Also the table includes transferred and renewed H1B, for which the cap does not apply.
What would be interesting is to know the number of new H1B applicant of those big companies. Let's assume it's around 40k for the top 3 in that list: Infosys+Capgemini+Tata, and assume all Advanced degree seats gets filled, then there'd be 236-20 = 216k remaining applicants in the undergrad pool (Advanced degree gets 2 chances: one in the advanced degree pool, where 20k gets picked, then those who didn't get picked in that round fall back in the normal pool. Without knowing the ratio but assuming it's at least 20k Advanced degree applicants, the only thing we can conclude is that there is 216k remaining applicants in the Non-advanced degree pool).
With 65k seats, with I+C+T, there's a 65/216 = 30% chance of getting an H1B if you don't have a US Advanced degree. Now let's suppose we completely forbid I+C+T to get H1B visas, then there would be a 65/(216-40) = 36% chance of getting an H1B. It's an increase, but 36% remains pretty low.
This is an extreme example where we would completely forbid those to apply, if instead we limit them to 10k as the author suggest, the probability increase of people not in those companies would be even less important.
Regarding exempting the cap for those who studied in the US, I think that would be a great idea, as long as "fake" universities[1][2] do not exist.
[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/University_of_Northern_New_Jer... - This one is interesting as it was created by DHS as a bait.
[2] https://www.nytimes.com/2016/04/06/nyregion/new-jersey-unive...
Also the table includes transferred and renewed H1B, for which the cap does not apply.
What would be interesting is to know the number of new H1B applicant of those big companies. Let's assume it's around 40k for the top 3 in that list: Infosys+Capgemini+Tata, and assume all Advanced degree seats gets filled, then there'd be 236-20 = 216k remaining applicants in the undergrad pool (Advanced degree gets 2 chances: one in the advanced degree pool, where 20k gets picked, then those who didn't get picked in that round fall back in the normal pool. Without knowing the ratio but assuming it's at least 20k Advanced degree applicants, the only thing we can conclude is that there is 216k remaining applicants in the Non-advanced degree pool).
With 65k seats, with I+C+T, there's a 65/216 = 30% chance of getting an H1B if you don't have a US Advanced degree. Now let's suppose we completely forbid I+C+T to get H1B visas, then there would be a 65/(216-40) = 36% chance of getting an H1B. It's an increase, but 36% remains pretty low.
This is an extreme example where we would completely forbid those to apply, if instead we limit them to 10k as the author suggest, the probability increase of people not in those companies would be even less important.
Regarding exempting the cap for those who studied in the US, I think that would be a great idea, as long as "fake" universities[1][2] do not exist.
[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/University_of_Northern_New_Jer... - This one is interesting as it was created by DHS as a bait.
[2] https://www.nytimes.com/2016/04/06/nyregion/new-jersey-unive...
There are already a few real universities of dubious value that profit from the current situation. I've seen former coworkers work 1-2 years after graduating, save up to be able to afford a Masters in one of those bottom tier universities, and they're now employed on OPT status.
Say Tata Consultancy Services (TCS) files for 13k visas for in 2016. If the total number of applications were 236k, then the expected number of visas TCS is going to get is (using probability) => (13,000/236,000)*65,000 = 3,580 visas
Similarly, let us say a startup is filing for an H1-B for 1 of their employees. Their expected probability of securing the visa is => 1/236000*65000=0.27
As you can see, the current lottery system favors the company which applies for the most number of visas.
Yes - everyone has similar odds. But if you are a large outsourcing company such as TCS (which has 350k+ employees), you would simply file a lot of H1-B applications to secure the maximum number of visas. And since the number of visas are limited, each visa you secure is one less that another company would have secured. A startup (which have far lesser number of employees) can't do that.
If "cheap labor" from H1-Bs can do your job, you need to get better at your job.
It's been predicted 50% of jobs are at risk of being done by robots, so surely cheap H1-Bs could do them as well. Are you saying 50% of people need to just 'get better'? Or that you should move your family to Mexico or some other low cost of living country, just so you can survive at a globally competitive wage?
Edit: I also find the attitude that Americans are SO GREAT, only the worst of them should fear being outdone by a foreigner, very arrogant and not based in fact.
Edit: I also find the attitude that Americans are SO GREAT, only the worst of them should fear being outdone by a foreigner, very arrogant and not based in fact.
Yes. We are not entitled to anything, including being protected from competition of robots and those living in a low cost country.
No, but we can vote for politicians who promise to reform or do away with the H1B program altogether.
Are you suggesting Americans shouldn't vote for their own interests?
Are you suggesting Americans shouldn't vote for their own interests?
You can try to delay the inevitable but you can't hide from competition forever, especially if you want to live in a country with capitalism.
It's not at all inevitable that we have to allow the hiring of mass amounts of immigrants.
Why do you think it's inevitable?
Why do you think it's inevitable?
Exactly. I may look back and regret this later, but I don't see a circumstance where both my job will be outsourced and my skill set as a senior dev who can communicate architecture and business clearly and has developed soft skills won't give me a competitive advantage over cheap outsourced labor.
You should consider the fact that someone can simultaneously be cheaper and better at your job. See robots.
What makes you think I haven't? Unless you think we should ban robots from taking jobs, I'm not sure what your point is.
The point was that "just get better at your job" is an impractical advice if your competitors are much better than you for a cheaper price. Consider some entity with the same level of expertise as you but paid half as much. How are you going to suddenly become twice as good to keep your current position? So yeah, when that happens the solution is to become expert in another game entirely.
[deleted]
The article is good in the sense that it at least tries to consider pros & cons. However specifically from a startup point of view, H1-b is probably a not good fit anyway. Typically h1-b application process starts in Nov-Dec, from Feb-Mar, and the earliest someone who gets the visa can start is Sept. I doubt startups can wait for the minimum 6 month period for their new employees to join.
However the lottery system is indeed unfair for smaller companies.
However the lottery system is indeed unfair for smaller companies.
For a new student graduating from undergrad or grad course, the timing works out quite well - especially given the OPT period. Many times, you will notice that a startup literally doesn't hire a candidate from another country but hires international students studying in US universities - which is what I was trying to call out in the article.
[deleted]
[deleted]
It always cracks me up when I read H1B suggestions from people who weren't themselves H1Bs. They always focus on the intake, or on "gaming", or wage thresholds, or whatever the hell else their particular side of the aisle told them to worry about.
Yet this problem is in a dire need of a free market based solution. Let me explain.
H1B, for those who don't know, is the indentured servitude visa. While you can theoretically move between jobs, your next job has to match the one you had before nearly exactly, and you have to find it _before_ you leave your current job. Once you leave or lose the job you're currently on H1B for, you have to GTFO of the country in _two weeks_. I.e. if your employer finds out you're looking, and they fire you (which they can), you will have no recourse whatsoever. Same with them firing you if you ask for a raise or promo: GTFO.
You're in this limbo state until you get your green card, a lengthy process which for me took 7 years, and for someone from India or China would take even longer.
Companies abuse this power quite heavily by either not promoting/giving raises to H1Bs (because what are they gonna do, quit?) or hiring vastly more experienced workers into entry level jobs, or a combination of the two.
Here's what should be done to fix this:
1. Make the grace period between jobs at least 6 months. If people are abused, they should be free to leave their job without leaving the country, and find their next job over a reasonable period of time.
2. Make it possible for an H1B to move to another job more freely. Any job in the same industry should be acceptable. To make things fair to employers, require repayment of visa related fees if employee moves within the first year.
This alone would fix most of the problems you see on the ground today, including the problem of underemployment of fresh grads. Because movement of H1Bs will be unrestricted, they'll command "market rate". That Eastern European double PhD you hired for your entry level position will be able to move to a job that pays commensurate with her expertise, freeing up the entry level position for a fresh grad. The system will just be much more healthy overall.
However, this will never happen. All those tech CEOs who currently go on ad nauseam about helping people, all of them, without exception, want cheap fresh meat that's not going anywhere. And for as long as H1B existed, they were getting exactly that.
Yet this problem is in a dire need of a free market based solution. Let me explain.
H1B, for those who don't know, is the indentured servitude visa. While you can theoretically move between jobs, your next job has to match the one you had before nearly exactly, and you have to find it _before_ you leave your current job. Once you leave or lose the job you're currently on H1B for, you have to GTFO of the country in _two weeks_. I.e. if your employer finds out you're looking, and they fire you (which they can), you will have no recourse whatsoever. Same with them firing you if you ask for a raise or promo: GTFO.
You're in this limbo state until you get your green card, a lengthy process which for me took 7 years, and for someone from India or China would take even longer.
Companies abuse this power quite heavily by either not promoting/giving raises to H1Bs (because what are they gonna do, quit?) or hiring vastly more experienced workers into entry level jobs, or a combination of the two.
Here's what should be done to fix this:
1. Make the grace period between jobs at least 6 months. If people are abused, they should be free to leave their job without leaving the country, and find their next job over a reasonable period of time.
2. Make it possible for an H1B to move to another job more freely. Any job in the same industry should be acceptable. To make things fair to employers, require repayment of visa related fees if employee moves within the first year.
This alone would fix most of the problems you see on the ground today, including the problem of underemployment of fresh grads. Because movement of H1Bs will be unrestricted, they'll command "market rate". That Eastern European double PhD you hired for your entry level position will be able to move to a job that pays commensurate with her expertise, freeing up the entry level position for a fresh grad. The system will just be much more healthy overall.
However, this will never happen. All those tech CEOs who currently go on ad nauseam about helping people, all of them, without exception, want cheap fresh meat that's not going anywhere. And for as long as H1B existed, they were getting exactly that.
Very interesting perspective. Giving visa holders more leverage would indirectly give more leverage to domestic workers as well. 2 birds with one stone.
> However, this will never happen
As long as capitalists run the government and large corporations.
As long as capitalists run the government and large corporations.
As an immigrant, I _came here_ for capitalism, and you will have a hard time persuading me that Venezuela should be our role model. :-)
[deleted]
"Recently, Obama administration also passed a directive to allow the spouses of H1-B visa to apply for employment authorization (or the ability to work at any place). This is a great move as it again encourages more talented people, who are married, to come to US..."
This appears to be a "back door" to displace Americans from STEM jobs and going around the H1-B Visa program requirements and employment limits.
Immigrants should only be able to work STEM jobs in the US if there is absolutely nobody trained to do that job in the US which is the intent of H1-B. As it stands, it is a way for tech firms to depress wage rates and to displace Americans from jobs.
President Obama was serving elites that want to depress wage rates of American STEM workers.
As you might recall, there was recently a legal judgment against Apple, Google, .... for colliding to not try to hire each other's employees.
I hope the Trump administration clamps down on all of these ways that try to keep American STEM workers from receiving their fare wages.
This appears to be a "back door" to displace Americans from STEM jobs and going around the H1-B Visa program requirements and employment limits.
Immigrants should only be able to work STEM jobs in the US if there is absolutely nobody trained to do that job in the US which is the intent of H1-B. As it stands, it is a way for tech firms to depress wage rates and to displace Americans from jobs.
President Obama was serving elites that want to depress wage rates of American STEM workers.
As you might recall, there was recently a legal judgment against Apple, Google, .... for colliding to not try to hire each other's employees.
I hope the Trump administration clamps down on all of these ways that try to keep American STEM workers from receiving their fare wages.
Please stop talking about things you have no clue about. I have been in the US for 3+ years now on a H1B visa and during all this time my wife, who has an MBA, is not allowed to work here - which is absolute garbage. The change was the right one in the right direction, but not enough.
You also greatly overestimate the amount of competent people in the US. Most companies, like FB and Google and Uber, and not hiring from abroad because its cheaper. They are doing it because there are not enough competent people in the US to fill the jobs.
The companies abusing H1Bs are a different story, and those should be handled.
You also greatly overestimate the amount of competent people in the US. Most companies, like FB and Google and Uber, and not hiring from abroad because its cheaper. They are doing it because there are not enough competent people in the US to fill the jobs.
The companies abusing H1Bs are a different story, and those should be handled.
> "Please stop talking about things you have no clue about. I have been in the US for 3+ years now on a H1B visa and during all this time my wife, who has an MBA, is not allowed to work here - which is absolute garbage."
I have lived here all my life and you have lived here "3+ years" and yet you say I don't know what I'm talking about.
The intent of the H1-B visa law is clear: It is meant only for STEM workers when there is no American to fill the role. That's it. Period.
American employment should come first. Sorry if you don't like that, but you can always return to your country and maybe there your wife can find a job.
Do you know that there are Americans with MBAs that can't find jobs? Don't you think they should have priority over immigrants?
> "You also greatly overestimate the amount of competent people in the US. Most companies, like FB and Google and Uber, and not hiring from abroad because its cheaper. They are doing it because there are not enough competent people in the US to fill the jobs."
Where's your evidence, because I completely disagree? You'll note that these firms you mention are not offering the same or higher wages for immigrants than Americans but lower ones.
I wonder if other's on HN believe as you do that there aren't enough competent Americans in STEM.
But since you're so knowledgeable, please cite the reliable evidence of this claim.
I have lived here all my life and you have lived here "3+ years" and yet you say I don't know what I'm talking about.
The intent of the H1-B visa law is clear: It is meant only for STEM workers when there is no American to fill the role. That's it. Period.
American employment should come first. Sorry if you don't like that, but you can always return to your country and maybe there your wife can find a job.
Do you know that there are Americans with MBAs that can't find jobs? Don't you think they should have priority over immigrants?
> "You also greatly overestimate the amount of competent people in the US. Most companies, like FB and Google and Uber, and not hiring from abroad because its cheaper. They are doing it because there are not enough competent people in the US to fill the jobs."
Where's your evidence, because I completely disagree? You'll note that these firms you mention are not offering the same or higher wages for immigrants than Americans but lower ones.
I wonder if other's on HN believe as you do that there aren't enough competent Americans in STEM.
But since you're so knowledgeable, please cite the reliable evidence of this claim.
Just because you've lived in the US for all your life doesn't mean much when talking about something specific scient went through.
Note also, his comment addressed issues he perceived and solutions that would directly affect change in a positive way for you! Let me spell it out for you: if H1-B wasn't as restrictive, then companies couldn't abuse them for lower salaries, making Americans (in your view) more competitive.
Anyway, why should American employment come first? How have you contributed to the country more than a random foreigner, by default? If anything, it benefits a country to have immigrants (who it hasn't invested in) come and provide expertise for free! That free expertise is what H1-B was/is for.
From this, it also follows that it benefits a country to make use of a highly qualified spouse of an immigrant.
Note also, his comment addressed issues he perceived and solutions that would directly affect change in a positive way for you! Let me spell it out for you: if H1-B wasn't as restrictive, then companies couldn't abuse them for lower salaries, making Americans (in your view) more competitive.
Anyway, why should American employment come first? How have you contributed to the country more than a random foreigner, by default? If anything, it benefits a country to have immigrants (who it hasn't invested in) come and provide expertise for free! That free expertise is what H1-B was/is for.
From this, it also follows that it benefits a country to make use of a highly qualified spouse of an immigrant.
> "Anyway, why should American employment come first?"
Because we are American citizens. Ask about any American and they will agree as will our President, that immigrants should not be displacing Americans from jobs.
This is true of about any country and I and most agree with this that citizens come first for employment. If there are no citizens to fill the role anywhere in the country, then by all means hire a immigrant.
Many firms could hire more competent workers by locating office where the competent workers live.
For example, Google has a huge office building in NYC and hires many New Yorkers. Microsoft, Amazon, Facebook, Apple do not have such a large presence in NYC for engineering as Google and that is part of the problem those firms may have in terms of hiring competent people.
> "So it follows that it benefits a country to make use of a highly qualified spouse of an immigrant."
Your wife would be taking the job of an American. I'm sorry, but I don't see how that is a good thing. Maybe your wife can get a job in the country you are from instead of displacing American jobs.
Because we are American citizens. Ask about any American and they will agree as will our President, that immigrants should not be displacing Americans from jobs.
This is true of about any country and I and most agree with this that citizens come first for employment. If there are no citizens to fill the role anywhere in the country, then by all means hire a immigrant.
Many firms could hire more competent workers by locating office where the competent workers live.
For example, Google has a huge office building in NYC and hires many New Yorkers. Microsoft, Amazon, Facebook, Apple do not have such a large presence in NYC for engineering as Google and that is part of the problem those firms may have in terms of hiring competent people.
> "So it follows that it benefits a country to make use of a highly qualified spouse of an immigrant."
Your wife would be taking the job of an American. I'm sorry, but I don't see how that is a good thing. Maybe your wife can get a job in the country you are from instead of displacing American jobs.
>For example, Google has a huge office building in NYC and hires many New Yorkers.
You sound more and more like a closet xenophobe. I have multiple friends that work in that office. Majority of techies there are foreign born, although only a small percentage of them are on H1Bs.
You sound more and more like a closet xenophobe. I have multiple friends that work in that office. Majority of techies there are foreign born, although only a small percentage of them are on H1Bs.
> "Majority of techies there are foreign born"
Do you work in human relations at Google? Otherwise how would you know this. It hires many, many engineers.
The issue is the abuse of the H1-B Visa system to hire employees at lower wage rates than Americans. I have absolutely no problem with an H1-B Visa issued for its original intent which is in the case that there is no American to fill the job. Usually, there are Americans to fill the job, but the firm frequently doesn't want to offer the wages necessary to employ them.
Do you work in human relations at Google? Otherwise how would you know this. It hires many, many engineers.
The issue is the abuse of the H1-B Visa system to hire employees at lower wage rates than Americans. I have absolutely no problem with an H1-B Visa issued for its original intent which is in the case that there is no American to fill the job. Usually, there are Americans to fill the job, but the firm frequently doesn't want to offer the wages necessary to employ them.
Don't assume whether my wife is an immigrant or not. Or, that her job is fungible enough to be so easily displaced.
Anyway, my point was that the US as a whole benefits from immigrants.
So, from a economic standpoint your comment doesn't make sense.
I understand that Americans coming first in Americah is what you believe in. That doesn't make it right. It's something you can fight for/vote for[0]/we can talk about. But you can't just beg the question when asked why you think so.
[0] It's not something I have or will ever vote for. Because I believe in a meritocracy and pursuit of happiness open to all.
Anyway, my point was that the US as a whole benefits from immigrants.
So, from a economic standpoint your comment doesn't make sense.
I understand that Americans coming first in Americah is what you believe in. That doesn't make it right. It's something you can fight for/vote for[0]/we can talk about. But you can't just beg the question when asked why you think so.
[0] It's not something I have or will ever vote for. Because I believe in a meritocracy and pursuit of happiness open to all.
> "Don't assume whether my wife is an immigrant or not."
From the context you supplied earlier, it seems she is not allowed to work here, therefore, not a US citizen.
> "Anyway, my point was that the US as a whole benefits from immigrants."
I don't disagree. My problem is not with immigrants. My ancestors were immigrants. But they did not displace American jobs or depress wage rates through an H1-B Visa type program that was abused. They became American citizens.
> "I understand that Americans coming first in Americah is what you believe in. That doesn't make it right."
It is not only what I believe, but more importantly what about every American believes. What is wrong is that immigrants are taking jobs from Americans or depressing wage rates. There is no question that that is wrong. Perhaps immigrants should get jobs in their own countries.
"ComputerWorld reports that following an announcement by Disney in October 2014 that the company would be using an offshore outsourcing firm for future hiring, tensions between workers and Disney became strained. The company began hiring South Asian workers at a rapid pace, and some current Disney workers were forced to begin training their H-1B visa worker replacements.
In January of 2015 nearly 250 Disney IT workers were laid off, leading 30 of those former Disney employees to file a lawsuit in the US District Court of Orlando."
http://www.breitbart.com/tech/2016/12/14/disney-it-workers-f...
From the context you supplied earlier, it seems she is not allowed to work here, therefore, not a US citizen.
> "Anyway, my point was that the US as a whole benefits from immigrants."
I don't disagree. My problem is not with immigrants. My ancestors were immigrants. But they did not displace American jobs or depress wage rates through an H1-B Visa type program that was abused. They became American citizens.
> "I understand that Americans coming first in Americah is what you believe in. That doesn't make it right."
It is not only what I believe, but more importantly what about every American believes. What is wrong is that immigrants are taking jobs from Americans or depressing wage rates. There is no question that that is wrong. Perhaps immigrants should get jobs in their own countries.
"ComputerWorld reports that following an announcement by Disney in October 2014 that the company would be using an offshore outsourcing firm for future hiring, tensions between workers and Disney became strained. The company began hiring South Asian workers at a rapid pace, and some current Disney workers were forced to begin training their H-1B visa worker replacements.
In January of 2015 nearly 250 Disney IT workers were laid off, leading 30 of those former Disney employees to file a lawsuit in the US District Court of Orlando."
http://www.breitbart.com/tech/2016/12/14/disney-it-workers-f...
You probably thought I was the parent.
Anyway, since it seems to be a sticking point with you, my wife and I are Americans, but I don't believe that Americans, by default, should get a job over immigrants[0]. So it's not everybody :)
As I mentioned in a previous comment, I believe in a meritocracy and the pursuit of happiness for all. And, all doesn't mean just people who lucked out by being born in America.
We will just have to agree to disagree on this point.
[0] if the first word that jumped into your head was some variation of "[race] traitor", then I suggest you consider your subconscious biases in this debate.
Anyway, since it seems to be a sticking point with you, my wife and I are Americans, but I don't believe that Americans, by default, should get a job over immigrants[0]. So it's not everybody :)
As I mentioned in a previous comment, I believe in a meritocracy and the pursuit of happiness for all. And, all doesn't mean just people who lucked out by being born in America.
We will just have to agree to disagree on this point.
[0] if the first word that jumped into your head was some variation of "[race] traitor", then I suggest you consider your subconscious biases in this debate.
Here is a wild theory: Maybe it would be better if the US got more closed down regarding immigration and engaged in protectionism - better for everyone that is. It would make it harder for US businesses to take advantage of cheap overseas labour, which in turn would raise the prices of everything they produce and make companies in other countries more competitive on the market of goods, thereby decreasing the desire to immigrate to the US further.
This could be the most effective way in which the US could help move the world towards the ideal of global equality :)
note: My knowledge of economy and finance is nearly non-existent, which should inform you about the value of the above opinion
This could be the most effective way in which the US could help move the world towards the ideal of global equality :)
note: My knowledge of economy and finance is nearly non-existent, which should inform you about the value of the above opinion
All immigration serves to drive overall wages down.
But most immigrants from Mexico do not drive down IT workers wages. But abuse and increase of H1-B Visas does down IT worker wages.
so, as long as it is not in IT industry, it is okay to drive the wages down ?
I was simply replying in the context of the article which is regarding abuse of H1-B visas and a fix. Actually it applies to the larger category of all of STEM, not only IT.
I don't think it is right to drive anyone's wages down through immigration whether working class or STEM.
I don't think it is right to drive anyone's wages down through immigration whether working class or STEM.
You can argue it does indirectly.
If blue collar job wages are driven very low, more people will choose STEM careers, which will also serve to drive IT job wages down.
If blue collar job wages are driven very low, more people will choose STEM careers, which will also serve to drive IT job wages down.
No basic income serves to drive overall wages down.
I agree with that, but not sure how it refutes the point I was making.
I agree on the intent for the H1-B visa, no issues there. That does not mean that immigrants should be barred or Americans always chosen over the immigrant. The selection should happen based on their competency - if I'm a better candidate than any US candidate, I should get the job. Picking an immigrants over an American candidate because the immigrant is cheaper is the problem - although even here its not as black and white as you would want to.
Now as far as H4 vida holders, you are completely wrong and misunderstanding the issue. Sure, there are tons of MBA holders who cant find jobs. Does that mean she should not even be allowed to compete for any of the available jobs, even she might be more qualified for it? Or she might not be, who knows, this is why you have a free market, the employer can decide.
And the tech giants have equal salary levels associated with the peoples titles and experience. The whole thing about paying immigrants less is just utter bs. I'm in a senior position in my company, I see all the candidates coming through for engineering and the amount of available great engineering talent is very very low - and this is not a unique issue to the US. There is a reason why the tech giants are throwing stacks of money at these people. Its also the reason why I was brought in on a H1-B visa.
All in all I agree with fixing the issue of salary dumping via H1-B outsourcing, but barring actual talented immigrants, while following the rules of the visa process, seems beyond dumb. You WANT to bring in talented people, it raises the overall talent level of the whole pool as a whole, and having dumb restrictions making their lives more difficult (such as H4 work permit rules) makes little sense. As opposed to not having the talent brought in lowering the overall level of the whole pool because of arbitrary rules.
I get paid as you, I pay taxes just like you, I contribute to the society and economics just like you. Yet you seem to be determined that me being here is a bad thing. Ridiculous.
Now as far as H4 vida holders, you are completely wrong and misunderstanding the issue. Sure, there are tons of MBA holders who cant find jobs. Does that mean she should not even be allowed to compete for any of the available jobs, even she might be more qualified for it? Or she might not be, who knows, this is why you have a free market, the employer can decide.
And the tech giants have equal salary levels associated with the peoples titles and experience. The whole thing about paying immigrants less is just utter bs. I'm in a senior position in my company, I see all the candidates coming through for engineering and the amount of available great engineering talent is very very low - and this is not a unique issue to the US. There is a reason why the tech giants are throwing stacks of money at these people. Its also the reason why I was brought in on a H1-B visa.
All in all I agree with fixing the issue of salary dumping via H1-B outsourcing, but barring actual talented immigrants, while following the rules of the visa process, seems beyond dumb. You WANT to bring in talented people, it raises the overall talent level of the whole pool as a whole, and having dumb restrictions making their lives more difficult (such as H4 work permit rules) makes little sense. As opposed to not having the talent brought in lowering the overall level of the whole pool because of arbitrary rules.
I get paid as you, I pay taxes just like you, I contribute to the society and economics just like you. Yet you seem to be determined that me being here is a bad thing. Ridiculous.
> "I agree on the intent for the H1-B visa, no issues there. That does not mean that immigrants should be barred or Americans always chosen over the immigrant. The selection should happen based on their competency"
No, America is for Americans not for the world. You have your own country where typically Americans cannot work.
If you speak with most Americans they would agree. If you speak to people from other countries they agree that the jobs should be for people from their country.
> "You WANT to bring in talented people"
You can develop and train them and by offering appropriate wages, talented people will go into those fields. But in a situation where firms use immigrants to depress wages, who wants to be in that situation? -- they'd rather go into law or medicine where it is much harder to have foreign competition.
> "Sure, there are tons of MBA holders who cant find jobs. Does that mean she should not even be allowed to compete for any of the available jobs, even she might be more qualified for it? Or she might not be, who knows, this is why you have a free market, the employer can decide."
Free market as long as they are American citizens or in a STEM job for which there absolutely no American that can do it.
Some more junior people may just benefit from job training. I can't speak to the exact situations, but most American firms will do fine employing American MBAs over immigrants.
No, America is for Americans not for the world. You have your own country where typically Americans cannot work.
If you speak with most Americans they would agree. If you speak to people from other countries they agree that the jobs should be for people from their country.
> "You WANT to bring in talented people"
You can develop and train them and by offering appropriate wages, talented people will go into those fields. But in a situation where firms use immigrants to depress wages, who wants to be in that situation? -- they'd rather go into law or medicine where it is much harder to have foreign competition.
> "Sure, there are tons of MBA holders who cant find jobs. Does that mean she should not even be allowed to compete for any of the available jobs, even she might be more qualified for it? Or she might not be, who knows, this is why you have a free market, the employer can decide."
Free market as long as they are American citizens or in a STEM job for which there absolutely no American that can do it.
Some more junior people may just benefit from job training. I can't speak to the exact situations, but most American firms will do fine employing American MBAs over immigrants.
Telling people they can "always return [back to where ever they are from]" is pretty offensive and counter-productive.
They aren't here to make you happy, nor will they leave for that end.
Taking the same tone: why don't you find a career/job where you feel you have enough competitive advantage?
They aren't here to make you happy, nor will they leave for that end.
Taking the same tone: why don't you find a career/job where you feel you have enough competitive advantage?
I don't have a proof of the claim mentioned above, but I am a Canadian working in the US in one of the tech companies mentioned above. Not only I have never applied to work at the company I'm at, I've never applied to work at any US based company, ever.
[deleted]
[deleted]
> You also greatly overestimate the amount of competent people in the US. Most companies, like FB and Google and Uber, and not hiring from abroad because its cheaper. They are doing it because there are not enough competent people in the US to fill the jobs.
I disagree with this. I think companies abusing H1Bs aggravate the issue of lack of diversity in the tech industry based on my experience alone as a minority in the tech industry. There must be a good amount of competent people in the US, they just happen to be minorities. There's recruiters and even hiring managers at tech companies that believe that a South Asian, East Asian, European, white male/female is more competent than a Latino or African American male or female, based on their name alone. Being on hiring committees at a tech giant, I've found that bias is even greater when dealing with South Asian and East Asian hiring managers, who usually prefer to hire competent people from their countries (Sometimes requiring visas, sometimes not). I can't imagine it's that much different at other tech companies.
I disagree with this. I think companies abusing H1Bs aggravate the issue of lack of diversity in the tech industry based on my experience alone as a minority in the tech industry. There must be a good amount of competent people in the US, they just happen to be minorities. There's recruiters and even hiring managers at tech companies that believe that a South Asian, East Asian, European, white male/female is more competent than a Latino or African American male or female, based on their name alone. Being on hiring committees at a tech giant, I've found that bias is even greater when dealing with South Asian and East Asian hiring managers, who usually prefer to hire competent people from their countries (Sometimes requiring visas, sometimes not). I can't imagine it's that much different at other tech companies.
I like the idea of spouses being able to work, and I hope Trump doesn't get rid of that. I went through the same thing as you. But ultimately, you can't blame the US for the rule. You knew the rules when you came here. So did I. You weren't tricked into it.
[deleted]
There are like tens of posts on HN where the same discussion about the artificial suppression of American wages because of the foreign STEM graduates. The consensus among most of the people is that,
1) The exploitation of the visa's by consulting companies should be avoided.
2) Allow the foreign workers to easily move between jobs and provide a path to Green cards which avoids labor exploitation and low wages issue.
3) More funding for STEM education in US.
As per the down votes, I guess you are getting them because you are criticizing the H4 spouse visa's. By all means make sure they follow the norms like H1, but letting the spouses work helps their families and eventually American economy to a minuscule percent.
1) The exploitation of the visa's by consulting companies should be avoided.
2) Allow the foreign workers to easily move between jobs and provide a path to Green cards which avoids labor exploitation and low wages issue.
3) More funding for STEM education in US.
As per the down votes, I guess you are getting them because you are criticizing the H4 spouse visa's. By all means make sure they follow the norms like H1, but letting the spouses work helps their families and eventually American economy to a minuscule percent.
Thank you for answering. The intent of H1-B visas is only to offer immigrants jobs that cannot be filled by Americans.
American firms have been misusing H1-B visas to instead lower their STEM wage rates of American workers.
We don't need more STEM funding in the US. There are plenty of STEM graduates and the funding is already substantial for not only undergraduate but graduate (eg. fully funded STEM PhDs including living expenses).
In theory, giving employment for spouses would double the number of immigrants displacing American jobs from 85,000 to 170,000. Moreover, firms might choose a man (or woman) with a spouse in STEM that they can also employ. Thus, the number of spouses employed under President Obama's "back door" should be decremented from the 85,000 allocation.
American firms have been misusing H1-B visas to instead lower their STEM wage rates of American workers.
We don't need more STEM funding in the US. There are plenty of STEM graduates and the funding is already substantial for not only undergraduate but graduate (eg. fully funded STEM PhDs including living expenses).
In theory, giving employment for spouses would double the number of immigrants displacing American jobs from 85,000 to 170,000. Moreover, firms might choose a man (or woman) with a spouse in STEM that they can also employ. Thus, the number of spouses employed under President Obama's "back door" should be decremented from the 85,000 allocation.
Why is an American STEM worker any better than an equal or greater qualified foreign worker? Companies should hire based on merit. I very much doubt there's an insidious Liberal plot to subvert American workers with what sounds very much like free-market capitalism.
The history of the United States largely revolves around subverting workers.
Are you seriously doubting that large corporations want to drive wages down?
Let's not forget that that Silicon Valley was the epicenter of the largest wage fixing cartel in modern history.
Of course there is a plot to drive wages down.
Are you seriously doubting that large corporations want to drive wages down?
Let's not forget that that Silicon Valley was the epicenter of the largest wage fixing cartel in modern history.
Of course there is a plot to drive wages down.
Exactly, I agree, which is why I'm puzzled that anyone think Trump and his administration of people who became obscenely wealthy from controlling those very corporations would do anything otherwise, while accusing Obama of being the one trying to drive down wages.
On the second point, it's easy to see why people are critical of Obama - since he did nothing on this front during his 8 years.
As for Trump, at the very least he has talked about H1B reform, and if he does reform it, then who cares what is background is?
What you imagine Trump to be, or any other such talk is very cheap. Actions are what matter.
As for Trump, at the very least he has talked about H1B reform, and if he does reform it, then who cares what is background is?
What you imagine Trump to be, or any other such talk is very cheap. Actions are what matter.
Agreed that actions are what matter, and when those happen we can really judge. I'll remain skeptical in the mean time, however.
Firms often claim they want to hire on the basis of merit, but then don't offer the salaries necessary to hire on that basis. E.g., those that have higher abilities through merit deserve substantially higher salaries, based on merit.
The firms can find people on merit, but they are trying to lower the amount of money paid for people, so they seek immigrants to depress wage rates.
The firms can find people on merit, but they are trying to lower the amount of money paid for people, so they seek immigrants to depress wage rates.
Can you provide data that H1-Bs lead to wage suppression?
There shouldn't be a work visa that doesn't lead to a green card/permanent residency within two years. Anything less is merely legalized human trafficking.